Civil rights and privacy violations by unmanned Aerial Systems (UAVs)

Drones Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAVS) and Constitutional Violations of Citizens' Privacy The purpose of this research paper is to examine how the advancement of technology in Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems (UAVs) has aided the government's objective of thwarting and countering terrorist attacks both within and outside the United States, while still impinging on citizens' constitutional rights to privacy.

Statement of The Problem

The employment and deployment of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for assault missions in a military theatre, surveillance in an active combat situation, and domestic surveillance activities has been a source of contention. This issue encompasses not just the ethical use of such modern technology, but also a plethora of military tactical, moral, psychological, and privacy concerns associated with domestic deployment scenarios. It can be used improperly to breach citizens' constitutional rights to privacy and to engage the government in non-violent or criminal personal problems. The purpose of this study is to investigate the topic at hand and to assess the truth of these arguments regarding individuals' privacy concerns, as well as those of international organisations and the military.

Drones or Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAVS)

According to an estimate by the Drones Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAVS) industry, worldwide spending on Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) for government and commercial purposes would reach $ 89.1 billion by the end of this decade. $ 28.5 billion would be spent on research and development, while the remaining $ 60.6 billion would be utilised to acquire this technology. The United States of America's military will be the primary driver of growth in this sector. According to forecasts, this market's growth is highly dependent on legislation and regulations ensuring the safe use and integration of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAVS) into the airspace system. (2002) (Dillingham, 2012, p.

Military technology has advanced at a breakneck pace during the last decade. Historically, governments who launched conflicts had to contemplate the possibility of losing their own loyal troops and commandos. However, governments that possess the necessary technology may now eliminate individuals who represent dangers to their economic and national integrity without fear of reprisal. Although the employment of UAV technology has increased over the last century, only the United States of America, Israel, and the United Kingdom are claimed to have done so to far. Other governments are known to have bought this technology for military and combat monitoring, with some procuring the armed version. (Birch, Lee, and Pierscionek, 2012, pp. 1–11)

History of the Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAVS) Technology

Israel employed drones for the first time in 1973 during the 'Yom Kippur' conflict. These were US-made drones that were deployed to deflect missile fire. Israel later built more powerful drones capable of filming the conflict. Additionally, drones were utilised for surveillance and intelligence collection during the first 'Gulf War' in 1990 and 1991. In 1999, the UAV or Drone technology was also deployed in Kosovo for the same goals. (Birch, Lee, and Pierscionek, 2012, pp. 1–11)

Prior to the September 11 attacks, the US Air Force began testing with armed drones. In 2001, a Predator drone launched a weapon called 'Helfire.' The missile was fired against a stationary target, and the experiment was a success. In the same year, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employed a predator drone for the first time to murder Mohammed Atif, a terrorist and well-known Al Qaeda leader. (Birch, Lee, and Pierscionek, 2012, pp. 1–11)

Today, it is believed that over seventy-five nations own Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) or Drones. The United States of America has implemented this technology in a number of nations, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Iraq. On the other side, Israel has been accused of utilising armed drones in the Gaza Strip. In 2007, the United Kingdom also utilised these drones in Afghanistan. (Birch, Lee, and Pierscionek, 2012, pp. 1–11)

Current Trends in the Usage of Drones

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are aircraft that are piloted remotely and do not require a pilot to remain on board. When combined with ground stations and other data linkages, these Unmanned Aerial Vehicles are referred to as Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS). Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) come in a wide variety of sizes and capacities. For instance, some UAVs may have a wing span comparable to that of a Boeing 737, while others may be smaller than radio operated model aeroplanes. (Cavoukian 2012, 3) Previously, the employment of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) was confined to military objectives; but, with technological improvements, these instruments are increasingly employed for domestic surveillance and public research as well. (Remy, Senouci, Jan, & Gourhan 2013, 1) While Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are frequently linked with military activities, they are also utilised by domestic law enforcement organisations for surveillance purposes. Additionally, the commercial sector has increased its usage of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). The increased usage of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) by non-military entities is a result of the technology's lowering cost. Additionally, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are more efficient and beneficial than manned aerial vehicles. (2012) (Cavoukian, 2012, p. 3)

Classification of the Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)

On the basis of their specifications, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) may be classified into three broad categories: micro and tiny UAVs, tactical UAVs, and strategic UAVs. Cavoukian (2012), p. 6 Drones may be classified into two types based on their intended use: surveillance drones and armed drones. (Birch, Lee, and Pierscionek 2012, pp. 1-11.) The next section discusses each of these categories in further depth.

Micro and Mini Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

They are the smallest Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) technology available. They often fly at low altitudes or heights. This height is often less than 300 metres. Typically, this category includes vehicles capable of flying within buildings. These Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are equipped with cameras, microphones, and radio transmitters, among other things. Micro UAVs are smaller than micro UAVs, weighing less than a hundred grammes. Mini UAVs typically weigh less than thirty kilos and fly between 150 and 300 metres in height. Both micro and tiny unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are often utilised in civic and commercial operations. Cavoukian (2012), p. 6

Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

Tactical UAVs are significantly larger and heavier than micro and tiny UAVs. Their weight is between 150 and 150 kilos. They fly between three and eight thousand metres in height. At the moment, tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are mostly utilised to assist military applications and operations. This category may be further subdivided into six subcategories: short range, medium range, long range, close range, and endurance, as well as Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Long-range UAVs are more sophisticated technologically, as they communicate with base stations through satellites. This communication difficulty is mainly caused by the earth's curvature. Medium, short, and near range unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) can operate in constrained space due to the absence of satellite communication infrastructure. The Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) may be utilised for forty hours at altitudes more than 3,000 km. Additionally, they may be utilised to launch precision guided missiles. 'Predator' is an example of a Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) aircraft. Cavoukian (2012), p. 6

Strategic Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

Weight, flying range, and endurance of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) all rise as altitude increases. High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) Unmanned Aerial Vehicles are the heaviest Unmanned Aerial Vehicles available today. These unmanned aerial vehicles have a takeoff weight of up to 12,000 kg. They can fly up to a maximum height of 20,000 metres. These are intended for the transportation of complex, bigger, and heavier equipment. 'The military UAV Global Hawk' is a well-known and advanced Unmanned Aerial Vehicle that falls within this category. It has a range of around thirty-five hours. Helios is a non-military example of High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE). The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is in charge of its operation (NASA). The Helios uses solar panels to power the electrically controlled propellers and has established a record-breaking height limit of thirty thousand metres. The Helios UAV performs a variety of purposes, including earth observation, atmospheric analysis, and mapping. Cavoukian (2012), p. 7.

Surveillance Drones

The majority of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles are equipped with or equipped with video cameras capable of transmitting photos and video clips to base stations. These surveillance drones have gotten more affordable and intelligent with the passage of time. They are capable of photographing objects at large distances and also have a greater camera resolution. Certain surveillance unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are fitted with sensor cameras or can be equipped with such cameras. The term 'forward-looking infrared camera' refers to a sensor camera. A camera of this type is capable of detecting infrared radiations released by a source, most commonly a heat source. These cameras can then stitch together video feeds to form a composite image of the source that may be broadcast to ground stations. Additionally, modern video analytics enable the application of artificial intelligence to the process of gathering and analysing large amounts of video data. This technology is integrated with face recognition software, and the resulting system is used to track persons both in public and private spaces. It is capable of tracking persons even when they are concealed behind closed doors or walls. (7) (Cavoukian 2012).

Armed Drones

Armed drones are pilotless or remotely controlled aircraft that operate by a pre-installed programme or software or are controlled by a network of ground stations. These instruments are used by armies and militaries. They are employed to assassinate individuals whom the government or any other intelligence agency has recognised as terrorists. (1) (Kutyreva 2013).

Benefits Associated With The Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)

There are several advantages to utilising Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS). In homeland security, they aid domestic law enforcement and security agencies in gaining a better grip on the nation's law and order situation. Additionally, with the assistance of this technology, law enforcement authorities are able to effectively deal with threats to domestic or homeland security. 1-2 (Tom 2013). In terms of terrorism, these UAVs assist us in more effectively countering terrorist acts. The Unmanned Aerial System has been embraced as the weapon of choice by the United States military and intelligence agencies to target and kill terrorists and other radicals in countries such as Pakistan, Yemen, and Afghanistan, among others. (2011) (Pedrozo, 218). Apart from that, drones have harmed terrorist groups' capacity to function efficiently by having a detrimental effect on their mentality, as they are always under observation and face the prospect of being murdered by Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). (315–316) (Smith et al.

Drones And Domestic Security

In the modern period, drones have been used both globally and locally. Domestically, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) employs drones or Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) to rapidly respond to domestic threats. Additionally, they are being used to efficiently respond to national security threats and emergencies. Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of the United States of America's drone fleet supports law enforcement agencies in the appropriate and effective enforcement of laws and regulations throughout the country. (Tom 2013, pp. 1 and 2)

Drones And Terrorism

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) procurement has expanded significantly in a number of western economies, most notably the United States of America. The US has used this equipment in a variety of areas, including Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan. (1) (Strawser 2010). Drones are now being employed extensively in the 'war on terrorism.' Between 2000 and 2008, the number of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) employed by the United States Department of Defense (DOD) went from under fifty thousand to approximately in the neighbourhood of sixty thousand. In 2009, four hundred and fifty thousand flight hours were logged by Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), and in 2010, this figure surpassed five hundred and fifty thousand. The United States of America launched thirty-six aircraft strikes in 2008, and more than one hundred and fifty in 2010. (2011) (Pedrozo, 218)

Drones, or Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), have become a critical instrument in the battle against terrorism and a huge number of militants during the last decade. Drones provide a variety of benefits over conventional weaponry and have shown to be more successful in the battle against terrorism. They may study militants and terrorist groups covertly for an extended period of time and then strike instantly when the chance presents itself. Another advantage of deploying Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) is that they can execute all of these tasks without endangering the pilot. The combination of all of these capabilities is rather unusual, and it has clearly provided the United States of America with a competitive edge over terrorist organisations. The Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) have helped the United States of America to successfully battle terrorism, and with their assistance, the US has degraded the Al Qaeda group and gained control of a number of other terrorist groups as well. (2) (Zenko 2013)

Drones And the Psychology of Military Combatants

The United States of America began employing unmanned aerial systems (UAS) with the goal of assassinating terrorists and militants and limiting terrorist groups' capacity to engage in immoral, illegal, and dangerous operations. Drone assaults weaken terrorist groups, and this technology impairs their capacity to function efficiently and achieve success. They have a detrimental influence on the psychology of terrorist groups Since drone attacks are typically targeted at Al Qaeda leaders, when the leaders are killed, it has a detrimental effect on the psychology of the subordinates, preventing them from doing their responsibilities successfully. The assassination of terrorist groups' leaders has a detrimental effect on both the quality and quantity of their activities. (315–316) (Smith et al.

Additionally, when terrorist groups are aware that they are under constant monitoring and are at risk of being targeted by Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), they are unable to simply obtain the physical and human resources necessary to complete a mission efficiently. Apart from that, because these groups are fearful of assault, they are unable to easily transport their communications from one location to another. By striking terrorist groups with more effective and accurate Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), the United States of America is able to have a detrimental effect on the mentality of enemy fighters, hence reducing the amount of threat posed to the nation by these organisations. (315–316) (Smith et al.)

Issues Associated With the Use of the Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)

While Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) have proven to be highly useful in the fight on terror, there are certain concerns and debates surrounding their employment. The primary concern with the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) for domestic security purposes is the violation of individuals' privacy and constitutional rights. (Dolan et al., 2013, p. 12). Additionally, the excessive collateral damage caused by drone strikes is a potential issue associated with the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), as each terrorist killed by drone strikes results in the death of a number of innocent people; this serves as a strong argument against the United States of America's drone strikes. (2013) (Etzioni, 2) Apart from that, the employment of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) has a detrimental effect on the mentality of the individuals who control these machines. 1-4 (Parkes 2013). Additionally, drone attacks have a detrimental effect on the psyche and mental health of the people who live beneath the drone strike zones. (2012, Living With Drones, p. 7)

Drones And Privacy

The primary concern of integrating Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) into the domestic air space of the United States of America is that this technology might be used to spy on its residents, jeopardising their privacy and constitutional rights. With the use of infrared, sensor cameras, face recognition, and video analytics, it is a well-established fact that when Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) are employed for domestic surveillance, they represent an immediate danger to residents' privacy. While the government's use of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) is permitted under the fourth amendment, there is a risk that unmanned aerial systems (UAS) may be used illegally by non-government entities, violating citizens' privacy rights. (Dolan et al., 2013, p. 12)

Drones and Excessive Collateral Damage

The employment of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) results in a disproportionate amount of collateral harm. Many innocent people, including women and children, are murdered for every terrorist killed in an Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) strike. According to surveys and research, the majority of victims killed in Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) assaults are civilians. Different persons have presented varying estimates of the incidental harm caused by drones. For example, American counterterrorism officials estimate that civilians are killed in less than 2.5 percent of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) attacks, while former military officials David Kilcullen and Andrew Exum estimate that 50 civilians are killed for every terrorist killed in an Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) strike. As a result, there are no feasible means of resolving these disagreements. (2013) (Etzioni, 2)

Drones And Psychological Impacts On Operators

In 2011, a research was conducted to determine the psychological effects of operating unmanned aerial systems on individuals who operate them (UAS). The study's findings indicated that the majority of psychological effects were caused by lengthy work hours, difficulty operating equipment, and geographic location of job. In comparison to non-combatants, predator/reaper operators experienced greater emotional weariness and lacked cynicism. Another research concluded that operators' stress was caused by operational factors rather than constant exposure to battle situations. Additionally, it indicated that active duty operators suffered more than shift workers. 1-4 (Parkes 2013)

Drones And Psychological Impacts On Civilians

Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) strikes have a variety of negative psychological consequences. (2012, Living With Drones, p. 7) Several of these are detailed below;

Impact On Victims' Willingness To Be Rescued Two Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) strikes occur; the first kills the intended individuals, while the second kills those who come to their aid. This makes it impossible for neighbours to rescue the victims. This double attack is sometimes referred to as a 'double tap,' and it has a detrimental effect on both bystanders and rescue personnel' humanitarian impulses, causing them to avoid assisting the injured. (Living in a Drone-Infested World, 2012, p. 74)

Impact on Economic Status

The majority of individuals who live in regions targeted by drone attacks face unpleasant financial challenges. Typically, these strikes damage the attacked area's infrastructure. They damage the homes of innocent individuals, and occasionally the innocent persons murdered in drone attacks are the family's sole breadwinners, leaving the family in a financial bind following their death. (Living in the Age of Drones, 2012, p. 77)

Other Impacts

Drone strikes also have a detrimental influence on people's mental health. Additionally, these strikes have a detrimental effect on educational possibilities, cultural and religious customs in the impacted area. Additionally, as a result of the drone assaults, the impacted community's residents lack confidence in one another. They develop doubts about their neighbours' allegiances and oppose developing positive relationships with one another. (Living With Drones, 2012, pp. 80–99)

Research Methodology

The term'research methodology' refers to the 'whole strategy and perspective' of a study and includes the following major points:

1. Reason for collection of data,

2. Type of data collected,

3. Sources of data,

4. Method of collecting data, and

5. Methods of analyzing the collected data. (Neville 2007, 5)

This section of the study describes and discusses the procedure and methodology used to perform the complete research. The data utilised, the sources from which the data were gathered, the procedures used to evaluate and convert the data to meaningful information, and the methods used to draw conclusions about the obtained collection of information. The study strategy relied heavily on the collection and analysis of considerable background data. All significant research questions were discovered at the first stages of the study, and the research is structured in such a way that it successfully answers all of the questions and accomplishes the research objectives.

The following are some of the research's limitations:

1. Unavailability of accurate data,

2. Data collected might be irrelevant, and

3. Data collected might be obsolete and not updated.

The aforementioned constraints were taken into account during the research design and conduct phases. The restrictions were also taken into account while developing the most effective research approach and determining the research's theoretical framework.

The most critical feature of this section was developing an effective and efficient research plan that would result in results that readily addressed the research questions mentioned at the outset.

Theoretical Framework

Primary research is focused on gathering knowledge directly from sources and not on relying on the work of others. It entails collecting data through surveys, interviews, and other means and then analysing the data using a predetermined manner.

The difficulties encountered when using the primary method of information gathering and collection include the inability to obtain an accurate sample of participants, incorrect or vague responses or contributions by participants, participant hesitation, and time constraints (as the data collection phase will take a long time to complete), etc.

The advantages of this form of research include the following: accurate, precise, and precise data that is appropriate for the goal (objective) of the study and can successfully answer the research questions; data obtained is current (to the date of the research); and so on.

Secondary research is centred on utilising the work of others in order to derive critical data and concluding your research using secondary data (work of others). Books, previously published articles (newspaper, web-based, or otherwise), literary works, scientific publications, and journals are all examples of secondary sources of data.

The downsides of this form of study include the availability of a large amount of useless data, the possibility that data will not be updated and promptly, and so on. On the other hand, this sort of research is simple to do and requires little time, as a large database of previous work on the study topic is available online or in the form of books, journals, and other publications.

The research will be done utilising a secondary data collection technique. Secondary data will be gathered primarily from publicly available sources on the internet, as well as research conducted in books, magazines, and other publicly available publications, as well as research conducted by the Open Source Center, which is available to members of the United States government. The data gathered from various secondary sources will be properly evaluated to eliminate irrelevant data. It is critical to use only relevant data since this increases the accuracy and relevance of the study undertaken. Additionally, the primary disadvantage of conducting research solely through secondary sources is the availability of a massive database containing a large amount of outmoded and useless material. To overcome this disadvantage (or limitation), a large number of data sources will be analysed to choose the most relevant collection of data for accurately answering the research question.

By examining existing data, we will attempt to determine the real impact of widespread drone use in combat environments. Additionally, the research concludes with recommendations on how to best implement widespread adoption of UAV technologies in domestic airspace while adhering to and complying with governmental legislation, rules and regulations, and guidelines designed to prevent the technology's unauthorised use and abuse by the government and private parties. Unlawful uses of this pervasive technology include illegal monitoring of citizens, launching drone air attacks on home land, and other potentially deadly activities.

Research Design

The research is conducted with the research subject and research question in mind. Quantitative and qualitative approaches are used to conduct research and analyse data gathered through the secondary mode of data collecting described above.

Qualitative research is a sort of study that places a premium on the quality of data acquired and using qualitative methodologies to gain a better understanding of the research questions and data gathered. 'Qualitative research elicits information about the problem's context, providing ideas and/or hypotheses.' (8) (Macdonald & Headlam, 2011).

Another approach of doing research is the quantitative method, which quantifies the data and information gathered. This form of study provides answers to queries such as how many, how much, how long, and how far, and so on. (8) (Macdonald & Headlam, 2011).

Qualitative research is more subjective than quantitative research in that it focuses on the intangible components of a subject, such as values, attitudes, and impressions. While this form of study may be simpler to initiate, it is frequently more difficult to evaluate and explain the findings; the findings may also be more easily contested.

The purpose of quantitative research is to thoroughly explain the observations (data and information obtained throughout the course of the study) in order to analyse and comprehend the research viewpoints. In comparison to organised quantitative research, this style of study is unstructured (in the form of tables, percentages, numbers, etc.). (2011) (Macdonald & Headlam, 9)

The paper will focus exclusively on qualitative analysis of available literature and research in order to best determine the state of the UAV industry and its potential future, how to best address current technological limitations, the high civilian casualties associated with drone air strikes, and a framework for the proliferation of UAV use in the domestic market for commercial and government purposes. It can be said that this paper analyses and evaluates qualitatively the ideas presented by peers and other scholars on drone technology, the UAV industry's history, present, and future, benefits and drawbacks, costs and issues, legislations, laws, and regulations governing the use of this technology, and control in terrorism and other unlawful purposes made possible by this technology. Qualitative analysis is examining the underlying assumptions and statements made and determining if they are accurate in the particular set of circumstances and scenario. Qualitative analysis is more subjective since it involves commenting on the opinions and viewpoints of others. As a result, the findings drawn from the research are more subjective. Thus, these can be contested at any moment by anyone (having a different point of view and seeing the things in other light).

Literature Review

Although scholars and experts disagree on the definition of a UAV, Air Cdre Neville Parton noted two important characteristics: 'The first two are self-evident: the vehicle should be unmanned and rely on aerodynamic lift or buoyancy to remain aloft.' Torpy, Parton, Goulter, Jordan, Wilkins, McMahon, Mardell, and Cox, 2009, p. 7). Whereas the United States Department of Defense defines Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) as 'powered, aerial vehicles that do not carry a human operator, rely on aerodynamic forces for lift, can fly autonomously or be remotely piloted, are expendable or recoverable, and can carry a lethal or nonlethal payload.' (Bone et al., 2003, p.

1).Current Trends In the Unmanned Aerial Systems Technology

In the modern period, Unmanned Aerial Systems are utilised for a variety of applications. Nicholas Cranston discussed a variety of applications for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). 'Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are increasingly being employed for civilian and military objectives,' he says. They can be piloted remotely or autonomously using pre-programmed flight patterns. They are employed militarily for reconnaissance and assault. They are utilised in a range of safety-related jobs in the civilian sector, from firefighting to crowd surveillance. The prospect that within a few years, UAVs will be utilised much more broadly for telecommunications, law enforcement, environmental patrol, and a variety of other jobs is particularly intriguing.' (Cranston 2008, pp. 1–2).

Apart from that, other countries have increased their acquisition of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. According to a UK Defense Forum study,'more than 40 countries are presently developing and/or deploying UAV systems. This area of research has been identified as one of the most sought-after technologies in the business. In 2003, the US military expenditure for UAVs topped $1 billion.' (2007) (Cranston 2008, 1). Additionally, 'The Teal Group' forecasted that 'UAV spending will more than quadruple over the next decade, from $3.4 billion yearly to $7.3 billion.' (Cranston 2008, pp. 1–2).

In the United States of America, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) compared 'the current status of UAVs to that of personal computers in their early years, when technical advances made operating systems more user friendly.' (2007) (Cranston 2008, 1). Defense authorities agreed at the Farnborough Air Show that the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) business will see rapid growth. They stated that the 'UAV business is on the verge of exploding, much like the satellite market did in the 1970s.' (Cranston 2008, pp. 1–2).

The Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Market

According to many analysts, unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) technology is 'the aerospace industry's most active development area this decade' (Cavoukian 2012, 3). Concerning the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) industry, the Teal Group forecasted that 'UAV research, development, and procurement totaled US $6 billion in 2011. This amount is predicted to more than quadruple over the next decade (see chart below; note that this figure excludes unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAV).' (2012) (Cavoukian, 2012, p. 3)

Despite its fast advancement, the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) still faces several obstacles. According to Ann Cavoukian,'market barriers for civil and commercial applications include the following: Incomplete or immature air space regulations that encompass UAV systems; liability for civil operations; a lack of secure non-military frequencies; a negative consumer perception; a lack of operator training/safety standards; and limited payload capacity and space constraints.' (3-4) (Cavoukian 2012).

Current Issues Legislations in the United States of America Regarding Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)

'While there are several beneficial uses for UAS, there are also numerous reasons to be worried about the privacy implications of UAS,' Chairman Goodlatte stated. Unchecked law enforcement use of UAS might result in abuses of the Constitutional rights of US people. Excessively pushy bureaucrats in charge of UAS restrictions might result in an increase of the federal government's footprint, harassment, and major privacy violations.' Villasenor, McNeal, Maclin, and Calabrese 2013, p. 1).

The Fourth Amendment

Numerous legislations address a variety of concerns relating to the usage of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS). The primary concern with the acquisition of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) is the breach of privacy, and the United States of America's government has enacted the 'Fourth Amendment' to address this concern. According to the fourth amendment, 'the people have the right to be secure in their persons, homes, documents, and possessions against unreasonable searches and seizures.' (4) (Villasenor, McNeal, Maclin, & Calabrese, 2013). However, according to legislative attorney Richard M. Thompson, "the Fourth Amendment does not extend to all government activities, but only to those that constitute a search." Thus, when does government surveillance qualify as a Fourth Amendment "search" for which a warrant is often required? Initially, the court's evaluation was narrowly focused on the region under investigation.' (4) (Thompson 2013).

Chicago Convention

Each state is accountable for the protection of its airspace, and the Chicago convention was founded on this concept. This convention has several provisions that regulate and control the operation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Among these provisions is 'Article 8', which reads, 'No aircraft capable of being flown without a pilot shall be flown without a pilot over the territory of a contracting State without that State's prior written authorisation and in conformity with the terms of such authorization. Each contracting State agrees to guarantee that such aircraft flying without a pilot in areas open to civil aircraft are regulated in such a way as to avoid endangering civil aircraft.' (2004) (Peterson 2005, p. 42) Additionally, as stated under 'Article 3' of the Chicago Convention, 'although the Chicago Convention does not apply to state aircraft, military activities of a UAV/ROA may be required to integrate into the NAS's civilian airspace, which is severely regulated by ICAO regulations.' (2004) (Peterson 2005, p. 44).

Apart from Articles 8 and 3, this convention's 'Article 12' also applies directly to UAVs. It states that 'Each contracting State undertakes to take measures to ensure that all aircraft flying over or manoeuvring within its territory, as well as all aircraft bearing its nationality mark, wherever they may be, comply with the applicable rules and regulations governing aircraft flight and manoeuvring. Each contracting State agrees to preserve its own rules in this area as consistent as practicable with those enacted from time to time according to this Convention. The regulations applicable to the high seas shall be those established by this Convention. Each contracting State guarantees the prosecution of all those who violate the applicable regulations.' (2005) (Peterson, 45).

Additionally, 'Article 17, Aircraft Nationality, and Article 20, Marks Display, Article 32, Personnel Licenses, Article 33, Recognition of Certificates and Licenses, and Article 36, Photographic Apparatus, which states that, Each contracting State may prohibit or regulate the use of photographic apparatus in aircraft flying over its territory.' are applicable to the deployment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). (2004) (Peterson 2005, pp. 46-47)

Federal Aviation Regulations

According to the Federal Aviation Administration, governing regulations for all aviation activities conducted in the United States, activities conducted by United States-licensed or certified personnel, and aircraft registered in the United States are promulgated by the FAA in the Federal Aviation Regulations ("FARs"), which comprise Title 14 parts 1 through 199 of the Code of Federal Regulations ("CFR"), and by the TSA in Title 49 parts 1500 through 1699 of the CFR. They provide national implementation standards for registration, airworthiness certification, personnel licencing, and air traffic control.' (Peterson 2005, pp. 64–65).

Use Of Drones in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq

'UAVs enable incumbents to collect intelligence and attack terrorists remotely,' according to Kalyvas. Drones were originally built for information gathering, not for the purpose of attacking terrorists; when the US military sent drones to Bosnia in 1995, the fleet was dedicated to observation and reconnaissance. Armed strikes were not utilised in Afghanistan until the United States invaded the country on 9/11. Drones have the ability to loiter for extended periods of time without endangering the pilot, making them perfect for monitoring suspicious activity and tracing known suspects.' (Sarbahi, & Johnston, 2013, p. 7)

According to Johnston and Sarbahi, 'drone strikes in a particular location are a significant indicator of an enhanced security risk for terrorists operating there. The increased risk associated with continuing to operate there should apply to any type of militant activity that is vulnerable to drone capabilities, which conducting attacks is, regardless of whether militants would otherwise conduct operations at their "average" rate and level of lethality, or would otherwise escalate their frequency and lethality to deter potential defectors' (Sarbahi & Johnston, 2013, p. 8)

According to a University of California research on the impact of US drone attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan, 'drone strikes had a negative correlation with numerous metrics of terrorist activity, both within particular FATA agency and their near vicinity. Additionally, there is evidence that the negative relationship between drone strikes and three metrics of militant violence, incidence, lethality, and IED assaults, reverses sign once the neighbourhood radius exceeds 125 kilometres.' (Sarbahi, & Johnston, 2013, p. 26-27)

Drones and Collateral Damage

Government sources reporting on drone strikes' collateral damage provide a very conservative assessment of the harm inflicted by the Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. According to a recent 'New York Times' storey, the Obama administration considers "any military-age males [died] in a striking zone" to be "combatants" unless there is concrete evidence demonstrating their innocence posthumously. (2012, Living Under Drones, p. 33). According to a Stanford International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic research, 'the most immediate consequence of drone strikes is, of course, death and injury to individuals targeted or in close proximity to a hit. Drone-launched missiles kill or wound through burning, shrapnel, and the discharge of intense blast waves capable of crushing internal organs. Those who survive drone attacks frequently suffer disfiguring burns and shrapnel wounds, amputations of limbs, and loss of vision and hearing.' (Living in the Shadow of Drones, 2012, p. 33)

According to Idrees Farid, an eyewitness to the March 17, 2011 drone attack in Pakistan, 'funerals for the victims of the March 17 strike were strange and different than in the past.

The community was required to gather [the victims'] body fragments and bones and then bury them in this manner, making every effort to identify the fragments and body parts so that family attending the burial would be satisfied they had the correct body parts and individual.' (Living in the Age of Drones, 2012, p. 61). According to the same report, 'the specific number of victims killed in the March 17, 2011 attack has never been determined, however practically all accessible sources—including survivors with whom our researchers spoke—put it at close to 40 or higher. According to an independent study conducted by the Associated Press, the number is 42. ’ (2012, Living With Drones, p. 62)

Drones and Border Surveillance

'UAVs have also been deployed in residential situations,' according to Congress Research Services. NASA's Environmental Research Aircraft and Sensor Technology (ERAST) programme has developed civilian unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to monitor pollution and ozone levels. Academia has also been interested in researching civilian applications for unmanned aerial vehicles. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is working on the development of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and video camera navigation systems for the purpose of locating and identifying dangerous compounds. The Department of Energy said lately that it will conduct tests using unmanned aerial vehicles equipped with radiation sensors to identify possible nuclear reactor accidents.' (2005) (Bolkcom, 2005, p. 1). According to Christopher Bolkcom, a Specialist in the Department of National Defense's Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division, patrol agents employ Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) because 'UAVs have the potential to fill a vacuum in present border monitoring. UAVs' technological skills, in particular, might boost coverage throughout distant areas of the United States' frontiers. From an altitude of 60,000 feet, electro-optical (EO) sensors (cameras) can distinguish an item the size of a milk carton. 12 UAVs may also offer precise and real-time imagery to a ground control operator, who can subsequently distribute the data to enable speedy decision-making on border patrol agent deployment.' (2003) (Bolkcom, 2005, p. 3).

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and the Psychology of Military Combatants

According to some researchers, 'the attacks constitute one of the most successful counterterrorism tools available to nations, aiding in the dismantling of al Qaeda terrorist networks.' (Sarbahi, Johnston, & Johnston, 2013, p. 5). 'Drone strikes diminish terrorists' capacity to exercise sovereign rule over local regions, according to Johnston and Sarbahi. Even if an insurgent or terrorist group is the sole armed actor on the ground, as is frequently the case in FATA, the higher the danger from above, the more expensive it is for militants to exert de facto authority over that territory.' (Sarbahi, Johnston, & Johnston, 2013, p. 7). Additionally, the same researchers indicate that 'the increased security risks imposed by drone strikes create an incentive for risk aversion among senior-level militants, implying that militant organisations are increasingly likely to rely more heavily on junior-level operatives with less experience than their senior counterparts in the aftermath of drone strikes. Constant observation and possible targeting weaken militant organisations' operational capabilities by increasing their reliance on junior-level operators and by restricting communication inside the organisation, particularly between various levels of the militant hierarchy.' (Sarbahi, & Johnston, 2013, p. 9-10)

Data and Analysis

This section discusses the effects of drone strikes and the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) on terrorist groups and their capacity to strike, border security, civilians, and privacy, as well as drone operators. It conducts a critical examination of the efficacy, prospective advantages, and risks linked with Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS).

Effectiveness of Drones in Combatting Terrorism and In Degrading the Terrorist Organizations

Drones have been shown to be exceedingly effective at eliminating High Value Targets (HVTs) in regions inaccessible to human vehicles. Additionally, the employment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) to target terrorists mitigates the danger or threat of losing a pilot, which is always present with human vehicles. The United States of America's (USA) defence secretary praised drones for their precision and effectiveness in assassinating leaders of numerous terrorist organisations. According to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), drone attacks have rendered terrorist organisations incapable of operating securely in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen. According to US government sources, drones are one of the most effective methods for locating and assassinating terrorist organisation leaders in remote regions. Additionally, there is little visible resistance to the drone strikes in the United States of America, even among the President's staunchest Republican opponents. Boyle (2013), pp. 3–4.

Drone attacks have been exceedingly efficient at assassinating terrorist leaders such as Baitullah Mehsud. The targeted assassination of these groups' leaders contributes to the terrorist organisations' structural weakness. It has a detrimental effect on the quality of their activities. Boyle (2013), pp. 3–4. As a result of the senior leadership being efficiently targeted and killed in drone attacks, the planning and organisation of different operations are disrupted, and so the organisations' grip over an area or several regions reduces or shrinks. The assassination of leaders also has a detrimental effect on the morale of subordinates or younger soldiers. According to a research undertaken by the University of California and the RAND Corporation, there is a negative correlation between drone strikes and terrorist activity, meaning that an increase in drone strikes results in a drop in terrorist activity. Additionally, the same research revealed that drone attacks in a particular territory, such as Pakistan or Afghanistan, had a detrimental effect on terrorist operations in that country's near vicinity. However, this effect diminishes when the radius approaches one hundred and twenty-five kilometres. (Johnston & Sarbahi, n.d., p. 4)

Additionally, the Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) have demonstrated their ability to exert significant pressure on terrorist organisations. Additionally, it has harmed their capacity to work efficiently and had a detrimental effect on the psychological well-being of terrorist group members. Drone strikes have been claimed to have a detrimental effect on the terrorist groups' constituents. As a result of such acts, terrorist groups tend to deteriorate and lose one of its best recruiters, eventually collapsing. There has been ample evidence that the employment of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) makes it more difficult for enemy combatants to operate in the impacted area. Additionally, as a result of drone assaults, military troops must continually relocate from one site to another. Due to their frequent travel, they are unable to train new soldiers or plan future operations and activities. Osama bin Laden suggested in his post-death letters that Al Qaeda troops flee to Waziristan in order to shield themselves from drone strikes and to avoid them. Apart from that, a cost-benefit comparison of the deployment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) vs human vehicles demonstrates that drone attacks are both more effective and precise than other weaponry. Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) deployment is less costly than other weaponry and manned vehicles. Additionally, the human cost of ground operations and manned aerial systems is significantly greater than the cost of unmanned aerial systems (UAS), owing to the fact that unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) strikes are more precise in killing the target than ground forces and the Air Force. (12-13) (Boyle 2013)

Use of Unmanned Aerial Systems and Border Surveillance and Security

Border security has long been a priority for the United States of America's Congress. The United States of America's borders are controlled and monitored through the use of a variety of techniques, including video cameras, motion and ground sensors, land vehicles, manned aerial vehicles, and physical obstacles. However, the increased challenges to the United States of America's security and national integrity posed by terrorist organisations have convinced patrol officers to employ Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) for border security and surveillance. (2002) (Bolkcom, 2005, p.

Numerous benefits might accrue from the deployment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) for border surveillance. To begin, they can fill a vacuum in the United States of America's present border monitoring system by gaining access to isolated locations that land and manned air vehicles cannot. Additionally, UAVs are capable of recognising objects as tiny as a milk carton at a height of around 60,000 feet. Additionally, they may transmit real-time photographs to ground station operators, who can then disseminate this information to make fast and effective judgments on patrol agent deployment and border security. Additionally, the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, dubbed 'Predator B,' that is being utilised along the United States of America's southern border can fly continuously for around thirty hours without the need to refuel. This flying time is far longer than the two hours allowed by helicopters. The increased flight time of Unmanned Aerial Aircraft (UAVs) is extremely beneficial for border security since it enables these vehicles to give better coverage and surveillance over a region, hence enhancing the United States of America's border security. (Haddal, & Gertler 2010, 3) The wide variety of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) is a feature that distinguishes them from border patrol agents, ground vehicles, and human aerial vehicles. If a possible terrorist attempts to enter the United States of America through woodlands or another inaccessible region, there is a good chance that he will be detected by Unmanned Aerial Vehicles equipped with heat detection sensors. However, the stationary video cameras that are often installed at border crossings may be unable to spot him. The great range and endurance of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles can assist in alleviating the stress placed on human resources or patrol agents posted at the United States of America's borders. Apart from that, unlike helicopter mishaps, those involving unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) do not pose a risk to the pilots' lives. (Haddal & Gertler, 2010, pp. 3–4)

Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles And The Threat to Privacy

One of the primary concerns regarding the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) for domestic surveillance is the infringement of the inhabitants of the United States of America's privacy. The rapid advancement of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) technology has created several concerns about the invasion of residents' privacy. The novel methods by which Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) acquire data and the technological equipment they deploy immediately constitute a danger to privacy. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), according to John Villasenor, a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, collect a variety of data from our mobile phones and smart metres. And this data will soon become the digital record of everything we do. (12) (Cavoukian, 2012, p. 11)

The tapping of a suspect's phone for security purposes does not constitute an excessive invasion of privacy because the tapped phone lines do not provide photographs of the suspect's home. However, when Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) acquire information, the suspect's and other family members' privacy may be infringed. Unmanned Aerial Systems can hover in the backyard of a suspect's house and photograph the suspect and his family members, or they can hide within the suspect's house and continually watch the suspect and his family members. Such continual surveillance may result in the capture of immoral images. Photographs might be taken while the suspect or his family members are undressed. Even if they have warrants, the government and intelligence personnel have no legal authority to see such images, breach people' privacy, or monitor their every move without their knowledge (Villasenor 2013, 498)

Drones And The Collateral Damage

The government of the United States of America never reveals the precise amount of collateral damage inflicted by drone attacks in remote and ungoverned tribal regions to the media or the general public. Neither supporters nor detractors of drone strikes are aware of the precise number of persons and innocent citizens killed as a result of the United States of America's drone operations. According to figures compiled by the New America Foundation, civilian casualties ranged between 1886 and 3191 between 2004 and 2012. This suggests that a single drone attack killed an average of 5.6 to 9.5 persons. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) performed its own investigation and collated data on the number of people killed in Pakistani drone operations. According to this statistics, a total of 346 attacks were launched against Pakistan between 2004 and 2012. Between 2570 and 3337 civilians were killed as a result of these drone attacks. This equates to an average of 7.4 to 9.6 people being killed in these strikes. Additionally, according to statistics compiled by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ), between 1,232 to 1,366 Pakistani individuals were injured as a result of these drone operations. (5) (Boyle 2013).

Additionally, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) reported that the United States of America conducted around forty to fifty drone attacks in Yemen between 2002 and 2012. Between 357 and 1026 people were killed in these drone attacks. Apart from that, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) revealed that between three and nine drone strikes were undertaken in Somalia, with the ensuing death toll ranging from 58 to 170. (5) (Boyle 2013).

Additionally, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) revealed that civilian casualties accounted for between sixteen and twenty-five percent of all deaths caused by drone attacks in Pakistan. In Yemen, civilian deaths were estimated to account for sixteen percent of the total death toll. In Somalia, these fatalities account for between 7% and 34% of the total death toll. The United States of America's drone attacks result in significant collateral damage and the deaths of thousands of innocent individuals. Numerous studies have shown that for every terrorist killed by Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), nearly fifty civilians perish. (6) (Boyle 2013).

Impact of the Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) on the Civilians Living in the Affected Areas

A research undertaken by the Stanford International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (IHRCRC) studied the psychological effects of drone attacks on people living in targeted regions. Several of the most significant consequences are outlined below; (Living with Drones, 2012, p. 73)

Impacts on the Humanitarian Instincts to Help and Rescue the Victims

Numerous research have revealed that the United States of America frequently engages in a behaviour known as 'double tap.' According to this, the initial strike by the Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) is directed at the target, and when people congregate around the impacted area to assist the victims harmed in the strike, a second strike is directed towards rescue personnel and bystanders attempting to assist the casualties. When the researchers questioned the impacted, they claimed that they are fully aware of the second strike that occurs in conjunction with the first strike and hence oppose assisting the victims of the first attack. Additionally, the majority of NGOs and rescue organisations have prevented their employees from entering the impacted region for at least six hours following the initial drone strike. (Living with Drones, 2012, p. 74)

Impact on the Property and The financial Status of the Residents of The affected Area

Most of the people who are being interviewed by the employees of the Stanford International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (IHRCRC) stated that, they have to suffer severe economic crisis and financial problems due to the damage that is being caused by the Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS). The drone strikes destroy their properties and kill the sole bread earners of the family. In addition to that, the medical expenses that are to be incurred on the victims of these strikes are also very high and lead toward economic hardship. These medical bills can have a destructive and long term impact on the financial conditions of the family members of the victim. The government of the United States of America, on the other hand, has not taken any step to help the innocent families that are being attacked by the drone strikes, which are conducted by the United States of America. (Living Under the Drones 2012, 79)

Impacts on the Mental Health of The Residents of The affected Area

According to Stanford's International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (IHRCRC), residents of regions impacted by drone attacks experience stress and worry. These individuals characterised the sound produced by the drone hit as a 'wave of horror.' They described how terrible it is to live under constant observation and face the fear of being killed by an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). All people, even the elderly, women, and children, are scared of these drone assaults and live under constant stress as a result of them. Additionally, respondents reported that the thought that they are powerless and impotent to halt these attacks adds to their psychological stress. Additionally, the dread and anxiety associated with the prospect of losing a loved one contribute to their mental stress. Additionally, strike victims and others who observed the strike continue to suffer from psychological disorders associated with worry and terror. (Living with Drones, 2012, pp. 81-82)

Impact on the Educational Opportunities For the Residents Of the Affected Area

According to a research undertaken by Stanford University's International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (IHRCRC), people of the region targeted by the drone attacks have a lack of educational possibilities. Those who become victims of strikes are unable to complete their education as a result of the strikes' negative financial, physical, and psychological consequences. Additionally, the majority of families withdraw their children from school to care for family members who have been injured in drone strikes. Additionally, the students are unable to complete their education because they are required to work and earn money to compensate for the income loss caused by the death of the family's main breadwinner as a result of the drone attacks. According to one interviewee, he removed his children from school after witnessing the shredded body parts of schoolchildren murdered in a drone attack. (Living with Drones, 2012, pp. 88-89)

Impact on Attending Funerals and Burial Activities

Numerous investigations have concluded that Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) target funerals and regions where people congregate to perform burial customs for drone attack victims. According to a research performed by the Stanford International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (IHRCRC), members of the impacted neighbourhood have shown reluctance to attend the funerals of the victims out of fear of being targeted by the drone attack. Additionally, interviewees stated that the remains of those killed in drone strikes are frequently ragged and difficult to identify, making it impossible for them to execute traditional burial customs. (2012, Living Among the Drones, p. 92-93)

Impact on Community Trust

According to experts at the International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (IHRCRC), residents of regions impacted by drone strikes said that the strikes instilled a sense of distrust among community members. These individuals claim that intelligence services implant microchips in their vehicles and homes in order to monitor their movements and activities and target them with drone attacks. The neighbours are suspicious of one another and see one another as spies or intelligence operatives for the United States of America. They believe that their neighbours and community members will implant microchips in their homes and cars, making them exposed to drone strikes. (Living With the Drones, 2012, pp. 100–101)

Impact of Unmanned Aerial Systems on the Psychology Of Drone Operators

Numerous studies are being undertaken to determine the impact of drone attacks on the drone operators. According to a study conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) titled 'Psychological Health Screening of Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) Operators and Supporting Units,' the primary sources of stress for drone operators are occupational and operational, which means that long work hours, the location of the work, and concerns about the nature of their profession are the primary sources of stress. Apart from that, the study found that operators of military or armed Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are more susceptible to mental tiredness and stress than operators of surveillance UAVs (UAVs). Additionally, a study of 426 officers found that the cynicism and mental stress experienced by drone operators are attributable to operational and professional factors, not to exposure to assaults and conflict. (3) (Caroline 2013) According to a 2012 Medact investigation, drone operators' concerns about the nature of their profession might have a detrimental effect on their psychological well-being. This is because the unfavourable image associated with drone strikes and the deployment of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) has contributed to the creation of negative attitudes of drone operators among the general people in the United States of America and the impacted areas. (4) (Caroline 2013)

8. Conclusions and Recommendations

This section summarises the preceding study using the examined data and information gathered from various secondary sources. This section makes recommendations for enhancing the use of UAVs for national security purposes. Additionally, this section makes advice for mitigating the drawbacks of drones, particularly in terms of invading public privacy.

Conclusions

The study outlined above has resulted in the following conclusions: Drones have been essential in the battle against terrorism. The US Defense Secretary, the CIA, and other US government officials have acknowledged that the deployment of UAVs has been extremely beneficial in the battle against terrorism in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and Yemen. Additionally, this technology mitigated the hazards encountered by pilots (or other vehicle operators), since prior to the deployment of this type of technology, operators of vehicles employed in wars and counter-terrorism operations faced a threat to their lives and other risks (associated with severe accidents).

These authorities, the CIA and the US government, also acknowledge that as a result of the deployment of UAVs in the US's war against terrorism, a number of senior leaders of terrorist agencies and organisations have been apprehended, disciplined, and killed. The arrest and assassination of these leaders has been the most significant achievement in the fight against terrorism (because it has had a moral and psychological impact on the remaining members and resulted in the weakening of terrorist agencies and organisations), and it has been made much easier and possible through the use of UAV technology. Numerous studies have established that the employment of UAVs (through drone attacks) in combating terrorism has resulted in a decrease in terrorist activity. The United States of America has reaped significant benefits from UAVs in terms of border monitoring and security. By utilising UAVs to supplement existing security, the United States of America has been able to close gaps in existing security, gain access to remote areas, identify minor disturbances in inaccessible locations, and obtain real-time images of areas and localities where issues or security breaches have been detected.

Additionally, the utilisation of UAVs alleviates pressure on current security equipment and human resources. This not only alleviates the strain on fuel agents and security officers during difficult times, but also helps mitigate the dangers encountered by such officials. UAVs are far more susceptible to threats than other devices or petroleum agents. Despite their numerous benefits, UAVs continue to pose the greatest danger to the privacy of US people. Due to the fact that UAVs are equipped with cutting-edge technology that enable them to detect, transport, and capture data promptly to controlling sites, there are significant hazards involved with the usage of UAVs. Drone strikes result in a slew of collateral damage (use of UAVs). Due to the fact that these damages are not brought to light, the full extent of the harm cannot be determined. Drone attacks have a detrimental effect on not just terrorists and dangerous individuals, but also on the lives of innocent civilians. Most significantly, countless innocent people have lost their lives, homes, security, privacy, and peace of mind as a result of the UAVs' continual monitoring and attacks. The nature and degree of these consequences on innocent people and their lives are still unknown, but it is believed that they will be enormous.

The residents in places subjected to UAV surveillance and assaults live in constant worry and tension. Their daily lives, livelihoods, and prospects for living a regular life like any other individual are all negatively impacted and endangered by this technology. They live in continual terror of losing their lives, families, possessions, and homes due to a drone strike at any time. This is one of the most serious downsides of UAVs, since it results in the intentional destruction of numerous lives and little action is taken by controllers.

These attacks and monitoring also have an effect on these people's social and religious life. They are not permitted to engage in or conduct religious or non-religious celebrations or ceremonies. Even when such activities are arranged, they are avoided by participants due to fear of reprisals and threats to their life. Due to the effect of the UAVs' twofold strike on a single spot (target site), the inhabitants in such locations have been afraid to assist the afflicted. There are several innocent persons within the impacted population, and such reluctance results in a slew of unpleasant consequences (including lifelong disability or loss of life). The places and sites that are subjected to UAV monitoring and assaults sustain significant financial and economic losses. Locals suffer financial suffering as a result of the loss of property and lives of earners, and impacted families confront enormous financial and mental difficulties. Additionally, the US government takes no steps to assist impacted families in overcoming financial difficulties and sorrow. Residents of impacted sites and localities also face significant difficulties due to the lack of educational institutions. Additionally, even if there are institutes, many are afraid to leave their homes and seek education. Additionally, they are always fearful and stressed, rendering them incapable of focusing on schooling and learning. Thus, it can be concluded that UAS technology (in the form of UAVs and drones) has another negative effect on inhabitants, namely on their ability to obtain a decent education. Another effect that UAVs have on the lives of citizens in impacted towns and places is their fear of attending funerals or burial rites due to the danger of more assaults on areas where people congregate. This results in fear of people congregating in market areas or participating in religious rites or festivals. Their lives are in danger, and they are constantly threatened with violence and death. These attacks and monitoring by UAVs have bred distrust and hostility among local residents. Individuals lack confidence in one another and typically maintain a sense of self-sufficiency. The sense of belonging to a society and neighbourhood has been significantly diminished, and individuals are constantly under emotional and mental strain. Not only can unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) or drones have a profound effect on the psychology and emotions of innocent bystanders, but also have a profound effect on the drone operators' psyche. The lengthy and strenuous job schedules, the nature of the job (which has a significant impact on other people's lives), and other operational needs place operators under continual mental and emotional stress. Recommendations

There are several issues and adverse consequences related with the usage of UAVs. Additionally, it is widely believed that UAV technology is extremely helpful in combating terrorism. This technology has aided the United States significantly in its war against terrorism by dismantling the backbones of several terrorist organisations. Additionally, due to the utilisation of very complex and elaborate monitoring systems, this technology is an exceptionally valuable tool for surveillance and border protection. As a result, the proposal of several researchers, advisors, and government organisations to cease using UAVs and drone attacks cannot be accepted. As the benefits of modern technology much outweigh the disadvantages. To mitigate the hazards and impacts of drone attacks on inhabitants (innocent people) of impacted communities, the US government should take efforts to enact legislation and regulations governing the attacks and their aftermath. Damages should be quantified and local residents should be compensated.

According to the New America Foundation, drone strikes are becoming more precise daily as a result of the advancement of technology, and as a result, the collateral damage inflicted by such assaults has decreased over time. However, the establishment of an independent agency responsible for the design of rules, regulations, and policies governing and overseeing UAV surveillance and assaults is required. Additionally, the agency should be accountable for calculating the harm inflicted by those assaults and paying the innocent victims. Additionally, the department should be accountable for recognising and defining individuals' privacy and establishing the boundaries that should not be breached in order to protect civilians' private.

The critical aspect to note is that the department responsible for supervising and managing UAVs should be autonomous and should periodically report to an authorised representative of the judiciary.

By doing so, many of the harms to the lives of innocent people can be mitigated, since an independent distinct body will be responsible for their welfare and will be accountable for all of its choices and mandates.

Regular reports should be provided by that department detailing the damages inflicted by these assaults and their consequences on the lives of innocent people, as well as the efforts taken by the department / agency to mitigate those effects and normalise the lives of normal people. These reports should also include the purpose for the assaults, their impact on people's privacy, and their outcome.

Birch et al. Drones the physical and psychological implications of a global theatre of war, 1-11. London: Medact, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.medact.org/content/wmd_and_conflict/medact_drones_WEB.pdf (accessed June 27, 2013).

Bone et al. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Background and Issues for Congress, Washington, D.C: Congressional Research Service, 2003. Retrieved from http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL31872.pdf (accessed June 29, 2013). Michael. "The costs and consequences of drone warfare." International Affairs 89 (2013), http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/public/International Affairs/2013/89_1/89_1Boyle.pdf (accessed June 30, 2013).

Cavoukian. Privacy and Drones: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, Toronto: Information and Privacy Commissioner, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.ipc.on.ca/images/Resources/pbd-drones.pdf (accessed June 27, 2013).

Cranston. Current developments in UAV technology, Newcastle: UK Defense Forum, 2008. Retrieved from http://www.ukdf.org.uk/assets/downloads/GR174CurrentDevelopmentsinUAVTechnology_1.pdf (accessed June 29, 2013). Gerald. "UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS Measuring Progress and Addressing Potential Privacy Concerns Would Facilitate Integration into the National Airspace System.”, Washington, DC, September 2012, http://www.gao.gov/assets/650/648348.pdf (accessed June 27, 2013).

Dolan et al. Integration of Drones into Domestic Airspace: Selected Legal Issues , Washington, D.C: Congressional Research Service, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42940.pdf (accessed June 27, 2013).

Etzioni. The Great Drone Debate, Leavenworth: University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies (UFMCS), 2013. Retrieved from http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20130430_art004.pdf (accessed June 28, 2013).

Haddal et al. Homeland Security: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Border Surveillance, Washington, D.C: Congressional Research Service, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RS21698.pdf (accessed June 30, 2013).

Kutyreva. The Use of Armed Drones, 1. Dresden: elbMUN, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.elbmun.org/downloads/studyguide2013/studyguideDrones.pdf (accessed June 27, 2013).

Living Under Drones Death, Injury, and Trauma to Civilians From US Drone Practices in Pakistan, Stanford: Stanford International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic (IHRCRC), 2012. Retrieved from http://livingunderdrones.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Stanford_NYU_LIVING_UNDER_DRONES.pdf (accessed June 28, 2013).

Macdonald et al. "Research Methods Handbook: Introductory guide to research methods for social research." 1-61. Manchester: The Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES), 2011. Retrieved from http://www.cles.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Research-Methods-Handbook.pdf (accessed June 29, 2013). Colin Introduction to Research and Research Methods. Bradford: Effective Learning Service, 2007. http://www.brad.ac.uk/management/media/management/els/Introduction-to-Research-and-Research-Methods.pdf (accessed June 29, 2013). Raul. "Use of Unmanned Systems to Combat Terrorism." International Law Studies 87 (2011), https://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/6fe03880-25d2-4b20-bc2e-ff3393261967/Use-of-Unmanned-Systems-to-Combat-Terrorism.aspx (accessed June 28, 2013).

Parkes. Background Note Psychological Impact Of Drones., All Party Parliamentary Group on Drones, 2013. Retrieved from http://appgondrones.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/background-note-psychological-impact-of-drones.pdf (accessed June 28, 2013).

Peterson. The Uav And The Current And Future Regulatory Construct For Integration Into The National Airspace System, Montreal: Institute of Air and Space Law, 2005. Retrieved from http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA437392 (accessed June 29, 2013).

Remy et al. SAR.Drones: Drones for Advanced Search and Rescue Missions, 1. Bourgogne: University of Bourgogne, 2013. Retrieved from http://bentley.u-bourgogne.fr/jnct2013/proceedings/JNCT13_Remy-UB.pdf (accessed June 27, 2013). Megan and Walsh James. "Do Drone Strikes Degrade Al Qaeda?" Terrorism and Political Violence 25 (2013), http://www.jamesigoewalsh.com/tpv.pdf (accessed June 28, 2013).

Strawser. UAVs as Ethically Obligatory, Mansfield: University of Connecticut, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/strawserpaper.pdf (accessed June 28, 2013).

Thompson. Drones in Domestic Surveillance Operations: Fourth Amendment Implications and Legislative Responses , Washington, D.C: Congressional Research Service, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42701.pdf (accessed June 29, 2013).

Tom. Drones Over the Homeland How Politics, Money and Lack of Oversight have Sparked Drone Proliferation, and What We Can Do?, Washington, D.C: Center for International Policy, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.ciponline.org/images/uploads/publications/IPR_Drones_over_Homeland_Final.pdf (accessed June 27, 2013)

Torpy et al. Air Power UAVs: The Wider Context, Edited by Owen Barnes, London: Directorate of Defense Studies, 2009. Retrieved from http://www.airpowerstudies.co.uk/UAV-Book.pdf (accessed June 29, 2013)

Villasenor et al. Eyes In The Sky: The Domestic Use Of Unmanned Aerial Systems, Edited by Chris Calabrese, Monterey: Naval Postgraduate School Center for Homeland Defense and Security, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=737245 (accessed June 29, 2013) John. " Observations From Above: Unmanned Aircraft Systems And Privacy."Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 36 (2013), http://www.harvard-jlpp.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/36_2_457_Villasenor.pdf (accessed June 30, 2013).

Zenko. Reforming U.S. Drone Strike Policies, New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 2013. Retrieved from http://i.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/Drones_CSR65.pdf (accessed June 27, 2013)