The Latest Fad in Public Safety?
public-safety · October 7, 2026
Every few years, public safety embraces a new idea that promises to change everything.
Let’s see what’s in the list.
Body cameras.
Shot-detection systems.
License-plate readers.
Real-time crime centers.
Alternative response teams.
Artificial intelligence.
Now drones can arrive at some emergency calls before officers do.
And individually, some of these tools may be useful.
That is not really my concern.
My concern is what happens when the newest tool becomes the newest fad.
Because public safety has a habit of finding a technology, program, or initiative that promises to solve an operational problem without asking whether the underlying system is healthy enough to support it.
Right Now, Technology Is Everywhere
One of the fastest-growing examples is Drone as First Responder, commonly called DFR.
Instead of waiting for an officer to arrive and request a drone, some agencies can automatically launch one toward a 911 call.
Recent research published in the American Journal of Criminal Justice found that drones in one California program frequently arrived before ground units and, in some circumstances, helped determine that an officer did not need to respond at all.[1]
That has obvious potential.
Faster situational awareness.
Better information before officers arrive.
Potentially fewer unnecessary deployments.
Less exposure to certain unknown situations.
Then there is AI.
Law-enforcement agencies are already using artificial intelligence to assist with report writing, video analysis, evidence review, surveillance, and other administrative or operational functions.[2]
Real-time crime centers are integrating cameras, license-plate readers, mapping, dispatch information, video, and other data.
Alternative response programs are expanding too.
A 2026 Harvard Government Performance Lab review examined nine community responder programs designed to send unarmed teams to certain mental-health, welfare, and quality-of-life calls instead of automatically sending police.[3]
There is a lot happening.
My question is not whether we should use these things.
My question is:
What problem are we actually trying to solve?
A Tool Can Become a Substitute for the Harder Conversation
This is where public safety organizations have to be careful.
A staffing problem appears.
Buy technology.
Response times increase.
Buy technology.
Employees complain about workload.
Automate something.
People question whether certain calls need armed police.
Create another response unit.
Violence increases.
Install another system.
Sometimes those are appropriate responses.
Sometimes they allow organizations to avoid a much harder examination.
Do we have enough people?
Are they properly trained?
Are supervisors prepared?
Are employees exhausted?
Are policies current?
Do different agencies communicate?
Is equipment matched to actual risk?
Are employees leaving faster than we can replace them?
Do we even understand why they are leaving?
Technology can improve an operation.
Technology cannot make an unhealthy operation healthy simply by being installed.
Public Safety Still Has a People Problem
The Government Accountability Office reported in February 2026 that increased resignations and retirements from 2019 through 2024 contributed to staffing declines across law-enforcement agencies.[4]
The National Policing Institute has described the situation as broader than a simple recruiting problem.
Recruitment matters.
So does retention.
So does wellness.
So does the loss of experienced employees and institutional knowledge.[5]
That is important because you can put sophisticated technology into an organization and still have an exhausted workforce operating it.
You can install AI while employees work excessive overtime.
You can launch drones while units remain understaffed.
You can build a real-time crime center while struggling to fill ordinary patrol assignments.
You can create an alternative response team without resolving what happens when that team encounters a situation beyond its capabilities.
Those things are not arguments against innovation.
They are arguments for capacity before mythology.
AI May Become the Biggest Test
AI is especially interesting.
It can reduce paperwork.
Organize information.
Analyze enormous amounts of data.
Review video.
Assist dispatchers.
Potentially help employees make sense of complex situations faster.
Those are substantial possibilities.
But public safety decisions have consequences.
An incorrect marketing recommendation might lose a company some money.
An incorrect public-safety recommendation can affect:
liberty,
privacy,
use of force,
investigations,
evidence,
employment,
or somebody's physical safety.
That means "the AI said so" can never become an acceptable decision-making standard.
Stateline reported in 2026 that police adoption of AI is expanding while rules governing some of those uses continue to develop.[2]
That gap deserves attention.
Adoption should not move faster than accountability.
Drones Are Tools, Not Staffing Plans
The same applies to drones.
If a drone reaches a scene in 90 seconds, that can be valuable.
It can tell officers whether the reported person is still there.
It may locate someone.
It may identify a vehicle.
It could provide information before employees enter a dangerous environment.
Excellent.
But a drone cannot handcuff someone.
It cannot render meaningful physical aid.
It cannot conduct every interview.
It cannot make every judgment.
It cannot replace the human response when a human response is actually necessary.
A force multiplier is useful.
It is still supposed to multiply something.
If there are not enough people underneath the technology, eventually we have to discuss that too.
Alternative Response Has the Same Test
I have said before that not every call requires the same response.
Someone experiencing a behavioral-health crisis may need a clinician more than a police officer.
A person needing shelter or social services may not need an armed response.
Programs around the country are testing those ideas, and research is beginning to give us better information about how community responder models actually operate.[3]
Good.
Study them.
Measure them.
Improve them.
But alternative response cannot become another slogan.
Ask:
What calls qualify?
Who performs the initial risk assessment?
What happens when information from the caller is wrong?
How quickly can police or EMS respond if the situation escalates?
How are workers themselves protected?
What training do responders receive?
What outcomes are being measured?
The question is not:
Police or no police?
The better question is:
What response best matches the risk?
Public Safety Loves New Things
New programs photograph well.
New technology photographs even better.
A drone launch makes a great press conference.
An AI system sounds modern.
A real-time crime center has giant screens.
A new task force gets a name.
A new response team gets a logo.
You know what does not look nearly as exciting?
Fixing staffing.
Training supervisors.
Replacing outdated equipment.
Reviewing policies.
Improving employee retention.
Cleaning up inconsistent procedures.
Examining mandatory overtime.
Documenting institutional knowledge.
Those things are boring.
They are also how organizations actually function.
Do Not Confuse Innovation With Readiness
An organization can be innovative and unprepared at the same time.
That distinction matters.
Buying AI does not mean you are AI-ready.
Buying drones does not mean your organization has a drone strategy.
Creating an alternative response program does not mean you have solved behavioral-health response.
Installing cameras does not mean employees are safer.
Collecting more data does not mean leadership knows what to do with it.
Modernization should answer an operational need.
Not create the appearance of progress.
Maybe the Latest Fad Is Looking for a Shortcut
That may be the bigger issue.
Maybe drones are not the fad.
Maybe AI is not the fad.
Maybe alternative response is not the fad.
Maybe the recurring fad in public safety is believing the next tool will allow us to avoid fixing the fundamentals.
People.
Staffing.
Training.
Equipment.
Communication.
Supervision.
Policy.
Accountability.
Leadership.
None of those are particularly new.
That may be exactly why they are easier to overlook.
The future of public safety absolutely will include more technology.
It should.
Use AI.
Use drones where appropriate.
Improve communications.
Modernize dispatch.
Build better data systems.
Explore different ways to respond to different calls.
But every time somebody walks into the room with the next big public-safety solution, there should be one question before the purchase order gets signed:
What problem does this actually solve?
Then another:
What problem are we hoping nobody notices it does not solve?
Because innovation can strengthen public safety.
But technology should never become camouflage for an operational problem we already know exists.
Sources
[1] American Journal of Criminal Justice, "Drone as First Responder (DFR): A Short Report on a DFR Program in an American Police Agency," August 22, 2026.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12103-026-09944-w
[2] Stateline, "Police use of artificial intelligence grows as rules lag behind," June 26, 2026.
https://stateline.org/2026/06/26/police-use-of-artificial-intelligence-grows-as-rules-lag-behind/
[3] Harvard Kennedy School Government Performance Lab, "Examining Alternative Response," March 13, 2026.
https://govlab.hks.harvard.edu/insight/examining-alternative-response/
[4] U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Law Enforcement Officers: Observations on Recruitment and Retention at the Federal, Tribal, State, and Local Levels," February 3, 2026.
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108495
[5] National Policing Institute, "Six Trends to Watch in American Policing in 2026."
https://www.policinginstitute.org/infocus/six-trends-to-watch-in-american-policing-in-2026/
Key takeaways
- Public safety agencies in 2026 are expanding their use of AI, drones, integrated data systems, real-time operations, and alternative response programs.
- Drone-as-First-Responder programs can provide faster situational awareness and sometimes reduce the need to dispatch ground units.[1]
- AI is increasingly being used for tasks including report preparation and analysis of public-safety information, while governance continues to develop.[2]
- Community responder programs are creating alternatives for some mental-health, welfare, and quality-of-life calls.[3]
- GAO continues to document recruitment, resignation, retirement, and staffing pressures in law enforcement.[4]
- Technology can serve as a force multiplier, but it should not be treated as a substitute for adequate staffing, training, supervision, equipment, and sound policy.
- Public-safety innovation should begin with a clearly defined operational problem and measurable outcomes.
- The most important question is not whether an agency is adopting the newest technology. It is whether that technology is strengthening an already functioning system or masking weaknesses underneath it.
Related articles
All articles