Berkeley Protests Prompt Local Police to Push for DronesCarey Wedler Bloomberg reports that Berkeley and Oakland, both part of Alameda County, are seeking to use unmanned aerial vehicles. The city of San Jose isalso eager to do the same. The departments say they will be used for hostage situations, active shooters, search and rescue operations, and disaster response. Captain Tom Madigan, a captain at the Alameda County Sheriffs office, claimed: It is unclear what specific emergency situations Madigan is referring to, but instances of police abuse and misconduct are overwhelminglycommon. For example, last month there were multiple cases of aggressive police overreach during police brutality protests.In a protest that marched from Berkeley to Oakland, two undercover California Highway Patrol officers were revealedby protesters and one drew a gun on the crowd. Oakland also has ahistory ofpolice abuse. In San Jose, there are similar long-standing injustices. In 1999,at least 100 complaints were filed with the NAACP against excessive brutality and racism by the policein one month. In 2014, the problem of harassment continued. OneSan Jose officer was recently cleared of any wrongdoing after he tweeted to protesters: Instances like these make it difficult to trust police departments with unmanned drones, especially after California Governor Jerry Browns veto of a bill that would have required law enforcement to obtain warrants before spying. Joe Simitan, a supervisor in Santa Clara County (where San Jose is located), echoed similar skeptical sentiments: Nevertheless, drones in Alameda and Santa Clarawere purchased last year. In the face of opposition, Alameda County spent $97,000 on two in December. The news brokejust days before the Berkeley protests were heating up, and Sheriff Greg Ahern drew sharp criticisms of secrecy and privacy violations. He denied the validity ofsuch concerns. San Jose spent $7,000 on onedrone in January 2014. All threewerebought withoutinput from the communities using funds from Homeland Security. In San Jose, city council approval is required before police can move forward. Several meetings on the topics have already been held and all three cities will need FAA approval before flying drones (San Jose policechallenged thislast year). All three are steadfast in their desire to incorporate their use. In spite of the appearance of authorities attaining consent, however,many are hesitant to accept police drones. Policy Directorof Technology and Civil Liberties at the ACLU Northern California, Nicole Ozer, said: 80 law enforcement agencies were using drones in 2013, but police comprised only 5% of all drone applications submitted in 2013. 37% were submitted by academia with 31% by the Department of Defense. CNN recently obtained FAA permission to use drones, as well. While police can say the drones will not be misused, the governments track record is not to be trusted. The Patriot Act was supposed to keep people safe from terrorism, but it is now public knowledge that it is used far more commonly for drug arrests. NSA surveillance is also supposed to keep people safe, but the agency passes information on to the IRS, DEA,and local policeto spy on Americans for non-terrorism offenses. It is coincidental that police are moving to use drones as dissent against law enforcement grows nationally as well asin the Bay Area. Jesse Arreguin, a Berkeley city council member who represents the area where UC Berkeley is located, said: Given the public outcry, there is at least somehope the drone programs will be deterred. Carey Wedler writes for TheAntiMedia.org, where this first appeared. Tune-in to the Anti-Media Radio Show Monday-Friday @ 11pm EST, 8pm PST. 