Drones are changing police operations, as demonstrated by an international trend in police agencies adopting and deploying drone technology.¹ Drones are taking center stage in the public safety adoption of technologies.² Drones offer value in a wide range of police operations, from responding to emergencies as first responders, to collecting real-time intelligence for real-time crime centers and increasing data collection for investigations.³ Drones and other deployable devices are reshaping how first responders approach crises. This transformative technology brings opportunities and challenges requiring thoughtful navigation.

An August 2023 Congressional Research Service Report stated:

There is no specific legislative framework that governs federal law enforcement use of drones. Generally, federal law does not direct or prohibit specific tools and technologies—such as UAS—used by federal law enforcement agencies to aid investigations. Rather, there are laws and policies broadly governing law enforcement investigations and intelligence gathering. Additionally, there are several policies directing the use of drones by federal agencies, including law enforcement, and pertinent guidance resources.⁴

[callout]Authors Note: Questions persist , regarding who controlled unidentified drones over New Jersey and other states in November–December 2024. The widespread media coverage, and public attention those drone sightings received revealed the need and value of widespread adoption and deployment of counter drone technologies by federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. Many of these integrated complexities are addressed in this article.[end callout]

Why Drones as First Responders?

Building Community Trust

The IACP supports actions across all aspects of policing that result in building community trust. Drones continue to prove invaluable as data collection tools, providing critical situational awareness in real-time. A drone’s value lies in its ability to get into places with less risk for all involved and provide data via wireless technology for better decision-making. One drone, operated by a single officer, can exponentially increase that officer’s efficiency in capturing visual/audio data about an unfolding situation. For example, drones can quickly scan an area and provide overhead footage, reducing the need for multiple officers to be physically present at a scene for intelligence gathering. By doing so, drones provide digital evidence of current conditions and enhance the understanding of what may or may not be happening. Drones provide a visual story of events as they unfold, and thorough digital documentation helps improve community trust in law enforcement’s decision-making when action is required.

Contemporary research supports drones deployed within an operator’s line of sight significantly reduce response times compared to traditional first response methods, allowing officers to act more decisively and safely. Drones used beyond operators’ line of sight are also proving to be an exponential force multiplier and the way of the future.⁵

Another critical benefit of drone use in policing is officer and public safety. Deploying drones into hostile environments, such as those involving barricaded subjects/suspects or hostage crises, reduces the risk to officers, suspects, victims, and the public. Visual data gathered by drones can help inform tactical decisions by providing real-time situational awareness and identifying uninvolved persons in an area or near an incident. Getting an advanced look into a high-risk unknown area can also reduce the likelihood of a force confrontation by allowing police personnel more time to assess the best course of action.

In addition to operational benefits, state regulations often require transparency measures that directly support community trust. For instance, Texas Government Code §423.008 mandates public-facing reporting on drone operations every two years. Similarly, the Montgomery County, Maryland Department of Police operates a live Drone as First Responder (DFR) portal, which publishes real-time statistics, including calls responded to, response times, and the types of incidents addressed.⁶ These transparency tools play a vital role in building and maintaining public trust by offering insight into drone program operations and outcomes.

Another key resource for agencies is the Law Enforcement Drone Association (LEDA) Standards for Law Enforcement UAS Programs document. In Section 3.4, it specifically addresses how adhering to standardized practices ensures program growth, operational effectiveness, transparency, and risk reduction. This standard serves as a roadmap for agencies seeking to establish or refine their UAS programs to meet community and regulatory expectations.⁷ LEDA’s mission is to support agencies in navigating these challenges while advancing professionalism and accountability in drone operations.

Transparency and openness are essential pillars for building trust between police agencies and the communities they serve, particularly when introducing or expanding a program like a drone initiative. By clearly communicating the purpose, policies, and safeguards surrounding drone use, agencies can address public concerns about privacy, safety, and accountability. Sharing success stories, engaging in community forums, and inviting public input can demonstrate a genuine commitment to collaboration and mutual understanding. This proactive approach fosters a sense of shared purpose, ensuring that the community views the drone program not as a tool of surveillance but as a resource dedicated to enhancing public safety, improving emergency response, and serving the greater good.

Many police agencies deploy drones for a wide variety of uses relative to each country’s laws:

1. Data from the United States indicate widespread adoption of drones by public safety agencies with some estimates suggesting more than 1,500 police agencies used drones in 2020.⁸
2. According to the National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC), police agencies in the United Kingdom are increasingly adopting the NPCC Drones Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) Pathway Programme. Trials of drones as first responders are already underway with Norfolk Constabulary and through a joint partnership between Hampshire & Isle of Wight Constabulary and Thames Valley Police. An additional trial with West Midlands Police is set to begin soon.⁹

Optimizing Officer Time

Police agencies are grappling with recruitment and retention challenges, making officer time the single most important resource. The hiring landscape is becoming more complex due to a combination of public scrutiny and changing workforce dynamics. Drones, therefore, offer a solution by performing tasks that might otherwise require additional personnel, such as aerial surveillance or crowd monitoring. Moreover, drones can help determine when officer deployment is unnecessary. For instance, drone feeds can confirm whether a reported disturbance has already been resolved, allowing agencies to reallocate resources to active emergencies.

One of the most significant time-saving advantages of DFR programs is their ability to resolve calls without requiring an officer’s physical presence. Data from established DFR programs demonstrates that drone use can negate the need to dispatch an officer to respond in approximately 24 percent of calls. The Chula Vista, California, Police Department’s DFR program shows a measurable reduction in officer dispatch through drone operations.¹⁰ Similarly, Montgomery County, Maryland’s DFR portal highlights the ability of drones to assess and clear calls for service in real time, freeing officers for more critical tasks.¹¹

While Chula Vista has paved the way for DFR programs and done a commendable job publicizing their statistics (a great example of public transparency), these numbers are not unusual or exclusive to just one community. Other DFR programs of various sizes around the United States have seen very similar numbers, with some even higher, demonstrating their effectiveness across multiple regions and community types.

DFR programs often focus on call clearance rates and number of captures. Another consideration not often spoken about is how much officer time is saved by one single suspect capture. When a single suspect is captured within the first 10 minutes of a call, that police department could easily be saving up to 4–8 hours of officer time. Just 30 minutes holding a perimeter with four to six officers while a K9 and cover officer conduct a search adds up to a significant amount of police officer time. While an exact number is very different for every agency, this resource conservation cannot be overlooked from a leadership perspective when considering whether to develop a DFR program.

DFR capability improves operational efficiency while minimizing officer fatigue and optimizes human resource allocation, enabling agencies to focus operational personnel on priority incidents.

Real-Time Crime Centers and Timely Data

Real-time crime centers (RTCCs) serve as hubs for aggregating and analyzing data during emergencies. The integration of drones into these centers represents a paradigm shift in situational awareness. Equipped with high-definition cameras, thermal imaging, and even lidar technology, drones transmit live data to RTCCs, providing actionable intelligence for decision-makers.

RTCCs leverage drone-collected data to monitor shifting conditions, such as crowd movement during large public gatherings or the trajectory of an active shooter. This immediacy enables the police to adapt strategies in real time, ensuring a faster and more precise response. For example, during the 2020 protests across major U.S. cities, drones provided aerial views that helped manage both security concerns and public safety.

Deploying Machines in Dangerous Situations

When first responders enter dangerous situations, the priority is often to gather information without compromising human safety. This is where deployable devices, particularly drones, shine. In contrast to traditional methods requiring physical entry into a hazardous area, drones offer a safer alternative.

Whether the scenario is a chemical spill, active shooter, or search-and-rescue mission in challenging terrain, drones enhance situational awareness. They can survey the area, identify threats, and provide precise coordinates to responders on the ground. For example, during the Surfside Florida condominium collapse in 2021, drones equipped with thermal imaging were instrumental in locating survivors amid the rubble.

To provide agencies with a framework for safely and effectively deploying these technologies, LEDA, in collaboration with the National Tactical Officers Association (NTOA), co-authored the LEDA Tactical Operations Standard document. These standards outline critical considerations for integrating unmanned systems into high-risk operations, including risk assessment protocols, communication procedures, and decision-making workflows. These guidelines aim to ensure consistent and transparent deployment of drone and robotic technologies in scenarios where human safety is at the highest risk. Agencies seeking to enhance their tactical deployment strategies can reference this document for actionable insights and proven methodologies.¹²

While public acceptance remains an evolving factor, agencies adopting drones and other machines for high-risk operations benefit from enhanced safety, increased efficiency, and more informed decision-making. As technology advances and agencies develop local policies, standards such as those from LEDA and the NTOA offer foundational frameworks that seek to mitigate public concerns and increase public trust in drones.

Radio Spectrum Availability

In the United States, one pressing challenge is ensuring the availability of radio spectrum for drone communications in downloading payloads in real time. The 4.9 GHz band, historically reserved for public safety and recently allocated to FirstNet Authority, offers significant relief by providing reliable bandwidth for transmitting large data payloads, such as high-resolution video. The IACP has supported 4.9 GHz use for drone/UAV/and land-based deployable technologies.¹³ To maximize these technologies, available wireless spectrum is necessary. To offload drone data information instantaneously, 4.9 GHz offers a portion of necessary radio spectrum.

Enhanced Security Protocols

As drone technology becomes more sophisticated, so do the risks of cyber interference. Secure encryption is essential to prevent “man-in-the-middle” attacks, where nefarious actors intercept communications between drones and operators. Furthermore, payload offloads—such as live video feeds—must be protected to prevent unauthorized access, underscoring the need for the robust cybersecurity measures recommended by the Department of Homeland Security.¹⁴

Significant debates continue to take place around cybersecurity concerns with Chinese drones. Agencies are wise to follow strict security protocols with drones, as with all electronic and computer systems. Air-gapping (keeping drone software off networked electronics and computers) from other networks and systems can enhance protection from threat vulnerabilities. Using secure third-party control software may likewise reduce risk of data interception, and using multi-factor authentication helps reduce risks of a security breach.

While this conversation takes place more with reference to Chinese drones specifically, these are measures that drone operators should use regardless of manufacturer. Public trust places a higher duty to protect sensitive information on police than on other sectors, and this responsibility increases within a moving and evolving threat theater.

Addressing Data Interception

Data scraping by hackers poses another serious concern. Advances in software now allow nefarious actors to intercept video feeds or telemetry data from drones. Forward-leaning police agencies continue to invest in next-generation encryption and real-time authentication protocols to safeguard sensitive information collected by drones, whether in motion or at rest.

For highly sensitive missions, utilizing drone equipment in an “offline” mode reduces the probability of data being transferred through unknown servers. Offline mode can keep drones from connecting to the internet, ensuring agencies have a higher degree of control over their data.

Next-Level Threats

As drone adoption grows, so too does the potential for misuse. Proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) drastically expands the range of possibilities and probabilities. Criminals have already exploited consumer drones for activities such as smuggling contraband into prisons and surveilling potential targets.¹⁵ The next frontier of threats may involve drones armed with AI and malicious hacking capabilities. Police leaders are wise to stay ahead of these risks by establishing rigorous operational guidelines and monitoring evolving counter-drone technologies.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Interagency Legal Advisory on UAS Detection and Mitigation Technologies outlines the significant legal hurdles state, local, and private entities face when deploying drone detection and mitigation tools. While federal U.S. agencies such as the Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, and FAA are authorized to use these technologies, state and local police agencies must navigate federal laws such as the Wiretap Act and Pen Registers and Trap and Trace Devices statute when attempting to intercept or disable rogue drones. These statutes restrict the use of systems that capture, record, or interfere with drone communications, making it essential for agencies to seek legal advice before implementing any detection or mitigation measures.¹⁶

The FAA advisory document also emphasizes careful evaluation of privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties implications of counter-drone measures. Agencies walk a familiar line of balancing public safety needs with compliance to federal regulations to avoid legal and operational pitfalls. As drone-related threats continue to evolve, police agencies will also see an evolution of technological advancements coupled with slow-moving legal frameworks.

Public Perception and Media Framing

Globally, police leaders recognize that the public’s perception of drones is all about what they know, what they don’t know, and what they should be aware of in new technology to take appropriate action. Balancing crime fighting utilities without alienating those who distrust policing efforts in using new technologies is noteworthy. There are many articles and diverse positions, with many nuances, about police use of drones and the array of federal, state, and local legislative constraints.¹⁷ Constitutional legal case law remains far from settled. Statutes and constitutional challenges can take years or decades to mature, and many states have or are now considering legislative initiatives.¹⁸

U.S. federal regulations regarding use of Chinese-made drones (which include the most popular currently deployed models) continues to be debated in the public square. In January 2024, the DHS and DOJ released a document titled Cybersecurity Guidance: Chinese-Manufactured UAS. This document is an important read for U.S. police agencies who already have or are considering a DFR program.¹⁹ Another resource is the COPS Office’s COPS-P455 Community Engagement Strategies for State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial (SLTT) Law Enforcement Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Programs.20

Counter-UAS Concerns and Best Practices for DFR Programs

As drones become an increasingly integral part of policing, particularly through DFR programs and regular patrol deployments, the parallel rise in nefarious drone use cannot be ignored. While the benefits of drones in enhancing community safety are well-documented, there is an urgent need to address the evolving counter-unmanned aircraft systems (C-UAS) landscape to protect both public safety and the integrity of police operations.²¹

The Value of C-UAS Systems

C-UAS systems serve as a critical tool for detecting, tracking, and mitigating rogue drones that may pose a threat to public safety or police activities. These systems can identify unauthorized drones operating in sensitive areas, allowing agencies to take timely action. For DFR programs, C-UAS improve the operational security of drones responding to emergencies, preventing potential disruptions or hijacking attempts. Similarly, during large-scale public events or high-profile operations, these C-UAS systems can deter and neutralize drones used for illicit surveillance or smuggling or even as weapons.

Recent global conflicts, such as the war in Ukraine, underscore the destructive potential of commercial off-the-shelf drones. Modified consumer drones have been used to deliver explosive payloads, conduct reconnaissance, and disrupt critical infrastructure. These incidents serve as a reminder that malicious drone use is not a hypothetical risk—it is a reality demanding careful attention.
[Subhead 2]The Reality Gap: Challenges in C-UAS Implementation
Despite the clear need for robust C-UAS measures, the current state of readiness in many communities’ police agencies remains poor. Several barriers hinder effective implementation:

1. Regulatory Constraints: Federal regulations in many countries limit the deployment of active counter-drone measures, such as jamming or interception, due to concerns about interference with civilian airspace and communications.
2. Technological Limitations: While detection technologies are advancing, counter-drone systems often struggle with accurately distinguishing between legitimate and unauthorized drone activity, particularly in urban environments with high electromagnetic interference.
3. Resource Constraints: Many police agencies lack the funding and personnel required to deploy and maintain C-UAS systems effectively, injecting vulnerabilities.

Best Practices for Mitigating Risks

To ensure the safety of communities and the effectiveness of DFR programs, law enforcement agencies are wise to adopt a proactive approach to C-UAS concerns. Best practices include the following:

1. Collaboration with Federal and Private Entities: Partnering with federal agencies, such as the FAA, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the DHS (or their counterparts in an agency’s home country), can provide access to resources, training, and advanced technologies. Collaboration with private industry can also drive innovation and cost-effective solutions.
2. Integration of C-UAS into Emergency Response Plans: Incorporate C-UAS protocols into standard operating procedures for DFR deployments and large-scale public events. Set standards for personnel trained to respond to rogue drone incidents effectively.
3. Community Awareness and Engagement: Educate the community about the risks associated with unauthorized drone use and encourage reporting of suspicious activity. Community support serves as an additional layer of surveillance and deterrence.
4. Investment in Research and Training: Allocate resources to study emerging threats, establish standards, and train personnel in the use of C-UAS systems. Simulated exercises can help identify gaps in current capabilities and prepare teams for escalating real-world scenarios.
5. Advocacy for Policy Reform: Police leaders are a strong voice of advocacy for legislative changes addressing regulatory barriers to C-UAS deployment. Support for policymakers’ continued consideration of the unique security needs of DFR programs and police operations when crafting drone-related regulations is a priority.

Taking the Threat Seriously

The proliferation of drones, both for legitimate and nefarious purposes, is an irreversible trend. As police agencies continue to leverage drones for public safety, the parallel need to counter malicious drone activity remains a top priority. Lessons learned from global conflicts and domestic incidents alike should galvanize police leaders and governments to bridge the gap between recognizing the threat and effectively responding.

Ensuring the safety of communities in the drone age requires a multifaceted approach—one that combines technology, standards, policies, training, regulation, and public engagement. By taking proactive steps now, police agencies can safeguard the transformative potential of DFR programs while also minimizing current and future risks posed by unauthorized drones.

Conclusion

The deployment of drones and other machines as first responders is redefining the landscape of public safety. From building community trust to optimizing officer resources and enhancing situational awareness, the benefits are significant. However, the challenges, particularly around cybersecurity, C-UAS platforms, AI in this space, and public acceptance, are best handled intentionally, thoughtfully, and head-on. By addressing these concerns through policy, standards, training, innovation, and transparent communication, drones can become an important part of a safer, smarter police future and a contributor to public trust. d

Notes:

¹Police Executive Research Forum, Drones: A Report on the Use of Drones by Public Safety Agencies—and a Wake-Up Call about the Threat of Malicious Drone Attacks (Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2020).

²Steve King, Shay Major, and Marlis McCollum, Drone as First Responder Programs: A New Paradigm in Policing (MITRE, 2023).

³Charles Werner, “11 Innovative Ways Police Departments Are Using Drones,” Police1, January 2, 2025;  “The Use of Drones in Disaster Response, “ Applied Technology Review, December 15, 2023.

⁴Kristin Finklea, Law Enforcement and Technology: Use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (Congressional Research Service,  2023).

⁵DroneSense, “Beyond Visual Line of Sight: The Next Step for Drones in Public Safety,” DroneSense Blog, February 3, 2025.

⁶Montgomery County Department of Police, “Drone as First Responder (DFR) Program.”

7Unmanned Aircraft Systems Operations Standard for Law Enforcement Agencies, Law Enforcement Drone Association (LEDA), September 1, 2023.

8Michael Dorgan, “More Blue Cities Using Drones Instead of Police for Some 911 Calls, Expert Says: ‘They Can’t Get Cops,’” Fox News, June 21, 2024; Romeo Durscher, “How Law Enforcement Has Been Using Drones,” Government Fleet, May 29, 2020.

⁹National Police Chiefs’ Counsil (NPCC), “NPCC Drones: BVLOS Pathway Programme Overview Including Drone as First Responder” (NPCC, 2024).

¹⁰ City of Chula Vista, “Drone Program: Drone-Related Activity Dashboard.”

¹¹Montgomery County Department of Police, “Drone as First Responder (DFR) Program.”

¹² Tactical Operations Standard, LEDA, September 23, 2024.

¹³Improving Public Safety Communications in the 4.9 GHz Band, 47 CFR 90 (2023).

¹⁴Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), “Be Air Aware!”

¹⁵U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Legal Policy, “Unmanned Aircraft Systems,” updated April 2, 2024.

¹⁶ Federal Aviation Administration et al., Advisory on the Application of Federal Laws to the Acquisition and Use of Technology to Detect and Mitigate Unmanned Aircraft Systems (2020).

¹⁷Beryl Lipton, “Drone as First Responder Programs Are Swarming Across the United States,” Electronic Frontier Foundation, June 27, 2024; Anna Gurinskaya, “Support for RoboCops: Measuring Effects of Attitudes Towards Police and Policing Technologies,” in David A. Alexandrov et al., Digital Transformation and Global Society, DTGS 2021, Communications in Computer and Information Science 1503 (Springer, 2022).

¹⁸Lipton, “Drone as First Responder Programs Are Swarming Across the United States”; Mack Degeurin, “Ready or Not, Here Come the Police Drones,” Popular Science, July 24, 2024.

¹⁹CISA, Cybersecurity Guidance: Chinese-Manufactured UAS, 2024.

²⁰ Police Executive Research Forum, Community Engagement Strategies for State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial (SLTT) Law Enforcement Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Programs (Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2022).

²¹Department of Homeland Security, Science and Technology, “Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS).”

---

Please cite as

Craig Allen, “All the Buzz About Drones as First Responders,” Police Chief Online, April 16, 2025.