General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why UAVs and Other Drones Won't be Used Frequently [View all]HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)It is almost certain that states will acquire some of these for their national guard units, it's hard to imagine those in service for NG units will not have hard points for weapons attachment.
There are now average and small towns in the US with high-performance armored personnel carriers that outperform those in military service in many countries. Whether such devices are really a priority for limited tax-dollars is arguable, but communities are acquiring them. Once funding is available for drones, how many Sheriff Joe types will demand them from their cities, counties, & states?
The manufacturer of the drones will predictably want to keep making and selling these things and will surely lobby to have funding available to fed agencies, and state and local law enforcement. Concern for officer safety amidst fear-mongering continually pushes the boundaries on the availability of military weapons for use in civilian arenas.
I don't disagree with you on how they might be routinely used. However, I would say that the missions will likely expand as the number of drones and their accessories become more available and training time is required to keep the pilots skilled. The drone manufacturers will also continue to invent civilian mission capabilities to help market their product. Looking for things to do will result in new applications in new public agencies.
I really don't believe there is anything to guarantee that drones flying over the US will not be armed. The HSD has special anti-terror rules that allow for operations in most of the populated areas of the nation. Shifting the capacity for those missions down the hierarchy of government doesn't seem that difficult to imagine.