Supporters say the bill could dramatically increase officer safety, effectiveness and efficiency — and allow Oregon law enforcement to join agencies across the country from California to New York who regularly use the technology to carry out their work.
But opponents say it would hand police unchecked powers and lead to invasions of personal privacy. They also worry drones with cameras recording protesters could be used as a tactic to squelch speech.
Michael Abrams, policy counsel for ACLU of Oregon, told the committee last month that the bill “would provide a legislative blank check for law enforcement agencies to begin deploying seemingly unlimited quantities of drones” and that it would amount to a colossal allocation of power that “could usher in an era of mass aerial surveillance that has a severe chilling effect on our public speech, assembly and movement rights.”
To try to address that, Sen. Floyd Prozanski, a Eugene Democrat and chair of the committee that filed the bill, said an amendment to the bill explicitly bans police from using drones to collect information about individuals who aren’t suspected of committing crimes. The bill also forbids police from using drones for traffic enforcement.
Currently, police can only use drones without a judge’s permission under “exigent circumstances,” such as when someone is in immediate harm or suspects are fleeing. But police say the real-world conditions under which those circumstances apply are too narrow. Otherwise, police must obtain a warrant, and they say that’s a delay that can result in suspects escaping, property being damaged or even people dying.
