EXACTLY.
THAT has been my whole argument NOW and for the past dozen years since they passed the law (in 2012) allowing consumer ownership of these things. What differentiates them from the old "model airplanes" of the mid-20th century and on, is that these things can be equipped with cameras and I think much of the mentality of "regulation" was based on that old "model airplane" era and not the imaging capabilities of these things.
There are "rules of the road" and license requirements for UAVs of a certain size but there has also been too much of this ARROGANT ASSUMPTION that ALL of the owners/operators of these would be "angels", always on their best behavior, and would never ever operate them illegally.
I can imagine criminal operations that do home invasions who could (or perhaps already do) use these to "case a house" (vs sitting in a car across from the house under surveillance for a robbery to watch the comings and goings, but where that house might also have a doorbell camera that gets a pic of that criminal sitting there).
It took time to get Google under control when they were doing their "Street View Maps" photography with vehicles driving around neighborhoods with the big 360 camera thing in the back (and this "control" included requiring the blurring out faces of people who were captured in stills).