We wonder how long it was after Orville and Wilbur Wright launched their first airplane that a police officer thought to use an aircraft to spot or chase criminals.

We’re not sure, but 28 years after the Wright brothers’ famous flight the New York City police department established the first police aviation unit.

As far as we can tell, the public was not concerned about the cops flying over their backyards. Today, there is virtually no criticism of police using airplanes and helicopters to do their jobs.

When it comes to drones, which are essentially unmanned aircraft, we are hardly into that period between invention and general acceptance.

That’s why it would be hasty and unwise for the Maine State Legislature at this point to place detailed restrictions on what police and state government can and cannot do with aircraft that happen to have no people aboard.

And that’s why we agree with Attorney General Janet Mills’ suggestion that the Legislature put a one-year moratorium on the use of drones by police agencies until more thought can be given to their proper role in law enforcement.

Mills’ suggestion springs from her opposition to LD 236, An Act to Protect the Privacy of Citizens from Domestic Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Use, sponsored by Sen. John Patrick, D-Rumford and strongly supported by the Maine Civil Liberties Union.

The bill is well-intentioned and would essentially require law enforcement to obtain the type of warrant they are required to seek when they search a home or vehicle.

The bill attempts to anticipate how drones will be used, and that alone raises a red flag. Testimony did not reveal that drones had been used, let alone abused, by any police agency in Maine.

This type of legislation, which seeks to anticipate problems and solve them before they arise, should concern us all.

The Legislature is currently rushing to close public access to concealed weapon permit records based upon absolutely no evidence of a problem with the current system in 30 years.

The danger in the drone bill is that in our zeal to head off  hypothetical problems we are likely to shut the door on the discussion and experimentation that could lead to legitimate progress.

Our experience with drones is based upon what we have seen on TV of their controversial use in war zones. Few of us have given any thought to what could be the legitimate use of drones in the civilian sphere.

Mills has recommended waiting a year and having the Criminal Justice Academy more fully explore how drones should and should not be used and how other states are addressing the issue.

The MCLU complains that Mills wants to allow police to make their own rules for the use of drones.

We believe that neither the MCLU or the police should be making the rules; that’s the Legislature’s job.

Thursday, the Judiciary Committee tabled LD 236, urging both sides to come back in two weeks.

There is no crisis, in fact there are no drones. Let’s go slowly, examine the issue over the next year and then develop appropriate regulations.

[email protected]

The opinions expressed in this column reflect the views of the ownership and the editorial board.