The L.A. Times' Brian Bennett wrote a rather frightening story over the weekend about the use of Predator drones by local law enforcement officials in the United States. The article highlights a recent example where a South Dakota sheriff called in a Predator B drone to perform surveillance on a family farm.

This is apparently hardly an isolated incident, and according to the story, Predator drones are being used for surveillance purposes by Federal, state, and local agencies around the country. All of this has been occurring without any public acknowledgement or debate.

The article recounts an incident which occurred over the summer in Nelson County, South Dakota. The local sheriff, Kelly Janke, went looking for six missing cows at a farm owned by the Brossart family. Coincidentally, the family allegedly belongs to an anti-government group called the Sovereign Citizen Movement and has had repeated run-ins with local police in Nelson County.

The cows had apparently wandered onto the Brossart's farm, which was a convenient reason for the sheriff to pay them a little visit - with a search warrant of course. I guess in South Dakota it is common practice to obtain search warrants to go looking for missing cows. Are you kidding me? When he arrived at the farm he was confronted by three men brandishing rifles who ordered him off of their property.

What happens next is rather astounding. The sheriff called for reinforcements from the state Highway Patrol, a regional SWAT team, a bomb squad, ambulances, and deputy sheriffs from three counties. Oh, and he called in a Predator drone!

Janke learned about the Predator drones last spring after attending a briefing on how two Customs and Border Protection drones based at nearby Grand Forks air base could help local law enforcement. When Janke called for backup, one of the drones, which had been patrolling the Canadian border over North Dakota and Montana made its way over the Brossart farm.

Officers were then able to watch live video and thermal imaging beamed to a handheld device from the drone as it circled at 10,000 feet providing surveillance. The images showed that the Brossarts were moving around their property with their rifles still in hand, and Sheriff Janke and the rest of the responders decided to retreat until the following day.

The next morning, the Predator was back above the Brossart farm beaming images to the sheriff, which indicated that the Brossarts were no longer armed. Janke then called in the SWAT team to arrest Rodney Brossart, along with his daughter and three sons on their property. The police also found the missing cows.

Unbelievably, the use of drones for domestic surveillance appears to be in the process of becoming commonplace. The L.A. Times article reports that local police in North Dakota said that they have used the Grand Forks based Predators to fly at least two dozen surveillance flights since June.

This is North Dakota for goodness sakes, what in the world would they need to use Predator drones for in the context of local law enforcement? "We don't use [drones] on every call out," said Bill Macki, head of the police SWAT team in Grand Forks. "If we have something in town like an apartment complex, we don't call them."

Really?

The L.A. Times' Bennett also quotes Michael C. Kostelnik, who is a retired Air Force general who heads the office that supervises the drones. He said that Predators are flown "in many areas around the country, not only for federal operators, but also for state and local law enforcement and emergency responders in times of crisis."

Who knew?

Certainly, this issue has not been brought to the forefront of public debate, until now. The background behind this Orwellian extension of the U.S. Police State is as follows: Drone purchases for the Customs and Border Protection agencies were first authorized by Congress in 2005. According to the Times, these Federal agencies own eight of the unmanned spy planes.

Furthermore, there use in state and local matters is apparently justified by Federal officials who cite "broad authority to work with police from budget requests to Congress that cite 'interior law enforcement support' as part of their mission," according to Bennett's article.

The reason that such controversial and downright frightening tactics have been implemented away from the public eye is because U.S. courts have allowed law enforcement to conduct aerial surveillance in the absence of a warrant. In other words, it seems that Predator drones, which can not be seen or heard and are operated remotely, fall under the same legal guidelines as police helicopters or aircraft.

Thus, a condition now exists where Federal, state, and local law enforcement officials are using U.S. air space to conduct surveillance on American citizens in missions that resemble those carried out against Al-Qaeda and other terrorist targets in places such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Iran.