UK police issued with a 28-page guidance on dealing with drones
The UK police have been handed a 28-page guidance document, detailing how they should deal with the misuse of consumer drones by rogue operators. The document sets out guidelines, procedures, legislation and frequently asked questions which include: officers should not take control of the drone, unless in exceptional circumstances; if the operator is wearing first person goggles, they are committing an offence as the drone should always be in the operator's sight; an officer must instruct the use to land a drone if it is in mid-flight; and if the person refuses to land the drone, waiting until the drone runs out of battery is the most appropriate option.

Chris Crisman

Police attempting to make an arrest for "negligent" use of drones have been instructed not to attempt to land the craft themselves -- in case they accidentally hit the public.

The suggested course of action? Just wait -- for the battery to run out.

The advice is included in 28-pages of guidance, provided to WIRED, on how police officers should deal with the misuse of drones by the public.

The document details a checklist that officers should stick to when they think a crime is being committed by someone flying a drone.

Officers -- who are told "drone is a word that the Police Service has steered away from using in the past" -- are told not to "criminalise innocent misuse" of drones, but are reminded to bear in mind national security, public safety, and the prevention of "traditional crime" when drones are involved.

Drone is a word that the Police Service has steered away from using in the past National Police Chiefs Council

The guidance, which hasn't been published before but was issued to all forces this year, was created in response to the increasing use of drones for personal and professional means.

The document and its annexes set out the procedure, legislation, and frequently asked questions that officers may have to answer when they're faced by someone with a drone.

Officers are told:

They shouldn't try to take control of the drone "UNLESS EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST," such as a threat to life or damage to property. Officers are told: "Trying to land the system yourself may cause the drone to crash leading to a very real risk of injury to persons and damage to property (in addition to destroying the drone)."

If the person is wearing first person goggles, showing them footage from the drone as they fly it, "they commit an offence. The pilot should be able to see the aircraft with the naked eye at all times."

To "ask to see the footage of anything recorded" despite not having "power to demand this or require its removal," unless the person is suspected of terrorism related offences.

If the drone's in the air "currently the only option open to you is to instruct the pilot to land the drone".

If the person refuses to land the drone "waiting is likely to be the most appropriate option" as its battery will run out.

There is a "concern" that terrorists could use drones to "obtain information through hostile reconnaissance".

Use and misuse

As the availability and affordability of drones has increased, so have the number of complaints made to police about their use. Last Christmas the Civil Aviation Authority, which is able to prosecute drone users under its powers, issued a warning to those who had received UAVs as presents to fly them safely. The CAA warning (the so-called 'Drone Code') was repeated again in July when the authority said it was "imperative that people observe the rules" of the sky.

And yet the public seems determined to misuse their flying craft; London's Metropolitan Police have already seen 21 complaints about drones in 2015, up from just one in 2014, and Thames Valley Police have seen a jump of 59 over the same time period, figures given to the Guardian show.