The killing of the United Healthcare CEO, assassination of Charlie Kirk and attempted assassination of Trump and many other incidents indicate that companies must step up security expenditures for CEOs and top executives and celebrities must be increased.
Tesla only spends about $3.3 million on security for Elon Musk who has received thousands of death threats.
There will need to be drones and systems monitoring rooftops and able to monitor and rapidly respond and possibly intervene with shooting threats.
There are also drones being used for police enhancement and first response.
We can look at current and planned drones of Anduril, Skydio, DJI, AeroVironment, and emerging players like Shield AI and Teal Drones. Drone will be integrated into law enforcement, anti-assassination strategies and counter-drone defenses. We will look at budgetary considerations. My analysis draws on operational deployments, technological trends, and real-world conflicts like Ukraine-Russia and Israel-Iran, where drones have redefined infiltration, surveillance, and kinetic operations.
Current Global Use of Drones for Police Response EnhancementDrone as First Responder (DFR) Programs
Pioneered in the U.S. (e.g., by departments in Chula Vista, CA, and New York City), drones launch from rooftops or stations to arrive at 911 calls in under 4 minutes—often twice as fast as patrol cars—providing real-time video feeds to assess threats like active shooters or domestic disputes.
Tactical Crisis Response
Drones map accident scenes, track suspects in pursuits, and deliver payloads like defibrillators or negotiator phones. For instance, U.S. agencies use them in SWAT operations for overhead intel, improving outcomes in barricaded suspect scenarios.
Traffic and Crowd Control
Departments like Riverside PD in California use drones for efficient accident reconstruction, cutting investigation times from hours to minutes.
Anduril provides AI-integrated systems like the Lattice platform for autonomous threat detection in police ops.
Skydio offers self-flying drones for indoor/outdoor mapping.
DJI dominates with affordable quadcopters for basic surveillance, though U.S. agencies are shifting to domestic alternatives due to security concerns.
Future Planned Use of Drones in Law Enforcement
By 2030, drones will likely be ubiquitous in policing, evolving from tools to autonomous force multipliers integrated with AI, 5G/6G networks, and IoT ecosystems.
Projections indicate nearly every U.S. agency will adopt them, with global adoption following suit as costs dropping well below $5,000 per unit.
Widescale Anti-Assassination Monitoring, Deterrence, and Drone Intervention
Anti-assassination drone systems would form a layered air shield around high-value individuals (HVIs) or sites, drawing from military tactics but adapted for civilian contexts.
Persistent drone patrols using AI for loitering people, suspicious people or other drones. Swarms of micro-drones (like Anduril’s Altius-600) could create a 360-degree bubble around VIP convoys or events, integrating with ground sensors for facial recognition and threat profiling.
Counter-Drone Security Resisting Military Infiltration Drones
Counter-unmanned aerial systems (C-UAS) must evolve to handle sophisticated military drones, as seen in Ukraine (FPV drones account for 60-70% of Russian losses) and Israel-Iran (stealthy infiltrators for deep strikes).
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
This seems like either a “The elites get the security and everything else devolves for the rest of us” or “Too much security for all (i.e. dystopia).”
Both options are equally bad. This is not a lesser of two evils situation.
I did not see any post here on NBF (I checked again today to be sure) regarding the threat of political violence, the cost estimates, or possible solutions when, on June 14, 2025, democrat state representative Melissa Hortman was assassinated and state senator John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, were wounded. Why?
Why is it not worth discussing if it is kids or democrats, but if it is Charlie Kirk or a CEO we absolutely have to evaluate the issue?
Tragic but when a powerful blue state governor want someone capped, there is little security for anyone. Tim Walz wanted to be president.
Gun control is not a cheaper way to do it ?
Propose your system and budget. The Kirk shooter used a WW1 era technology gun. A bolt action rifle. High-powered bolt-action rifle—an older-model Mauser .30-06, a design rooted in 1898 German WW1-era technology (the Mauser 98 action)—yet built more recently as an imported reproduction
The US has about 500 million guns. Rifles (all types): 150-200 million.
100 million shotguns.
More Powerful/Advanced Rifles ( semi-auto AR-15 style, AK variants, often labeled assault weapons): ~25-30 million in circulation.
These are underestimates—private sales, 3D-printed ghost guns and unreported heirlooms add millions. Annual sales: ~15.5 million in 2025
Rifles account for ~20-30% of violent crime
.
Why Forcible Disarmament Fails: Historical and Practical Realities
Existing guns can’t be gotten back without catastrophe. History abounds with examples:Scale and Hiding: With ~500 million guns, even 10% non-compliance means 50 million hidden (buried, smuggled, or traded on black markets). Prohibition (1920-1933) failed spectacularly—alcohol went underground; guns would too, fueling cartels (as in Mexico today).
Didn’t Australia do something in 1996 to ban semi-automatic weapons?
I think other countries have enacted various gun restrictions.
Guys, it is still all new to most, but for any observer of these developments it has been known for a fact that there is no “security” now for anyone. The budget for a drone hit on anyone, without any exceptions, does not exceed five digits, three digits is enough in most cases. Six digits gets absolutely anyone in any case with any “security arrangements”. Unless the victim stays in a bunker, or in space, permanently. Tanks can’t survive for any useful length of time in a drone operations area, which is at least 50km for smaller maneuverable ones, and dense air defenses can’t provide reliable cover from 1000km+ bigger ones. In short, if anyone has a million dollars “invested” into a drone hit, and another million in TSLA puts, security will not help Elon and the perp will get 100x on his investment – that is how low the “insecurity” bar is. If Elon is not safe even from “not personal, just business”, no one else is safe from any hostile interest. This has already happened technologically and on battlefield, it is not exclusive to government (on the contrary, governments lag behind), it is not future, rather a recent history and present.
While I agree these people need more security, it is on them to provide it. I already pay for security details for at least a thousand government employees. We don’t need to grow that list to include various talking heads and robber barons. It’s amazing this Charlie Kirk gets capped for asserting that transgenderism is a demonic fad and traditional family structure yields a future.
My point is there is no security to provide. Can’t provide what does not exist. All the “security” you see (or pay for) is based on assumption that someone wants to shoot the victim with a gun or something. What security can be offered if someone is de facto calling an airstrike? Using the mass-produced drones for scaling, a $20k drone lands a 50kg bomb with _visual_ terminal guidance (jam GPS all you want, no effect) with several meters accuracy, launched from 100km+ away. These are relatively easy to shoot down, so can’t be worse than this for the perp. Small FPV drones with fiber optic link launched from several km range don’t rely on GPS or any radios to get right on target with centimeter accuracy. They cost $xxxx – five of these destroy a combat-ready M1 tank (hatches sealed, moving), one of these destroys a car or truck. It doesn’t make any difference who the designated victim is, or how much armor is the victim covered by – the strike will achieve the objective. The battlefield solution for this is speed: motorcycle provides more protection than any armor. Drones can and do chase and hit any car or truck, while motorcycle can drive into woods and escape. Not an option for VIPs, CEOs and other similar types. So another point is if one stands and talks in public in open space, and has enemies or “conflicting business interests” (even such as a bag of puts on TSLA), one has to have one’s affairs in order in advance. This is the world we live in now. Doesn’t matter for most people though.
Sounds like we need more trees…
Are we heading into a dystopian future?
The rich and powerful get the lions share of the wealth and resources.
Those that can afford to invest get some crumbs.
The rest have their jobs taken away by robots and AI.
Violence increases, but the rich and powerful don’t have to worry about that, they have the very best personal security. Could be very much a world of us and them.
Hopefully the politicians will not allow this to happen.