This Colorado Man Is Ready to Hunt Amazon Drones

But does he have a point?

National Journal
Brian Resnick
Dec. 3, 2013, midnight

If an Amazon drone were to stumble in­to the air­space above Phil­lip Steel’s yard in Deer Trail, Colo., he knows ex­actly what he’d do: Grab his shot­gun. “I would shoot it down, or­din­ance or no, I would shoot it down,” he tells me over the phone, later adding, “I will shoot it down and go to jail with a smile over my face.”

Deer Trail is one place Amazon prob­ably won’t pi­lot its “Air Prime” drone de­liv­ery sys­tem. The town is poised to vote in the next week and a half on an or­din­ance that will al­low drone hunt­ing, an or­din­ance Steel au­thored.

That is, the meas­ure will al­low cit­izens of Deer Trail to pur­chase $25 drone-hunt­ing li­censes and then bring pieces of shot-down drones back for a bounty of up to $100. The text of the or­din­ance oozes with a not-on-my-lawn dis­dain for the copters. “As such, every un­wanted un­manned aer­i­al vehicle is hereby de­clared a threat to … pre­cious free­dom,” it reads. And, yeah, the kids can get in on the drone shoot­ing too. “There shall be no age re­quire­ment or re­stric­tion for is­su­ance of the hunt­ing li­cense.” No back­ground in­vest­ig­a­tions will be needed to ob­tain a drone hunt­ing li­cense. It’s that es­sen­tial of a right.

Per­haps you’ve heard of this. It’s the kind of stunt that gets no­ticed by the Col­bert Re­port, and that’s kind of the point. Steel’s the type of per­son to make his case to a town coun­cil wear­ing a cow­boy cos­tume and bran­dish­ing a plastic nerf rifle. He says he sent a drone-hunt­ing li­cense to Vladi­mir Putin. He also says he has Ed­ward Snowden’s phone num­ber, but hasn’t called him yet. Last week, he staged a drone-hunt­ing prac­tice ses­sion us­ing mod­el rock­ets in place of UAVs.

“Tech­no­logy ad­vances far quick­er than the law does; as a so­ci­ety we are too eager to em­brace the next new toy.”

He tells me he spent 14 years in the Army as a Psy­cho­lo­gic­al War­fare of­ficer. I asked him what that meant and he summed it up as “pro­pa­ganda.” And he says he’s us­ing that ex­per­i­ence in what he more eu­phemist­ic­ally calls “mar­ket­ing” to get the word out about drones. “I wouldn’t say that I’m a fear mon­ger; I’m try­ing to il­lu­min­ate an im­min­ent threat that is on the ho­ri­zon,” he says. “The per­cep­tion in the ab­sence of fact be­comes real­ity.”

Ba­sic­ally, he’s cre­at­ing a farce to make his cent­ral point: What does the mass pro­lif­er­a­tion of drones mean for pri­vacy? For prop­erty rights? If a drone flies with­in 1,000 feet of a per­son’s air­space, is that a tres­pass? These are the ques­tions the FAA will have to deal with as it makes re­com­mend­a­tions for com­mer­cial drone use. 

FAA chief Mi­chael Huerta out­lined a five-year roadmap last month chart­ing how the agency plans to in­teg­rate com­mer­cial drones in­to na­tion­al air­space, be­gin­ning with the an­nounce­ment of six test site loc­a­tions by the end of the year. A draft rule is ex­pec­ted early next year, but it is only ex­pec­ted to cov­er ap­plic­a­tions for drones that would fly un­der 400 feet above ground and re­main with­in the visu­al line of sight of a pi­lot dur­ing day­time. It’s a far cry from the drones Bezos ima­gines, which would travel up to 10 miles from a dis­tri­bu­tion cen­ter. “You have to pity the poor guy at the FAA,” Peter Sing­er, a seni­or fel­low at the Brook­ings In­sti­tu­tion, says. “I have this im­age of some poor guy at the FAA eat­ing his leftover tur­key sand­wich, watch­ing 60 Minutes and go­ing, ‘oh, crap.’”

“Do I think 1984 is go­ing to hap­pen?” Steel says, down­play­ing the hy­per­bole. “Not in the same sense as George Or­well did — but I think its go­ing to be a lot trick­i­er than that, a lot more subtle.”

And it’s true: Ex­pan­sions of tech­no­logy from re­tail­ers have lim­ited the pri­vacy of con­sumers. There’s that in­fam­ous story of Tar­get know­ing a teen­age girl was preg­nant be­fore her fath­er did. But that’s just the tip of a massive in­dustry that rests on selling con­sumer-be­ha­vi­or pro­files (de­tached from key iden­ti­fi­ers, but still, en­com­passing the shad­ow of a per­son’s buy­ing habits).

“Tech­no­logy ad­vances far quick­er than the law does; as a so­ci­ety we are too eager to em­brace the next new toy,” Steel says. The Su­preme Court every year has such a case — can GPS units track cars without a war­rant, is a DNA data­base search an in­va­sion of pri­vacy, and so on. And while the Deer Trail or­din­ance is a bit of a joke, there are many states that have con­sidered drone pri­vacy laws, to lay the leg­al ground­work be­fore the tech­no­logy be­comes com­mon­place.

Amazon has put forth a tan­tal­iz­ing scen­ario: the skies buzz­ing with in­stant grat­i­fic­a­tion. But that’s bound to have some un­in­ten­ded con­sequences — if it’s even prac­tic­al.

Dustin Volz contributed to this article.
What We're Following See More »
IN ADDITION TO DNC AND DCCC
Clinton Campaign Also Hacked
6 hours ago
THE LATEST
1.5 MILLION MORE TUNED IN FOR TRUMP
More People Watched Trump’s Acceptance Speech
7 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Hillary Clinton hopes that television ratings for the candidates' acceptance speeches at their respective conventions aren't foreshadowing of similar results at the polls in November. Preliminary results from the networks and cable channels show that 34.9 million people tuned in for Donald Trump's acceptance speech while 33.3 million watched Clinton accept the Democratic nomination. However, it is still possible that the numbers are closer than these ratings suggest: the numbers don't include ratings from PBS or CSPAN, which tend to attract more Democratic viewers.

Source:
AFFECTS NOVEMBER ELECTIONS
North Carolina Voter ID Law Struck Down
10 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday overturned North Carolina's 2013 voter ID law, saying it was passed with “discriminatory intent." The decision sends the case back to the district judge who initially dismissed challenges to the law. "The ruling prohibits North Carolina from requiring photo identification from voters in future elections, including the November 2016 general election, restores a week of early voting and preregistration for 16- and 17-year-olds, and ensures that same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting will remain in effect."

Source:
NORTH DAKOTA TO ILLINOIS
Massive Oil Pipeline Approved for the Midwest
11 hours ago
THE DETAILS

An oil pipeline almost as long as the much-debated Keystone XL has won final approval to transport crude from North Dakota to Illinois, traveling through South Dakota and Iowa along the way. "The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers gave the final blessing to the Dakota Access pipeline on Tuesday. Developers now have the last set of permits they need to build through the small portion of federal land the line crosses, which includes major waterways like the Mississippi and the Missouri rivers. The so-called Bakken pipeline goes through mostly state and private land."

Source:
×