Drone view of the neighborhood from last weekend.

[sseelhoff]

How many drones have you seen in your life? Is this really a big problem?

I won't fly my drone over my neighbors property and now they are coming and asking me to do so because they want pictures. Did a chimney inspection Sunday.

Some of you seem to have lousy neighbors - and be lousy neighbors. I'm starting to understand why some of you don't post your location: there's no bag limit on Ogres.....

As drones proliferate, I can see how the problem might proliferate, especially in confined spaces like a neighborhood, or Rhode Island (J/K, IT!). But it's like anything else-the device is not the problem, it's the intent of the person deploying the device. Neighbor lost a cat or dog (or heaven forbid a child)? Sure, we can take a look around the neighborhood and see what we can find. On the otherhand, flying around scoping out thy neighbor's wife, not a good or acceptable use.

For those wanting limits, I would suggest they already exist in the form of trespass and nuisance laws. There are already civil and criminal penalties for trespass, and nuisance allows for issuance of an injunction.

Bottom line is my advice for using a drone would be the same for any other activity: Don't be a self centered a-wagon and everything should be fine.

 

[sseelhoff]

Agreed. That's the same as saying tractor owners are all backwoods hicks. Or diesel truck drivers are obnoxious and blow black smoke everywhere.

You're saying their not? And they don't? Data, please.

 

[IslandTractor]

I'm not opposed to 'local' (good) government but federal regulations written up by a bunch of career politicians and their lobbyists and managed and enforced by bureaucrats thousands of miles away with no clue what the local 'folk' want is bad government!

I appreciate your frustration. However, "local" politicians are no more likely to get these things right. At least with national efforts there are a lot of eyes on the process.

 

[IslandTractor]

As drones proliferate, I can see how the problem might proliferate, especially in confined spaces like a neighborhood, or Rhode Island (J/K, IT!). But it's like anything else-the device is not the problem, it's the intent of the person deploying the device. Neighbor lost a cat or dog (or heaven forbid a child)? Sure, we can take a look around the neighborhood and see what we can find. On the otherhand, flying around scoping out thy neighbor's wife, not a good or acceptable use. For those wanting limits, I would suggest they already exist in the form of trespass and nuisance laws. There are already civil and criminal penalties for trespass, and nuisance allows for issuance of an injunction. Bottom line is my advice for using a drone would be the same for any other activity: Don't be a self centered a-wagon and everything should be fine.

Agree.

 

[MossRoad]

I'm not opposed to 'local' (good) government but federal regulations written up by a bunch of career politicians and their lobbyists and managed and enforced by bureaucrats thousands of miles away with no clue what the local 'folk' want is bad government!

I frequently have a toss-up between local VS federal laws. Local has control tailored to the locals, but federal you only have one version to deal with. Trying to figure out where your carry permit is good and where its not is just one example. Another excellent example is race and discrimination laws in the past where federal law had to come in and trump many local and state laws (Kentucky clerk marriage license denial for current example). Surprisingly, what one population considers common sense, another population can't fathom, and that's just within our own county, state and country. I took my kid to another state a month ago. I was returning a U-Haul trailer and after I unhooked it, the agent told me it would be a good idea to remove my hitch as the state police target out-of-state drivers with trailer hitches and no trailer. Apparently its against the law to drive with a hitch in (or ball on your bumper, too) and no trailer. Only exceptions are going directly to or coming directly from picking up a trailer. We got nothing like that here. I know its been discussed on this board before, and I don't want to get into if its a good or bad law. Its just that how would anyone know that if you cross the state line with a ball on your hitch and no trailer its a ticket?

Anyhow, without going into any of those specific cases, as with anything, as more drones are involved in altercations, its almost a certain that laws, ordinances, etc... will come into being. With the danger to aircraft, power lines, crowds, etc... its just a matter of time.

 

[buckeyefarmer]

wonder how many of those that want to shoot a quad copter would shoot the google car that drives by and records them? None, thought so.
Like others said, you might own real estate, but you don't own the air over your land.

 

[dragoneggs]

I appreciate your frustration. However, "local" politicians are no more likely to get these things right. At least with national efforts there are a lot of eyes on the process.

Local politicians might not 'get it right' any better than the feds, but local ownership of the law and local people being involved and taking responsibility and having the authority IMO, have a much better chance of looking out for its people. If it isn't right, local law can much easier be changed and tailored for the region. Fed laws are expensive and generally don't take into consideration geography, demography, etc. I don't have a specific proposal but I don't think a 'one-size fits all' fed law for drones is a good idea unless it is very limited such as FAA airspace limits for safety such as the 400ft rule. And maybe exceptions to the 400ft are granted by permit. Once Feds try to regulate what one can do with the drone, they have crossed the line. And for those who disagree with me... go fly a kite!

 

[aczlan]

wonder how many of those that want to shoot a quad copter would shoot the google car that drives by and records them? None, thought so.
Like others said, you might own real estate, but you don't own the air over your land.

Apples and oranges.
A Google car can only see stuff thats visible from the road (from a tall vehicle) and its driving down the road, not sitting there looking at you.
A drone (at least the ones people are complaining about) is peering into your backyard from the air, and going slowly or hovering if the operator sees something they find interesting.

Aaron Z

 

[IslandTractor]

Local politicians might not 'get it right' any better than the feds, but local ownership of the law and local people being involved and taking responsibility and having the authority IMO, have a much better chance of looking out for its people. If it isn't right, local law can much easier be changed and tailored for the region. Fed laws are expensive and generally don't take into consideration geography, demography, etc. I don't have a specific proposal but I don't think a 'one-size fits all' fed law for drones is a good idea as long as it is very limited such as FAA airspace limits for safety such as the 400ft rule. And maybe exceptions to the 400ft are granted by permit. Once Feds try to regulate what one can do with the drone, they have crossed the line. And for those who disagree with me... go fly a kite!

Local vs national is a fair consideration. I think what you are leaving out is the cost in time and money to have 50 states or 5000 communities trying to fumble their way through this type of relatively technical legislation. How many times do you need to reinvent the wheel? Or kite? On top of that efficiency consideration there is also the legitimate FAA concern that would trump all local laws if aircraft safety was infringed upon. Is the FAA supposed to review all 50 or 5000 local ordinances? While I admit that my personal bias is more in line with Hamilton than Jefferson on this matter generally, I do see both sides. The efficiency argument for a national approach (FAA) makes sense at least with regard to maximum height and distance from airports/air corridors etc. I would also point out that flying drones over interstate highways is likely to come under federal regulation as well. How many police helicopters are going to be hit by amateur drones "chasing OJ"?? How about flying over nukes or schools or stadiums or military installations? A consistent national policy just would be so much faster and more efficient to implement. Maybe a two tier approach would allow flexibility. Perhaps the feds set certain boundaries (eg 500 ft) and then leave it up to local ordinances whether flybys at tree top height are allowed in residential areas or not.

 

[4570Man]

Have you guys looked at Google earth lately? The image quality is pretty darn good, and the street view is even better. Most of you list your equipment in your profile anyway.