State and federal officials droned on Tuesday about rules for increasingly popular unmanned aircraft.

Federal Aviation Administration official Mark Bury told dozens of state attorneys general at an event in the nation's capital that his agency needs help enforcing federal rules on drones.

“We’re hoping that moving forward we’ll be able to enlist the assistance of local law enforcement in gathering information about operations of unmanned aircraft that violate our regulations,” said Bury, the FAA’s assistant chief counsel for regulations, during a panel discussion.

“We simply don’t have the manpower," he said.



Last week, the FAA released proposed rules for commercial drones under 55 pounds. If adopted, the rules would require licenses – issued after knowledge tests and valid for two years – to use the aircraft and mandate that operators keep the drones within eyesight and under 500 feet.

Some rules are already in place that affect use of small drones. Temporary air restrictions above stadiums hosting large events, for example, already apply.

Drones can perform an ever-expanding list of tasks, and safeguards for privacy and public safety are only now catching up. Many possible applications of drones aren't regulated.

Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, who repeatedly solicited new hunting buddies during this week’s National Association of Attorneys General meeting, asked about using the aircraft to pursue prey.



Bury told Hood the FAA considered the issue but doesn't have a strong regulatory interest. “From [the FAA’s] perspective, if installation of a weapon, camera, whatever … if safe operation is not implicated, we don’t really have an interest,” he said.

One thing the FAA does have an interest in: Making sure privacy-minded citizens don’t shoot drones out of the sky.

There’s a “fairly large constituency out there,” Bury said, that’s “very suspicious of unmanned aircraft.”

Bury said he’s “read a lot in the press about this idea of, ‘We’ll just shoot them down.’”

“That’s a problem,” he said.



The destroy-snooping-drones sentiment is somewhat common. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told CNN last month if a drone flew over his house he’d destroy it. “They better beware, because I’ve got a shotgun,” he said.

Bury said U.S. law and international treaties ban using force against aircraft, meaning states cannot pass laws allowing citizens to shoot down drones and that citizens cannot legally do so on their own.

Daniel Lennington, privacy officer with the Wisconsin Statewide Information Center, hailed drones as a potentially fantastic technology for realtors, reporters and others – but said local police often are stumped by what charges to apply when issues arise, such as neighbors peeping on each other.

Lennington shared a story about an oddball neighbor hovering a drone outside nearby windows. Police declined to charge him with a crime after failing to determine which would apply, he said. It’s a “problem that’s increasing by 12,000 drones a month,” he said, referring to small aircraft sales.



Fifteen states in some way regulate the unmanned aircraft, most of them limiting their use by state authorities. An Illinois law bans people from using drones to interfere with hunting.

Photos: CES 2015 View All 15 Images

Henry Perritt, a law professor at the IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, told attorneys general the government should avoid over-regulation and be wary of tales of problems caused by small drones.