'Armed drones should not be used in normal crime situations,' Paul said. Rand Paul: No drones flip-flop

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) insists that he hasn’t changed his position against domestic drones, but admitted that a recent interview he gave “left the mistaken impression” he had done an about face.

“My comments last night left the mistaken impression that my position on drones had changed. Let me be clear: it has not,” Paul said in a public statement on Tuesday after coming under fire from some of his own supporters.


Paul touched off the flap when he said on Monday that he wouldn’t have a problem using drones if there was “an imminent threat.”

( PHOTOS: Pro, con: Best quotes about drones)

“I never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an active crime going on. If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and $50 in cash, I don’t care if a drone kills him or policeman kills him,” Paul said on Fox Business Network, in reference to the Boston Marathon bombings. “But it is different if they want to come fly over your hot tub or your yard just because they want to do surveillance on everyone, and they want to watch your activity.”

Earlier this year, Paul performed a 13-hour filibuster on the Senate floor opposing domestic drone use.

In his statement Tuesday, Paul clarified his remarks, saying that drones should only be “considered in extraordinary, lethal situations.”

“Armed drones should not be used in normal crime situations. They only may only be considered in extraordinary, lethal situations where there is an ongoing, imminent threat. I described that scenario previously during my Senate filibuster. Additionally, surveillance drones should only be used with warrants and specific targets,” Paul said in the statement.

He continued: “Fighting terrorism and capturing terrorists must be done while preserving our constitutional protections. This was demonstrated last week in Boston. As we all seek to prevent future tragedies, we must continue to bear this in mind.”