Missouri SB 296 Sparks Debate Over Chinese Drones in Law Enforcement

A proposed Missouri law aiming to ban law enforcement from purchasing drones manufactured in China, such as DJI drones, has stirred controversy in the state capital. Senate Bill 296 (SB 296), introduced by Sen. Rick Brattin (R-Harrisonville), seeks to address national security concerns but has drawn sharp opposition from law enforcement and public safety officials who depend on Chinese made drones. As detailed in the Columbia Missourian, the bill’s hearing on March 3, 2025, exposed a rift between security advocates and those prioritizing operational needs.

In this article we will take a look at the technical and regulatory stakes of SB 296, its potential impact on Missouri’s public safety sector, and its place within the ever changing drone technology landscape.

Security Concerns Driving SB 296

Sen. Brattin framed SB 296 as a safeguard against foreign espionage, citing the Chinese balloon spotted over the U.S. in 2023 and concerns tied to TikTok. “This is basically the modern-day Trojan horse,” he told the Senate Committee on Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Safety, suggesting that Chinese DJI drones could be exploited to collect sensitive data.

While the article in the Columbia Missourian doesn’t specify which agencies back his stance, federal warnings from the FBI and Department of Defense have flagged potential risks with Chinese-made drones like those from DJI, the global market leader.

DJI holds roughly 70% of the U.S. industrial drone market and over 80% of first-responder applications, per Bloomberg estimates, making it a prime target for such legislation.

Law Enforcement Pushes Back

Opposition surfaced quickly. John Yeast of the Law Enforcement Drone Association argued that SB 296 reflects lobbying by U.S. drone makers rather than genuine security threats.

“This bill is not about data security but lobbying efforts by domestic drone manufacturers aiming to ban non-U.S. drones for financial gain,” he said. This skepticism aligns with industry critiques of similar federal bills, like the Countering CCP Drones Act.

Eric Schmitt, Branson’s police chief, criticized the bill’s grant program, intended to offset replacement costs for banned drones. “The grant funding… would not suffice and would force communities to choose either to violate the law in order to save lives or not participate,” he testified. The Columbia Missourian didn’t quantify the grants, but replacing a $1,500 DJI drone with a $10,999 U.S.-made alternative underscores the financial strain.

John Barton, fire chief of High Ridge Fire District, offered a technical counterpoint. His team uses DJI drones but replaces the Chinese software with DroneSense, a Texas-based platform.

“The hardware is manufactured in China. That’s true,” Barton said. “However, we do not use the software released by the Chinese drone manufacturer.”

He likened this to Apple, noting that 90% to 95% of its hardware is Chinese-made yet its software remains American.

Technical Realities of Drone Hardware and Software

The hardware-software split is key. DJI’s Mavic 3 Enterprise, widely used by first responders, weighs 2.3 pounds, offers 45 minutes of flight time, and retails for $3,600, per DJI’s specs. By contrast, Skydio’s X2D, a U.S.-made option, weighs 2.9 pounds, flies for 35 minutes, and starts at $10,999, according to Skydio. Barton’s DroneSense solution encrypts data and blocks foreign access, a practice echoed by firms like Paladin Drones, which adds secure hardware to DJI units for data security.

Public Safety Use Cases at Risk

Barton stressed practical drone applications, like search-and-rescue and wildfire monitoring, over non-sensitive areas. “We fly over areas… just as visible from Google Maps,” he said. The Columbia Missourian also cited examples from other officials, including tracking suspects and assessing disasters—uses detailed in Drones for Good coverage. A ban could disrupt these missions, especially in rural Missouri, where drones cover vast terrain on limited budgets.

Market and Regulatory Context

SB 296 fits a national pattern. The U.S. House’s Countering CCP Drones Act passed in 2024, and the 2025 NDAA may tighten restrictions further, per Congressional records. James Harris of State Armor Action supported SB 296, citing FBI warnings and arguing U.S. manufacturing could outpace China’s. Yet, domestic firms like Skydio struggle to match DJI’s scale and pricing. The bill allows waivers if U.S. alternatives aren’t viable, but the process could bog down adoption, particularly for cash-strapped agencies.

Conclusion: Balancing Security and Utility

SB 296 highlights a clash between security fears and operational needs. Brattin’s “Trojan horse” warning carries weight—data risks aren’t imaginary—but the bill’s broad stroke ignores fixes like DroneSense. Law enforcement’s pushback suggests a deeper issue: U.S. drone makers need innovation, not mandates, to compete.

If SB 296 passes, Missouri agencies will scramble for replacements, testing the grant program’s limits. If it fails, software patches may hold the line. Either outcome will ripple through the drone industry, where geopolitics increasingly dictates technology’s fate.

DroneXL’s Take

Yeast’s lobbying critique hits the mark—SB 296 smells like a boost for U.S. firms lagging behind DJI. Punishing users for a market failure isn’t progress. The real fix lies in funding American R&D to match China’s edge, not banning tools that work. Missouri’s first responders need drones that deliver, not a legislative standoff.