A U.S. senator said Monday that he would have no problem with an ordinary armed robber being killed by a drone.
According to The Huffington Post, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) explained that he did not care if a police officer or a drone killed an armed liquor store thief.
"Here's the distinction: I have never argued against any technology being used when you have an imminent threat, an act of crime going on," Paul said on Fox Business Network. "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 a policeman kills him. But it's 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 activities."
Though Paul made it clear he was against "willy-nilly" invasions of privacy without probable cause, his latest position apparently shifted since March 6, 2013, when he alleged President Barack Obama was "advocating a drone strike program in America," according to PolitiFact.com
Paul launched a 13-hour filibuster in March after sending a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder asking him to clarify whether American citizens could be killed in drone strikes. "No American should be killed by a drone on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court," he said.