Last year, alarm was raised among some Americans regarding the Federal Aviation Administration’s expanding legislation for drone use over U.S. soil and the list of 63 authorized drone sites in the country. With more recent news that the Obama administration has approved drone strikes on some U.S. citizens, which some have said is “chilling” and the government saying “we can kill you,” the FAA has recently released an updated list of domestic drone authorization applicants.
The list was obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request made by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The list shows 20 new applicants, mostly law enforcement and universities but also the first tribal entity, EFF noted.

(Image: Google Maps/EFF)
Here are few of the new authorization applicants EFF called out:
- The State Department
- National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
- Barona Band of Mission Indians Risk Management Office (near San Diego, California)
- Canyon County Sheriff’s Office (Idaho)
- Clackamas County Sheriff’s Office (Northwest Oregon)
- Grand Forks Sheriff’s Department (North Dakota)
- King County Sheriff’s Office (covering Seattle, Washington)
- Medina County Sheriff’s Office (Ohio)
- Ohio Department of Transportation (Ohio)
- Sinclair Community College (Ohio)
- Lorain County Community College (Ohio)
EFF’s Jennifer Lynch, a staff attorney for the privacy advocacy organization, wrote the hope of the nonprofit in releasing this information is that people will ask their own local law enforcement about their plans for drone use.
“We also encourage people to ask hard questions of government officials about who is funding drone development in their communities and what policies the government will demand agencies follow if they fly drones,” Lynch wrote on the website. “We need greater transparency and citizen push-back to protect Americans from privacy-invasive domestic drone use.”
An example of local law enforcement authorized to fly drones that just now might be getting ready to deploy them is the Arlington Police Department in Texas.
According to WFAA News 8, the city has two drones purchased in 2011 with grant money from the Department of Homeland Security that it has not yet used. Here’s some explanation as to the reason why, according to the news station:
The FAA regulates unmanned aerial systems, commonly known as drones. Arlington does have the agency’s permission to test the aircraft away from crowds, buildings, and highways. Practice sessions with the aircraft have been restricted to Lake Arlington, behind the police department’s training academy.
“The process can be frustrating, but ultimately we understand that the process takes time,” Rivera said.
The FAA turned down our request to go on camera, but they sent us a statement regarding unmanned aerial systems, saying safety it its top concern.
“The FAA regulates operation of Unmanned Aerial Systems to ensure that they pose no hazard to manned aircraft or people and property on the ground,” said FAA spokesperson Lynn Lunsford.
[...]
Also delaying the program’s final approval is Arlington’s location.
A big chunk of the city lies in one of the busiest air corridors in the country. D/FW International Airport, as well as Arlington and Grand Prairie Municipal Airports are all nearby.
These regulations aside the police department told WFAA in a statement that within six weeks they expect to make a positive announcement regarding its drone program. The department said the equipment would be used in situations including search and rescue, SWAT and major accidents.
Watch WFAA’s report:
Read more in the EFF’s post here. See the map EFF pulled together of all the domestic drone sites here.
(H/T: Gizmodo)



















































































































Comments (206)
CowboyExpat
Feb. 8, 2013 at 9:51pmWFAA channel 8 – ABC (Belo Broadcasting) is anti-second amendment and refusing to run ads for our local gun shows. We, as Texas residents, can only explain this attitude as anti-Texas, anti-gun, anti-second amendment….pro-left, pro-liberal. Some of us are boycotting WFAA chanel 8 ABC it’s parent company, it’s subsidiaries and more importantly, it’s advertisers. NBC5 also fits this bill, and we are boycotting their organization as well.
Report this comment
media-bias-steals-elections
Feb. 8, 2013 at 9:23pmSome politicians are getting ahead of this, because they are arguing that photographic drones will basically be affordable by anyone, especially the disposable ones?
We have rights against searches (look) without a warrent, all it takes is for people to request the legal system to enforce their civil rights, beginning with removing private property pictures from search engine results, who are acting as agents of the state, by publishing the information and not restricting those photos from law enforcement?
If you don’t restrict arial photos from law enforcement, you have in effect violated the civil rights of others by performing a search (look) without a warrant? The only exceptions to this are clearly defined public areas, such as photographers on the ground have to follow? You can’t just walk up to someone, take their picture, then make money off it, you have to restrict the use of the photo, and if you don’t, you face serious civil lawsuits?
Report this comment
mpoconnor7
Feb. 8, 2013 at 9:21pmHow long will it be before drones will be available to the public? Two years at the most, I’m guessing. I’m already dreading what’s coming, stories about guys using drones to stalk women, or obsessive fans using them to stalk celebs (not to mention tabloid media using them to follow celebs around), or gangs hooking them up with explosives and using them to blow people up.
That’s not the worst part. The worst part will be when they can develop nanotechnology to make these the size of a tiny insect like a gnat, so small you can barely see them, and these can sneak into people’s homes thru a screen window or a tiny crack. I’m guessing that they will have this technology within ten years, probably within five years, and I would bet any amount of money they’ve already got people developing this stuff. You don’t think there aren’t people in the government who would not want to have these in everybody’s house, recording data and conversations, especially for those who are perceived as enemies. This opens the door for all sorts of corporate espionage, and blackmail. This drone technology, and where we know it is headed, scares the crap out of me.
Report this comment
Case_Logic
Feb. 8, 2013 at 8:44pmNo to Drones, it’s bad enough with cameras at every intersection.
Report this comment
HigherRoad
Feb. 8, 2013 at 8:32pmMany of us have a sense that these drones are going to be a sinister force against our civilian population. Obama has already given himself permission to target citizens without due process. If this technology had been available to Hitler, you better believe he would have used it against both Jews and his own fellow countrymen. No reason needed. He would have considered it his “right” as supreme leader. Sound familiar? It should!
Report this comment
Tigress1
Feb. 8, 2013 at 7:40pmTennessee needs to get on the ball about this. They tend to wait and see how many other states are doing things rather than be among the first. Too chicken I guess.
Report this comment
publicas
Feb. 8, 2013 at 7:24pmCan you imagine John F. Kennedy approving drone strikes on U.S. citizens? The Democrats have lost it!!
Report this comment
RIG4DIVE
Feb. 8, 2013 at 7:11pmWelcome to the fastest growing Police State in the World!
Report this comment
Leerm
Feb. 8, 2013 at 5:44pmRule of thumb!! If they have it they will use it. The only way to not have some jerk looking into your house with thermo scope is make sure they do not have one. All the rules new the world will not stop someone from using this tech for their own purposes. There is no reason for drones over the US thats what Helios are for.;
Report this comment
moreteaplease
Feb. 8, 2013 at 5:41pmmuffythetuffy
Posted on February 8, 2013 at 4:45pm
IN NEW JERSEY UNMARKED HELICOPTER GUN SHIPS FLY REGULAR PATROLS 24/7 OVER NEW JERSEY NEIGHBORHOODS AT DANGEROUS TREE TOP LEVEL
This is even done late at night at low levels. A gun ship was observed hovering in my neighborhood for over 5 minutes at 100 feet. I was able to give the pilot the Italian F sign and he moved closer. I was able to get the tail number of the chopper, looked it up on the internet and found out it was registered to the US Depart of Energy in Colorado.
————————————————-
That’s unnerving.
Report this comment
Trail_Jumper
Feb. 8, 2013 at 5:33pm“We need greater transparency and citizen push-back to protect Americans from privacy-invasive domestic drone use.”
No. We need #8 shot and a long barreled shotgun, or a directional emp device built by your local ham radio club. How do you stuff and mount one of those things anyway?
Report this comment
katzkiner
Feb. 9, 2013 at 2:45amAll you need is to figure the frequency, broadcast that frequency @ high power and it will jam the operators transmission. The drone will fall out of the sky or return to base depending on the model. The equipment is available. They are not invincible, yet. Losing a few drones puts a real dent in an agencies budget. Janet your not in Mexico.
Report this comment
BAMinKY
Feb. 8, 2013 at 5:11pm“I always feel like somebody’s watching me…and I have no privacy.” — Rockwell, you tried to tell us in the 80′s but we only wanted to hear Michael Jackson sing the chorus. Guess we should have listened.
Report this comment
LeFaux Jew
Feb. 8, 2013 at 5:23pmAlso everyone should be following the Kim Dotcom (Aaron Schwartz as well) situation with the trumped up racketeering charges to have him extradited from NZ. Much more candy here than meets the eye. Dotcom was working on a new file system that could not be hacked by the Government…a lot of dirt going on. Thats why you are seeing the “hackers” hacking into the US government sites.
Report this comment
LeFaux Jew
Feb. 8, 2013 at 4:55pmI read a lot of material from a lot of different sources…interesting take from counterpunch;
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/02/08/the-police-state-is-real/
Report this comment
leary1
Feb. 8, 2013 at 4:33pmAll of these applicants will defend the drones as being,safer, more accurate, less exspense, blah, blah. WHAT THEY ARE REALLY DOING IS HELPING TO RAISE THE UNEMPLOYMENT LIST AND ATTEMPTING TO CAUSE CIVIL UNREST. I live in ohio, I may give a little lee-way to the OHSP,but not a college!! So if/when they get these drones, no need for pilots, less police manpower available, no need for aircfaft maintainence. They are clearing the way for our video game children to have a place in society watching and controlling things. How empowering for these young,naive couch taters. This may turn out well for their EGOS, since so many of them cannot,design,manufacture, sell, fix or repair as their forefathers could. So back to the drones, if all of these people are replaced by machines, THEN THE UNIONS WILL SUFFER AS THEY LOOSE INCOME FROM THESE MOSTLY UNION WORKERS THAT BECOME UNEMPLOYED. That in turn means less people to pull…more to ride. TELL ME HOW THAT WORKS? WILL THE UNIONS RESPOND?
Report this comment
Frederick_Douglass_Republican
Feb. 8, 2013 at 4:29pmAnyone thinking they’ll shoot down drones with a rifle is uninformed at best. Too high. Too small, and not stationary. The rounds going up will come back down causing danger. The camera in the drone will locate you and you will get to go to jail, and most likely prison. If you want to fight them do so legally and electronically.
Report this comment
MrKnowItAll
Feb. 8, 2013 at 4:27pmIn MICHIGAN. All White, Gun Toting People live where, according to this Map, Drones are. WHY?
Ted Nugent has a Place Close by Also. SCARY!
Report this comment
De-Elect
Feb. 8, 2013 at 4:25pm“Sky-net is almost operational sire.” “Gooood. . .Goooood.”
Report this comment
quiltgal
Feb. 8, 2013 at 4:05pmAlong with universal healthcare, it appears we are also on our way to universal surveillance. It gives me the creeps to think of drones flying over my home and spying on me. Big brother is here.
Report this comment
funjumper
Feb. 8, 2013 at 3:55pmWonder if anyone will shoot them down like Jesse Jackson claimed we could do with assault weapons. A new type of skeet shooting.
Report this comment
Al J Zira
Feb. 8, 2013 at 3:45pmAnother reason to limit automatic or even semi automatic to civilians. It would make it easy to shoot one of these things down.
Report this comment
critterbait
Feb. 8, 2013 at 3:41pmLions ,Tiger and Bears OH MY !!!! Next will see flying Monkey’s
Has this Government Declared WAR on the American people or what ????
Report this comment
Sicialian Eyeball
Feb. 8, 2013 at 3:36pmAnd UCONN needs drones? Guess we have to keep an eye on all those valuable basketballs,or could it be just a front for something else? Move along. Nothing to see here.Lots of really weird stuff going on.
Report this comment
searcher619
Feb. 8, 2013 at 3:32pmi have a problem with the federal government being able to freely use these here but not so much with state and local governments doing this. All states should be allowed to have their own fleet of drones that the Feds would have to ask to borrow and follow the state and local regulations regarding their use.
Report this comment
Sicialian Eyeball
Feb. 8, 2013 at 3:29pmAdd you comments????? Wasnt what I wrote. Anyone else have these problems?
Report this comment
EQUALIZER
Feb. 8, 2013 at 3:27pmWhy does a Barona Indian Casino need drones? For all 10 on the reservation? Wild pow wows?
Report this comment
Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Feb. 8, 2013 at 4:07pmYeah, it’s not like they paid any money to build it.
Report this comment