Editing Surveillance aircraft (section)

== Ethics and regulations ==

=== Public opinion ===
A 2014 survey from the Pew Center showed that pluralities or majorities of people in 39 of 44 countries oppose American drone strikes in the Middle East. Only in Israel, Kenya, and the USA do at least half of the public support American drone strikes. Additionally, following the Edward Snowden incident, concern within the US is only increasing regarding the government respecting people’s privacy and civil liberties.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last=Gates |first=J.W.C |date=December 2002 |title=Surveillance and reconnaissance imaging systems{{snd}}modelling and performance prediction |journal=Optics and Lasers in Engineering |volume=38 |issue=6 |pages=607–608 |doi=10.1016/s0143-8166(01)00180-4 |issn=0143-8166}}</ref> Regarding the use of surveillance drones domestically in the US, the public tends to consider the benefits of this kind of surveillance versus the risks to individual privacy. Findings from an ethical analysis suggest people understand the benefits UAVs contribute to protecting the public while at the same time poses a risk to individual safety.<ref name=":2">{{cite web |title=Canadian Warplane Heritage: Auster Beagle AOP |url=http://www.warplane.com/pages/aircraft_beagle.html}}</ref> A report from 2014 found 70%-73% of U.S. adults believed government use of surveillance drones was “excessive” and “violates personal privacy.” Subsequently, only 39% believed it “increased public safety” and only 10% believed it was “necessary” for surveillance. Furthermore, the public is more opposed to surveillance drones being in the hands of private individuals and businesses, rather than the government.<ref name=":3">{{cite news |date=May 23, 1960 |title=Reds, U.S. Face Hot Plane Debate at U.N. |work=The Paris News |location=Paris, Texas (US) |page=1 |agency=Associated Press}}</ref>

=== Applicable law ===
In the U.S., case law holds that airborne surveillance does not violate privacy rights protected under the [[Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|14th Amendment of the Constitution]], so long as unmanned aircraft systems are not in "general public use".<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |last1=West |first1=Jonathan P. |last2=Bowman |first2=James S. |date=July 2016 |title=The Domestic Use of Drones: An Ethical Analysis of Surveillance Issues |journal=Public Administration Review |language=en |volume=76 |issue=4 |pages=649–659 |issn=0033-3352 |doi=10.1111/puar.12506}}</ref> The lack of widespread use of such systems justifies individuals' reasonable expectations of privacy again this type of surveillance.<ref name=":1" />

In the European Union, Article 7 of the [[Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union]] 2000 provides that people have a right of privacy and Article 8 protects the right to one's individual personal data. Under these provisions, aerial surveillance of public spaces would be lawful but surveillance of one's private home be subject to administrative oversight.<ref name=":1" />

The [[Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000|Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act]] (RIPA) of 2000 applies to air surveillance in the United Kingdom. RIPA prohibits large-scale and generalized surveillance, and RIPA authorization is required for individualized surveillance of private residences.<ref name=":1" />