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.

Read next The £599 Samsung Galaxy S20 FE could be all the phone you need The £599 Samsung Galaxy S20 FE could be all the phone you need

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:

Read next Tesla’s Model S Plaid wasn’t the biggest Battery Day announcement Tesla’s Model S Plaid wasn’t the biggest Battery Day announcement

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.

In September Nigel Wilson, a 42-year-old from Nottinghamshire, was prosecuted -- under the Navigation Order, 2009 -- and fined more than £1,800 after he was caught illegally flying his drone over football stadiums and buildings across London. Football stadiums are directly addressed in the document, which was given to WIRED by the Home Office, but produced by the National Police Chiefs Council, under the Freedom of Information Act. "Definitely not," the document says under the subheading asking whether drones can be flown over stadia. "This is one type of offending we are starting to see in London, and the danger is that they lose power and drop into the crowd from height, thereby causing injury.

Wilson was prosecuted under the Air Navigation Order 2009, which involves several sections that could apply to drones, after flying his drone over Anfield as Liverpool played Ludogorets FC in 2014.

Legislation and law

The Navigation Order is not the only legislation available to officers who suspect someone misusing a drone. There are at least six other areas of law where drone crimes are likely to take place: the Public Order Act, Protection from Harassment Act, Sexual Offences, Terrorism, breach of the peace and public nuisance -- although these are not an exhaustive list of the potential legislation that could be used.

Read next Apple Watch Series 6 review: still the greatest but with one big pitfall Apple Watch Series 6 review: still the greatest but with one big pitfall

Generally the Navigation Order requires people fly drones in a safe way, not to drop anything from them, not to fly them too high, have them in pilot's eyesight at all times, and not to fly them around protected areas, such as airports, or over public gatherings.

If a member of the police suspects a drone is being misused the first thing they should do is try to photograph or video the drone and where it is, the advice says. "Any flight close to an airport is highly suspect," the document states.

Concern that these devices could be used to obtain information through hostile reconnaissance National Police Chiefs' Council

They are then responsible for trying to work out who the pilot is; according to the document the pilot's "behaviour are likely to be significantly different to others" in the area. Crowded spaces, and drones controlled by mobile interfaces, may make it possible for the pilot to be identified.

There's no official register of individual drone users in the UK but commercial operators are required to register their UAVs with the CAA. The latest version of the CAA's approved commercial operators, which is for drones up to 20kg, lists 1,036 operators -- these mostly include media and video companies, such as the BBC, universities, mapping companies, and four police forces.

In the coming months the government may try to make it easier to identify a drone's pilot. So far it has been working with Nasa to create a cloud-based system to monitor drone use and allow pilots to see other nearby flights. The police document says "work is currently underway through a cross cutting Governmental working group" to consider the response to the growth of drones.

Engaging pilots

Once an officer has identified the pilot they are then told to "engage" with them to work out what they are doing, work out the offence that may be relevant, and then tell them to land the drone if it is believe an offence is being committed.


Officers don't have any power to seize a drone under the Air Navigation orders but may be able to do so under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, if the circumstances are right.

Photojournalist Eddie Mitchell was arrested in 2014 for using his drone over an area where he had already sought permission. It was reported by the Guardian that police officers "snatched" the controls from his hands and tried to land his drone as he was trying to gather footage for an article. As well as general use the police document states that if an officer believes a journalist is controlling the drone they should contact media relations who may be able to "negotiate" with the journalist or news organisation.

If a pilot refuses to land a drone police can't take control of it and should wait for its battery to die, the document states.