| Opinion/The Review

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

New drone questions: Another slippery slope

Email Newsletters

Click here to sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Letters home ...

Traveling abroad for personal, educational or professional reasons?

Why not share your impressions — and those of residents of foreign countries about the United States — with Trib readers in 150 words?

The world's a big place. Bring it home with Letters Home.

Contact Colin McNickle (412-320-7836 or

Daily Photo Galleries

'American Coyotes' Series

Traveling by Jeep, boat and foot, Tribune-Review investigative reporter Carl Prine and photojournalist Justin Merriman covered nearly 2,000 miles over two months along the border with Mexico to report on coyotes — the human traffickers who bring illegal immigrants into the United States. Most are Americans working for money and/or drugs. This series reports how their operations have a major impact on life for residents and the environment along the border — and beyond.

Friday, March 15, 2013, 8:57 p.m.

As if the Obama administration's explanations regarding the use of drones against Americans weren't troubling enough, now there's a new wrinkle — drones that can determine whether citizens are armed and can track cellphones.

Government documents, obtained by an electronic privacy organization under a Freedom of Information request, reveal that the Department of Homeland Security's Predator B drone fleet has been customized to identify people with guns and can pick up cellphone signals.

Attempting to squash another drone controversy, the Obama administration says only 10 of the drones are intended for use and then by U.S. Customs and Border Protection to identify armed illegal aliens at the border, The Washington Times reports. The agency insists it's not deploying the cellphone signal-interception capability.

We are not reassured, and for good reason.

Initially, Attorney General Eric Holder in correspondence to Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said using lethal force against American noncombatants on U.S. soil via drones is “possible” under “extraordinary circumstances.” It took Mr. Paul's filibuster for Justice to acknowledge that doing so would be unconstitutional.

Americans don't need any more White House slippery-slope “interpretations” on the use of drones, whether to spot armed civilians or to spy where there's no warrant. For the last time we checked, the Fourth and Fifth amendments remain parts of the Bill of Rights.

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read Editorials

  1. EPA diktats: Pushing back
  2. Medicare @ 50: Sick, getting sicker
  3. Yes, the IRS targeted conservatives
  4. Intrepid salute
  5. Greensburg Laurels & Lances
  6. Kittanning Laurels & Lances
  7. Regional growth
  8. Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
  9. Sunday pops
  10. The Box
  11. Saturday essay: Garden chances