Federal overreach on drones?

Van Living Forum

Help Support Van Living Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Optimistic Paranoid

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
4,534
Reaction score
10
Forbes magazine reports that the FAA just lost a court case where they were trying to require Radio Controlled Model Aircraft to be registered just like real aircraft.  There was actually a specific law forbidding them from doing this, but they tried to anyway.  It will be interesting to see if this affects their drone registration, that we've talked about here.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngo...tration-rule-for-model-aircraft/#4258341e4238
 
If these were around when invasion of privacy laws were written, I bet they would have been included. I think hunting them with birdshot should be legal.
 
Optimistic Paranoid said:
Forbes magazine reports that the FAA just lost a court case where they were trying to require Radio Controlled Model Aircraft to be registered just like real aircraft.  There was actually a specific law forbidding them from doing this, but they tried to anyway.  It will be interesting to see if this affects their drone registration, that we've talked about here.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngo...tration-rule-for-model-aircraft/#4258341e4238

Tried to?

Hell they DID it.

I registered myself the first day it started.

BTW, for hobby drones and model aircraft (under 55 pounds) the registration was actually for the OWNER, not the individual aircraft that he or she flew.
 
gTrainChaser said:
Many of the drone people are stupid, incompetent and crazy.  There are drones hitting legal aircraft, drones hitting runners, drones hitting bicyclists, drones hitting people in the head, drones smashing through windows.  It's going to be interesting when one of the 50-pound ones gets sucked into a jet engine.

If people were responsible, it would be different.  But they're not.

People killed from legal use of prescription drugs each year: About 37,000.

People killed in automobile accidents in the USA every year: about 36,000.

People killed in aviation accidents per year: about 100 to 1500.

Bicycle deaths per year: around 600-800.

People killed by trains: around 250 and climbing.

Deaths due to over-consumption of energy drinks per year: about 20, and climbing.

Passengers killed on elevators per year: about 6.

Drone deaths per year?

None.

(were talking about civilian hobby quadcopters, not military hardware)

Point is that all technology has an upside and a downside.


Ever watch TV or the movies? You are seeing a lot of aerial drone footage.

Drones are being used for security, police work, search and rescue, firefighting, road and traffic engineering, and inspecting the bridges you and I drive on. Airbus uses them to do elevated safety inspections on the airliners we fly in.

The reports of airplane strikes have been fabricated by the media, and pilots themselves. Although there have been some unproven reports of occasional, yet harmless right-of-way incursions. Bird flock strikes are much more dangerous than drone strikes.

And drones dont fly around airports in a swarm.

The newer drones (above the 'toy' level) include GPS based 'geo-fencing' and wont even take off or fly too close to an airport.

I fly mine responsibly, but like anything else, it's the 2 or 3 idiots doing it (and reported on TV) that make the rest of us look bad.
 
Drones are just starting. Wait and there will be a death count. I would be unhappy if one just bumped into my window. We can compromise on this. No registration for drones, and it is legal for me to shoot them if in my air space. Where can I get that radio interference device?
 
It's funny how different people's perspectives can be.  To me, the biggest thing in that story was that Congress specifically passed a law in 2012 forbidding them from doing something, and they tried to do it anyway.  No one else here commented on that aspect of it.
 
Optimistic Paranoid said:
It's funny how different people's perspectives can be.  To me, the biggest thing in that story was that Congress specifically passed a law in 2012 forbidding them from doing something, and they tried to do it anyway.  No one else here commented on that aspect of it.

I actually did comment on that. It might have been missed. 

I agreed with the statement. They didnt just TRY to regulate model aircraft, they DID regulate model aircraft.

For a time, anyway.
 
Optimistic Paranoid said:
It's funny how different people's perspectives can be.  To me, the biggest thing in that story was that Congress specifically passed a law in 2012 forbidding them from doing something, and they tried to do it anyway.  No one else here commented on that aspect of it.


Alas, it simply doesn't matter. No Congress can legally bind any future Congress. Congress can pass any law today saying "X", and any future Congress can repeal it and replace it with a law saying "Y"--even if the "X" law says you can't do "Y".

The only exception to this are rulings over constitutionality, which are binding on everyone at all times (unless they are overturned later).
 
Weight said:
Drones are just starting. Wait and there will be a death count. I would be unhappy if one just bumped into my window. We can compromise on this. No registration for drones, and it is legal for me to shoot them if in my air space. Where can I get that radio interference device?


Possibly.

But how do you define 'my airspace'.

In most practical definitions and legal terms, (not talking international laws) for homeowners, land owners, and land users, you only have a say in the 'non-navigable' airspace above your property.

In other words, the FAA and the airplane and helicopter pilots do NOT have to ask your permission to fly over your property in the USA, in the navigable zone above you, but a pilot in a helicopter (or a drone) that hovers 20 feet above your front lawn IS in your airspace, because it is not considered 'navigable'.

Where the dividing line is, depends on a few factors, but is generally considered to be about 100 feet in residential neighborhoods, but it is much higher in other places such as apartment complexes and downtown areas. This is 'navigable' airspace, but not where airplanes ACTUALLY navigate.

Where I live, occasionally I have spray planes fly right over my house, during mosquito season, about 200 feet up. I live right in the middle of a small city.

If I lived on the edge of town, I would be seeing a lot more of them, just before and during cotton-harvesting season. They are noisy, disruptive, and fast, but just because I dont like them, it doesn't matter, they are in 'navigable' airspace and I cant go out and blast away with a 12 gauge.

And shooting a firearm in the city is normally prohibited, unsafe, and can get you in trouble in a hurry. If you DID hit the drone and it crashes on a kid or breaks a car window as the debris falls, YOU are in trouble, not the drone pilot.

Of course, out in the country, we have less crowded conditions but still there can be risks of where the spent ammo might fall.

I for one, prefer the registration process, since that meant that our 'aircraft' were protected by Federal Law, if operated within the law in a safe and responsible manner.
 
I can just imagine what will happen when everyone in town begins shooting into the air at drones with their shotguns and rifles...................

And we think people are morons on New Years Eve............
 
lenny flank said:
I can just imagine what will happen when everyone in town begins shooting into the air at drones with their shotguns and rifles...................

And we think people are morons on New Years Eve............

EXACTLY!

:D
 
Top