Recent content by Chip

Its an interesting question whether the FAA would initiate or participate in any challenge to the LA law. The FAA would likely have automatic standing to challenge the law in federal court on grounds of preemption. They have done it many times before and often won. One time they lost big though...

One complication has always been that intercepting a drone signal may violate federal electronic eavesdropping law. Another one is that intentionally jamming the signal to or from a drone would almost certainly violate federal law as well. This is why it is necessary to pass new legislation at...

I don't know. They should. You did good job getting one on campus in your state. However, I am not sure how that relates to LA law. During the New Jersey Drone Debacle of 2024, the Fed's (DHS, FBI, FAA) made it clear that state and local authorities should obtain the training, equipment, and...

In the case of people hit by debris, or debris causing fire, I would say that would be handled in accordance with every state's own tort or negligence liability laws which may vary. No different than any situation where the police respond to a suspected crime in progress which somehow causes...

Okay. Such a person might have sufficient actual damage to have standing. So then let us say a $4000 drone was disabled by a state law enforcement officer for an allegedly illegal or reckless flight. Who has the time or resources to sue the state of Louisiana in federal court for allegedly...

Exactly. Who would challenge the law, on what legal grounds, and why would they do that? Who would get up and argue the federal government has the sole legal authority to disable a drone believed to be a threat by state and local law enforcement?

NJ State legislator Dawn Fantasia posted this to her X account after attending drone meeting at NJ State Police HQ attended by DHS on December 11, 2024.

I am not surprised given the New Jersey Drone debacle of 2024. State and local authorities learned they were on their own. The Feds have no problem with this kind of law. They did an excellent job proving the need for it.

The sensor.

I would assume the proper course is for the FAA to investigate and conclude whether the helicopter was flown recklessly. I personally think it was for sure. The one guy who was interviewed said that helos may be used to disperse crowds, that its now an approved practice. I have a hard time...

This is funny I am going to adjust the years slightly and use this one. But this is also the entertaining and informative part of being on the forum! If we all thought and felt the same or knew what everyone was going to say, it would get boring real quick. Happy Sunday everyone from the proud...

Well done! Drone Open Carry good grief I hope it does not come to that.

What do think of people who kill a lion or a bear? Go ahead tell us. Would you want to kill them or something? What are you really saying, that because you know that any form of hunting is immoral you have the right to intentionally disturb a hunter with a drone?

This is a privately owned internet forum with rules. This is not a true public square with open mike.

You are expressing a very strong view about a legal activity. People can feel very passionately and can get carried away which is why there are hunter harassment laws in USA.