As you all know, the US military is using drones for remote attacks on targets that are difficult to reach; they sell it pretty well with the argument that they offer precise strikes with "surgical precision". Even I was appealed by that argument, even though I'm generally critical about drones.
But then I saw this article, and now I'm even more disgusted than before: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147
The "surgical precision" seems to be but a myth fed to the people in order to lull them in contentment. They hush up all the innocent deaths ( "collateral damage" ) caused by these strikes.
But it doesn't end here. I am well aware that smaller drones can fulfill very useful tasks in public services; policemen, firefighters and other professional fields already try to implement them, often to good use. Such controlled uses of drones I would support.
But private people buy drones too, and we will have to have a serious discussion about air space regulation and, more importantly, private space and security. It is obvious how flying cameras can be a threat to the private sphere; the security part also becomes a reasonable concern after you read what incidents those drones already provoke: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/french-government-on-high-alert-after-unexplained-drone-flights-over-nuclear-power-stations-9850138.html
So, do drones make sense or not? Where are they useful and where not? And how do we handle them?