Paul: Position on drones is steady
Published 11:24 am Wednesday, May 8, 2013
A Wednesday letter, “Paul is flip-flopping on the use of drones,” asserted that my position on drones had changed since my filibuster. Nothing could be further from the truth. I continue to be a prominent critic of government surveillance without a warrant and an adamant opponent of targeted assassination without accusation, charge or trial.
The filibuster, though, was about more than just drones. It was about the Bill of Rights guarantee to confront your accuser, to have a lawyer, to receive a jury trial.
Trending
If you think the filibuster was just about drones, you miss the point. I oppose killing an American not involved in combat by any means, whether it be a drone, a sniper or a spear.
Armed drones flying at 50,000 feet should not be used in normal crime situations. But I have never questioned whether the police can use deadly force to repel deadly force.
We currently use robots to defuse bombs to protect our police. No one opposes that. Technology will continue to develop new weapons to allow police to repel deadly attackers. I do not oppose that.
My position did not change after the tragedy in Boston, as some, particularly on the left, tried to imply. Nor will my position change in the future.
Emerging drone technology has been effective in some ways, but we already see some abuse and the potential for greater abuse. My concern is that a government that already thinks it can regulate health care and infringe on the Second Amendment, might also come to the conclusion that it can jettison our Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. I wanted the president to state explicitly that he did not believe he had the power to kill American citizens on American soil without a trial or due process.
It took me 13 hours to get that answer.
Trending
As a senator, I took an oath to uphold the Constitution. Our rights as citizens are not subject to new technology or political whim. No government – federal, state or local – has the power to usurp our constitutional rights as citizens. The filibuster was really about the Bill of Rights. I am steadfast, rock solid and unwavering in defense of the Bill of Rights. That will not change.
Rand Paul
Bowling Green
Editor’s note: Paul is Kentucky’s junior Republican U.S. senator.