Drones
Dear Editor: Police drones in Alaska? Absolutely no!
There’s a poster that says, ‘‘Big Brother is watching you.’’ It is a grim reminder of the book ‘‘1984’’ by George Orwell. Is this the kind of future that Alaskans want?
In 1959 when Alaska became a state, everyone was happy. There were celebrations all over. Why? Well, it was because Alaskans finally got what they wanted – a Constitutional government just like the ‘‘Lower 48 states.’’
Now we have HB225 on unmanned aircraft systems otherwise known as ‘‘drones’’ and in this case this is for police drones. There are only two reasons to justify this to happen. First, it’s most popular in the Lower 48 and according to Congressman Begich, ‘‘It would be good for the economy.’’ What? Our basic rights under the Constitution are going to amount to nothing because of popularity and profits? In other words, our freedoms are for sale on Wall Street. Is this what Alaskans want?
The use of police drones violates the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. ‘‘The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures...’’
There are also two U.S. Supreme Court cases that address the issue of surveillance. They are Katz v. U.S. and Terry v. Ohio. In fact, Katz v. U.S. says, ‘‘and other forms of electronic surveillance are now subject to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement.’’ The use of police drones also violates the Fifth Amendment, the right to privacy, and Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Among other things considered, it makes the casualties of all the wars ever fought by the U.S. meaningless, very superficial. Everything concerning police drones should be stopped, repealed, deleted and otherwise done away with.
Albert Judson, Sitka
