ROYAL OAK — As the number of drones being manufactured throughout the country increases, the discussion is emerging on what the proper regulations for using the unmanned aircraft should be. 

According to the Federal Aviation Administration, by the end of the decade there will be 10,000 drones circling skies in the United States.  

On Monday, lawmakers and activists participated in a forum at the Royal Oak Public Library concerning regulations for domestic drones as well as the issue of advanced technology and civil liberties. 

About fifty people attended the forum. Many were concerned about domestic drones eventually being used as weapons by federal or local law enforcement agencies. Residents also expressed dismay about drones being used to spy on Americans and said  unmanned aircraft could violate their civil liberties and privacy rights. 

Panelists included State Rep. Tom McMillin (R-Rochester Hills), State Rep. Rose Mary Robinson (D-Detroit), ACLU of Michigan Legislative Director Shelli Weisberg and MI Campaign for Liberty’s Oakland Coordinator Dennis Marburger.

Activists and lawmakers stressed the importance of having legislation in place to limit the use of drones before it is too late. 

Weisberg says once police have the power to operate drones for certain purposes, it will be very difficult to overturn it. 

When mobile phones first emerged on the market, no strict laws existed, making it easier for law enforcement to obtain civilian data once technology became more advanced. There is fear the same could happen with drones. 

“Drones are going to be a billion dollar industry, so we really need to get laws into place,” said Weisberg. 

As the U.S. prepares for the launch of a commercial drone industry, local and state law enforcement are expected to be among the largest customers. 

The Detroit based company Detroit Aircraft Corporation is already building drones.  Amazon’s CEO recently announced it anticipates that by 2015 the company will be delivering packages to people using drones. 

Rep. McMillin has introduced House Bill 4455. The legislation places restrictions on government drones in the state and is also sponsored by Rep. Robinson and other legislators. 

“I just feel that this new technology is going to create new problems and we’re going to have to be very vigilant and we are going to have to be very aggressive,” Rep. Robinson said. 

In recent years, one of the most difficult challenges the ACLU has had is confronting the issue of privacy and advanced technology. The issue hasn’t drawn much partisan debate.  Both liberals and conservatives are coming together to ask for regulations on drone use.  

“I see this issue…as the invasion of people’s rights,” Marburger said. 

There is speculation about whether it is too early to introduce legislation that regulates drone use since the FAA guidelines on balancing privacy and safety concerns isn’t expected to be complete until 2015. 

About fifty people attended the forum. Many were concerned about domestic drones eventually being used as weapons by federal or local law enforcement agencies. Residents also expressed dismay about drones being used to spy on Americans and said the unmanned aircraft would violate their civil liberties and privacy rights.

Weisberg argued that it isn’t too early because tens of thousands of law enforcement agencies already have drones. “Once they set a precedent of how to use them, you can’t go back and try to change it,” she said.

The Michigan Department of Transportation announced that it is interested in purchasing drones for bridge inspection, among other uses. Weisberg says the Michigan State Police (MSP) is  seeking approval from the FAA to use drones.  The FAA has control over who gets drones. 

MSP’s draft policy on drone usage, which isn’t complete prohibits the use of weaponization, according to Weisberg. 

“Other law enforcement agencies are using them without regard to FAA approval, without having any policy in place and they’re doing it quietly so they can set the precedent for how to use it, so that when we come in and say wait a minute we don’t want you to use drones that way they can say too late we can’t change it now,” she said. 

Rep. Robinson says the Fourth Amendment doesn’t provide protection to Americans against drones in public places. 

“The Fourth Amendment doesn’t protect you when you’re in public places, and that’s where I have concern about these drones. If I’m in my backyard they can watch me. Drones do not violate the Fourth Amendment…If  you’re at a library having a conversation people could listen to what you are saying and that wouldn’t be a violation of Fourth Amendment rights,” Rep. Robinson said. 

According to a report, Customs Border Patrol has considered equipping its drones with “non-lethal weapons.” The CBP has also increased its use of drones for domestic surveillance while garnering heavy scrutiny from civil liberties groups.  

One resident said he is concerned about CBP using drones along the U.S. Canada Border as weaponry in the future.  

“Because of the collateral damage they tend to be not as accurate as what our military claims they will be. You end up going after one person and then taking out 100,” said Chris Greenwood. “How safe is it for me to live near a border because these weaponized drones are not precise.”  

Some say drones could potentially be used by the government to silence those in opposition to it. 

“Among the many ill effects that we could see from this is to stamp out political dissent…And so if some of us get together to protest against the Federal Reserve, wars or assaults on people’s rights here at home, would the drones be used? And come on, the question answers itself,” said Marburger. 

Weisberg says 40 states are in the stages of passing legislation for drone use. 

Two states have prohibited the use of drones completely. One of them is Virginia.  The state is holding off until the FAA’s guidelines on drone use are completed. 

The Department of Homeland Security does provide grants directly to law enforcement that can be used to purchase equipment such as surveillance cameras and drones.  

“My main concern is the federal government more than the state government or the local government…why do we even talk about the Fourth Amendment or even wonder if the government is going to turn tyrannical?  They already have.  We already know that they’re listening to us on your laptop right now. 

They can turn on your laptop right now without the light even going on. We all ready know that this federal government is a monster and they are violating the basic human rights of every American and human on the planet,” said Brandon LaVigre of South Lyon.