Commissar Sae said:
This is all true, it's just that people have had more time to come to terms with those realities.
I am not in favour of capability limitation based on the public perception of the equipment.
Drones are still fairly new and the only times anyone has really heard about them is when they blow something/someone up somewhere else in the world.
Then people should not put forward an opinion based on that experience without first making even a cursory effort to widen their knowledge base. Example, radiation and radiation therapy.
All things told, I'm not even sure I trust the American military with armed drones, since they have tended to be rather quick on the trigger resulting in unfortunately frequent friendly fire incidents last time Canada fought alongside them.
Drones, as a close air support platform, actually have a lower rate of blue on blue incidents than conventional fast air. If you think about it what has more time to evaluate whether or not to strike, a drone lazily circling the battlespace or a jet moving faster than the speed of sound?
OT: OP is freaking out over nothing, as many others have noted. This is a surveillance drone and short of dive bombing him it is unlikely to cause any lasting harm other than inform the LAPD of his current wereabouts (which will probably expose him to an awful lot of lasting harm, since they are clearly out to kill him anyway.)
In all honesty I would have no problem with him being taken out by a drone, I know the police are supposed to operate on a different set of rules, but if he is A-Hostile, B-Armed and C-not conducting himself in accordance with the act of surrender, he looks like fair game to me. He knows the police are after him, he knows that he is armed, he knows the consequences of these actions.
In addition, part of the reason that drones are so successful in countering insurgents and, I suppose criminals, is that there is that element of dehumanisation. Not of the target in the eyes of the operator, but the operator in the eyes of the target. See, when you see a cop coming towards you, you see someone you can bargain with, bribe, trick, convince to be merciful etc etc. If you are so inclined, you can see them as a source of glory, because if you kill a cop, you are (and I stress that this is only in the eyes of the criminal community) a 'badass cop killer'.
Now, substitute that with a drone. In the eyes of the target, the drone cannot be bought, it can not be intimidated, it will not take pity on you. If you are hostile and not willing to surrender, it kills you, if you attempt to harm a civilian under its protection it kills you, if you rock about armed and should not be, it kills you. And if you manage to kill it, its operator swears, takes a sip of his coffee and sics another one on you.
For these reasons, armed drones could make very effective law enforcement tools.