If you hear the word drone, do you picture a small commercial quadcopter with a camera or an enormous autonomous military aircraft that fires missiles? The reality of this question is that the majority of Americans picture the latter of the two. Comparing a consumer grade quadcopter, which is what a majority of consumers own, to a military grade drone is like comparing a car to a tank. In today’s world, all too often people hear the word drone, and it comes with a negative connotation to them. The public’s fear of drones is directly caused by misinformation and they should not be banned due to their benefits on the economy, small business growth, and their potential to save lives.

Something that many people overlook is the potential for jobs in the drone industry. Drones are having a big impact on growing existing businesses and encouraging new businesses to be created. A study by the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International estimated that Pennsylvania alone will gain 3,000 new jobs in the first 10 years that drones are integrated into U.S. airspace and will contribute 2.3 billion dollars in economic impact. The drone industry is also extremely competitive, with many different established companies and startups trying to become the next big thing in the drone world. This encourages innovation and makes companies want to set themselves apart with more reliable safety features and cutting edge technology built into their quadcopters, like thermal imaging cameras or added sensors. This is something that our country can greatly benefit from, and these machines encourage capitalism and investment. 

Once people can see commercial drones for what they really are, which is a tool with many different applications, the public will feel more comfortable seeing one overhead. As a drone pilot myself, I can attest to how some people are very fascinated by this technology although they don’t understand it. There are also a good amount of people who’ve read one article about drones and believe they are subject matter experts about their capabilities. This leads to them thinking they should be banned. While everyone is entitled to their opinion, I believe that misinformation caused by situations similar to this creates a great deal of people to form negative opinions about these machines.

The state of the public being blatantly misinformed on the difference between a drone and quadcopter is the reason for all of the negative press that crashes, and small mishaps receive. Very seldom do positive stories about drone reach mainstream media. Another effect of the word “drone” on the general public is to have them immediately think of a multi-million dollar unmanned plane with an expensive camera that can spy on them. A perfect example of this is a 2014 episode of Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. The very first thing said in this episode is “(Drones are)... the third most annoying thing in the sky after mosquitos and plastic bags caught in the breeze.” This is accompanied by a graphic that shows two large military drone aircraft, and a small consumer drone with a camera. The episode then goes on to talk about how drones are everywhere and they are used to shoot “romantic wedding videos”. The graphic for this part while John Oliver is talking is a huge predator drone with missiles below menacing red font spelling “Drones”. He then asks what could possibly go wrong with that as the show cuts to footage from a drone that proceeds to crash into a man and woman for a wedding photo shoot. The audience and host both laugh at the clip, but then the show takes a more serious turn. Oliver states that overseas, drones are more serious of a matter. He says that last week we week we carried out two drone attacks in Yemen and Pakistan and goes on to talk about how these drone strikes are seldom reported on TV. Some time passes and Oliver suggests drones slogan should be “appealingly cheap and incredibly deadly”. The issue here is that this show that is popular in mainstream media categorizes military and consumer drones as the same thing. It makes no mention of how the intended uses of these machines are inherently different and lets the audience infer that commercial drones with cameras for consumers are involved in missile strikes overseas simply because it shares the word “drone” with unmanned planes used by the military. This is exactly how a negative bias is placed into the minds of the public when they hear the word “Drone”.

The differences between a machine like that and a quadcopter are almost night and day. The only similarity they share is the ability to be remotely controlled. A more appropriate word to use for these commercial machines is “quadcopter” or “multirotor”. If we all began distinguishing these two types of machines as something completely different, the general public’s negative bias toward quadcopters would decrease substantially. For example, if both of these machines have distinct words, then someone's opinion on the military’s use of drones in the middle east wouldn’t influence their opinion of small quadcopters as substantially as it does now.Another issue at hand is laws concerning drones. In Should we fear the recent advancement in drone technology?, the author voices concerns for the lack of legislation outlawing the misuse of drones, and gives several examples. He argues that that drones are being used to scout targets of burglary, like houses and businesses, and how this is perfectly legal because of the lack of legislation. The author is not listed here, but the website is a blog for debates within the university of Sheffield. This author gives the impression they are committed to public safety and not necessarily against drones, but they would like to see them regulated properly to prevent their possible involvement in crime. The FAA states “You don't need permission from the FAA to fly your UAS (aka drone) for fun or recreation, but you must always fly safely.” (FAA.gov). The only stipulations given by the FAA before you fly your drone is that it must be registered if it weighs between .55 and 55 pounds, labeled with the registration number, and they suggest you read and understand all of the safety guidelines (FAA.gov). The problem here is that there is no way of policing whether or not people who buy drones actually register them. An individual who wanted to use a drone illegally could simply buy it, not register it, and use it. If their drone crashes, the investigators would have no way of knowing whose drone it is. A solution to this problem would be to pre register drones when they are manufactured if they are between .55 and 55 pounds, and then keep track of who purchases each one and start a drone registry record. The consensus among all of these articles that everyone seemed to agree on was that the drone industry and the demand for consumer drones is growing whether we like it or not. The disagreements seem to stem from how much legislation and regulation should be placed on the use of consumer drones.I believe once the public becomes more accustomed to seeing quadcopters and responsible pilots, we can revert this bias. Drones have been increasing exponentially in popularity in recent years. With each new model that is released, quadcopters for consumers become more reliable, and most importantly affordable. It is now a common sight to see toy versions of drones for sale in large chain stores or in arcades as prizes. I believe these basic versions of drones are a valuable tool to learn to fly before one purchases a larger drone, although toys like this don’t instill the responsibility that comes with owning and flying a larger quad. If a kid loses a toy drone, they only lose a small gift and a little bit of money out of it, so it doesn’t matter as much to them. This teaches that it’s okay to be reckless with these machines and fly dangerously. To solve this problem, the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) who set the laws regarding drones, should increase the publicity it’s drone safety campaign “Know before you fly’ (FAA.gov) gets.

In “The Drone Invasion Is Real, and It's Heading Your Way” by Deckle McLean, the author claims that drones have been hazards of safety and privacy. He then goes on to cite examples of near misses with aircraft, and laws passed by various states penalizing the use of drones for spying, which are very strict. The problem with this argument is that the people who buy drones to use illegally for spying or dangerous flying aren’t the ones who follow the proper laws when flying. Therefore, these laws will be ineffective to stop the few irresponsible pilots who intend to use drones maliciously. All these laws accomplish is hindering positive uses for drones such as search and rescue, or roof inspections to grow small businesses.Another issue at hand is laws concerning drones. In Should we fear the recent advancement in drone technology?, the author voices concerns for the lack of legislation outlawing the misuse of drones, and gives several examples. He argues that that drones are being used to scout targets of burglary, like houses and businesses, and how this is perfectly legal because of the lack of legislation. The author is not listed here, but the website is a blog for debates within the university of Sheffield. This author gives the impression they are committed to public safety and not necessarily against drones, but they would like to see them regulated properly to prevent their possible involvement in crime. The FAA states “You don't need permission from the FAA to fly your UAS (aka drone) for fun or recreation, but you must always fly safely.” (FAA.gov). The only stipulations given by the FAA before you fly your drone is that it must be registered if it weighs between .55 and 55 pounds, labeled with the registration number, and they suggest you read and understand all of the safety guidelines (FAA.gov). The problem here is that there is no way of policing whether or not people who buy drones actually register them. An individual who wanted to use a drone illegally could simply buy it, not register it, and use it. If their drone crashes, the investigators would have no way of knowing whose drone it is. A solution to this problem would be to pre register drones when they are manufactured if they are between .55 and 55 pounds, and then keep track of who purchases each one and start a drone registry record. The consensus among all of these articles that everyone seemed to agree on was that the drone industry and the demand for consumer drones is growing whether we like it or not. The disagreements seem to stem from how much legislation and regulation should be placed on the use of consumer drones.

The press often times tries to subliminally drill a negative bias into the minds of the population concerning drones. There are countless articles online about how a drone crashed somewhere, and why they need to be banned, but articles expressing an optimistic view toward these incredible machines are few and far-between. I have seen firsthand how some people protest the ease of any citizen buying and using a drone. All too often articles are published regarding how dangerous drones are without acknowledging the steps in safety the industry as a whole has taken. In reality, newer drones almost always come with built in safety features. Examples of this include GPS stabilization and tracking, sensors that can stop the drone before it flies into something, as well as pre flight checklists built into the app used to control the drone with a clear and precise display while flying. With each new model of drone that is released, the safety features also increase in number and reliability. A great example of this is the recent release of the DJI Phantom 4 professional. This consumer drone has been upgraded with 5 different obstacle detectors, so it won’t allow you to intentionally crash. It can be had for less than $1500 and is much more stable in flight than the previous phantom (dji.com/phantom-4-pro).

Another potential use of consumer drones that seldom receives recognition is first responder applications. Many law enforcement agencies have adopted drones as an efficient alternative to helicopters because of their high quality cameras and low cost. For less than a thousand dollars, a quadcopter with a 30 minute flight time, 4k camera, and simple controls with a live display of what the drone sees in real time can be purchased. The potential for search and rescue is huge here. This drone’s into a potential life-saving tool. Not to mention they would be used to aid your community in an emergency. I’m a member of a drone community blog myself, and have seen countless posts about how someone with a drone was contacted by a local small police agency and asked for help with a search and rescue mission or even help looking for criminal suspects on the loose.The journal “The Fear of Drones: Privacy and Unmanned Aircraft” by Daniel Friedenzohn and Alexander Mirot, they present an interesting idea that while drones should not be banned due to their benefits, we should also be mindful of everyone’s right to privacy. Drones do pose a threat to privacy when improperly used, however the way to solve this problem is not by passing strict laws and banning these incredible machines. A more effective solution would be to increase spending on programs to increase awareness of existing laws and safe flying by the FAA. These laws would not affect illegal use of drones as anyone intending to use a drone illegally would already have no respect for the existing law. As I stated before, these laws will only stand in the way of people who fly their quadcopter responsibly or for business purposes.

The use of military grade drones by the US government has also increased in recent years, bringing about concern for the ethical use of drone strikes. Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral, and Geopolitical Issues by Marjorie Cohn argues that military drone use today has become very easy to authorize by the president and is often used very immorally. It claims that the CIA has a broken system of identifying people as militants, so it gives inaccurate reports of the true number of innocent civilians killed by the US in drone strikes every year.These stories involve many more life or death situations and people just develop a negative bias after hearing several things like this in years past about the word “drone.” By distinguishing between the drones and commercial grade quadcopters, we can counter the negative bias and stop the public’s misinformation. 

All in all, the general public should research the differences in the type of drones that exist in today's world in order to eliminate a subliminal negative bias caused by the media and misinformation. In addition to this, commercial drones should not be banned due to their benefits on the economy and job creation, small business creation and growth , and their potential use as lifesaving tools through search and rescue or other first responder agencies. Drone technology is exponentially expanding and with each new release of drones, new possibilities for their application and uses are created. Regardless of the public’s opinion of drones, they are becoming more popular as they get better and cheaper. Once we all become more accustomed to seeing these machines, and catching sight of them while flying, we can all be more accepting that these machines are the future of many industries and will have a large impact on our economy.
