Are stricter drone laws on the way?

[Frank Dracman]

Well, that's been said throughout recorded human history, and probably earlier, too. The other perennial pronouncement is "Our music was much better than this stuff they listen to today."

So you think this is like any other generation?

 

[MS Coast]

So you think this is like any other generation?

No, I didn't say that all generations and all times are the same. That's certainly not been the case in my experience or in what history I've read.

It does seem that as every generation ages, they become convinced that younger generations are woefully deficient in some ways and that their music is "noise," as happened with jazz, rock and roll, the Beatles, disco, and rap. It's a sign of my age that I know for a fact that disco and rap represent a serious decline.

I'm also noting that some folks perennially suggest that "times have changed" so much that unusual actions are required. It's most often associated with some form of fear and leads to responses like hoarding, isolation, abandoning social norms, weaponry purchases, speculation of dangers, and mistrust of others. I've seen significant outbreaks associated with the launch of Sputnik, school integration, Y2K, the election of a Black president, and the Covid-19 pandemic. (Oddly, two of the three involved toilet paper panic buying and hoarding.)

But, it's often that case that, as Jimmy Buffett wrote, "Things are better off than I had feared." And I don't think we're on the edge of a gaping abyss of draconian governmental attacks on the drone-flying community.

 

[Droning on and on...]

I whole-heartedly agree about those 'auditors', I think they do us no favours.

I also think the CAA etc. should go after the "I flew to x miles, watch my video" youtubers and make public, well publicised examples of a few of them, that at least might deter the publication of such videos.

Why? What harm to individuals or society has occurred that justifies these restrictions and punishing those that break these rules?

These restrictions were originally created in a belief that BVLOS flights are dangerous. Ten years of actual flight experience has demonstrated the risk is vanishingly small.

The rule should be changed, not punish people for violating it. Exactly this is in process in the US.

 

[Droning on and on...]

In the U.S. these new rules are only the start of things to come. I think Recreational Drone pilots here will soon be restricted to where they can fly by weight. Those not holding a part 107 will be told to fly their "Big" stuff at the field.
Part 107 pilots face more paperwork down the road I fear.
Will They ban our hobby? NO, BUT they will make it more difficult for you to enjoy. That seems to be the thing in ALL things RC!

I'm far more optimistic than many of you guys here on the forum. Maybe it's because of the areas I routinely fly in.

I don't see the general rules changing much. Nor do expect restricted areas to expand much relative to the current US map. I expect most US territory to be flyable by recreational pilots just as it is today, perhaps with even greater freedom, flying BVLOS for instance, and the VO requirement when using goggles relaxed.

The key here is where, not what. Urban areas will get tighter. Perhaps so much so that doing this as a hobby becomes impractical. FRIAs and all that nonsense.

Out in the central valley of CA, the coast, foothills, forested mountains, nothing's gonna change. I think it's likely it'll get a little less restricted.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Aren't most laws created because of the transgressions of a few ?

I don't know. I can think of countless examples on both sides of the issue.

Law made because of transgressions: Probation of theft.

Law (US) made to maintain aircraft separation: 400ft AGL ceiling for sUAV.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Are you asking the government to actively go after drone pilots who fly their drone beyond visual line of sight so what will happen:

1. They pop some innocent drone flyer who had no ill-intent and they threaten him with heavy 5-digit fines and drag him into federal court knowing he will ultimately take the plea bargain that you will offer him which is a $150 fine and 1 year of probation (no drone flying) and you confiscate his $300 used drone. Or,

2. The targeted flyer finally decides they have had enough and refused to give up his freedoms and says let's go to trial where the government will be forced to drop the charges and go after easier victims or come to court and explain not only why this is the law but also these are the reasons for it (which they may not have to do that to win but...). They can bring all their safety records documenting the numbers of fatalities and injuries and property damage from flying beyond visual line of sight and they can show where this particular incident (the pilot flew his drone over the open lake for 2.2 miles when no boats were on the water) and try to convince the judge how bad that was and why he was arrested. And finally the government can show where the law has been in place for years and they have "no plans" to change that law even when the technology improves and the conditions on the ground and in the air evolve. In other words, we're not going to "harass" a bunch of flyers one year and then the next year make it all legal with a "never mind" we were wrong.

Lot of sarcasm in #2 but I suspect it's #1 because the government has no intention of testing this in court and run any risks but instead they will use flying beyond visual line of sight as one of your many violations where they heap on half a dozen other violations to create on big violation that you can't possibly challenge them with (for fear of losing) and they get to keep all of their rules and regulations intact including the regulation called "no flying beyond visual line of sight." Meanwhile, the *few* criminal flyers who fly their no remote ID drones beyond line of sight while they put the public in danger by flying over busy highways and large crowds, deliver contraband, fly at night in restricted airspace blacked out so no one can see them....they continue to operate undetected and when confronted they run and evade and abandon their unregistered property and what's left is the law behind "heavily enforced and cracked down" only on the honest, law-abiding (recreational) flyers who have no ill-will, didn't know or forgot it wasn't legal, unintentionally lost sight, or stupidity tried it once or twice and got caught.

Is this what you are asking for?

You forgot #3: The government will ignore it if no risk to people or property occurred.

They do not have enough resources to pursue everyone that IS violating the law in legitimately harmful ways. They're not foolish enough to spend any significant resources on completely harmless activity.

 

[Droning on and on...]

I'm glad you brought this up. Absolutely stricter laws are on the way. And in the US, they will come from other places like state and local governments where they can be *properly* enforced. Many of the laws will forgo intent and most of them will be trigger regardless if there are any *victims* or not. The penalties and punishment will be *disproportional* often involving arrest, heavy fines, and confiscation even on the first offense. Depending on the offense, you will probably end up on some sort of offenders list. Also when flying a drone, you will defacto lose many of your Constitutional rights. And finally, as public sentiment continues to grow against drones due to the perceived actions of the few, enforcement will increase in locations across the country such as rural and small towns never before seen. At that point, it's going to take a social media "audit" style drone movement to save whatever is left of the recreational hobby. Those are my predictions. /s /s /s

You've been predicting this for years. So far...

So when?

 

[Droning on and on...]

Even worse, in the US, there is already a federal agency in place with the power to severely curtail or limit drone use without the due process of law, and that's the FAA. They could issue an edict tomorrow stating all drones were grounded and short of a lengthy and costly law suit, owners would be screwed.

There is hope.

The overturning of the Chevron Doctrine by the SCOTUS will make this harder. It already has resulted in some agencies regulation being overturned in court challenges.

Also, remember that FAA rules generally are passed by Congress before taking effect. Every few years there's an Aviation bill of some sort where new FAA regs are passed legislatively.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Well, that's been said throughout recorded human history, and probably earlier, too. The other perennial pronouncement is "Our music was much better than this stuff they listen to today.

"Take me back to when politicians were truthful an incorruptible"

 

[mavic3usa]

You've been predicting this for years. So far...

So when?

Here's an example: Bradenton Beach Drone, FL - Please Proofread My Letter To City Council

It's happening now. But you don't want to believe it. Go ahead and make up an excuse and call it "something else" and tell me I'm wrong. You can label this example however you wish but "this" is exactly what I am referring to.

And then you can say oh but this is just one or two out of millions that don't; did you tell that to the OP there are millions of other places to fly besides his own beach? Drive out to the countryside in the middle of nowhere and fly your drone on weekends?

Here's what I think is really happening: These laws are creeping in right under your nose and you can't see them. And you say that as more and more recreational flyers are boxed out and new signs pop up all over and the people who erect this crap hope we don't notice and they also hope the few that are allowed to fly freely (yeah, that's me...and apparently you) won't say anything about it and in fact, will try to muzzle those who do. But I won't do that.

Recreational drones flyers are not yet everywhere. When they are....so will come the laws. Perhaps it's slower because drone adoption (from the recreational flying standpoint) is not a prevalent in so many places. Either way, the FAA has left a vacuum and it's gonna be filled, not by laws welcoming drone flyers and giving them protections against law enforcement and karens, but by strict rules designed to enforce laws that don't exist and zero tolerance to deter anyone want to challenge it. There are no drone signs posted in place where not even a signal drone has ever flown (yet). That should tell you something.

look here

 

[MS Coast]

Here's an example: Bradenton Beach Drone, FL - Please Proofread My Letter To City Council

It's happening now. But you don't want to believe it. Go ahead and make up an excuse and call it "something else" and tell me I'm wrong. You can label this example however you wish but "this" is exactly what I am referring to.

And then you can say oh but this is just one or two out of millions that don't; did you tell that to the OP there are millions of other places to fly besides his own beach? Drive out to the countryside in the middle of nowhere and fly your drone on weekends?

Here's what I think is really happening: These laws are creeping in right under your nose and you can't see them. And you say that as more and more recreational flyers are boxed out and new signs pop up all over and the people who erect this crap hope we don't notice and they also hope the few that are allowed to fly freely (yeah, that's me...and apparently you) won't say anything about it and in fact, will try to muzzle those who do. But I won't do that.

Recreational drones flyers are not yet everywhere. When they are....so will come the laws. Perhaps it's slower because drone adoption (from the recreational flying standpoint) is not a prevalent in so many places. Either way, the FAA has left a vacuum and it's gonna be filled, not by laws welcoming drone flyers and giving them protections against law enforcement and karens, but by strict rules designed to enforce laws that don't exist and zero tolerance to deter anyone want to challenge it. There are no drone signs posted in place where not even a signal drone has ever flown (yet). That should tell you something.

look here

Here's a screen clip from that mystery link. Wow! I had no idea there were so many no-drones graphic image files on the Internet. The sheer number of them proves that the FAA storm troopers and the 249th Karenic Kombat Korps are on their way to enforce those strict nonexistent laws. Quick. Let's sell our drones before flying one becomes a zero tolerance capital offense.

p.s. Here's proof of the existence of the Loch Ness monster.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Here's an example: Bradenton Beach Drone, FL - Please Proofread My Letter To City Council

It's happening now. But you don't want to believe it. Go ahead and make up an excuse and call it "something else" and tell me I'm wrong. You can label this example however you wish but "this" is exactly what I am referring to.

This is really obnoxious. I don't ever tell you what you think, want, believe, or feel. That's because I'm not in your head, and I respect others, ALL other people regardless of other character traits, not to tell them what they think when debating something.

Carry on with others in this thread. I'm not willing to sift through the noise in your replies to get to the hidden nuggets of actual information.

 

[mavic3usa]

This is really obnoxious. I don't ever tell you what you think, want, believe, or feel. That's because I'm not in your head, and I respect others, ALL other people regardless of other character traits, not to tell them what they think when debating something.

Carry on with others in this thread. I'm not willing to sift through the noise in your replies to get to the hidden nuggets of actual information.

You don't think it's obvious the question whether there are an increasing amount of drone laws going into place when the biggest drone ban probably of our lives is on the verge of being adopted? The drone industry is currently being impacted in ways like never before and is at a cross-roads that could easily determine the fate of recreational drone flying in this country and you're asking me so when are my "predictions" going to come true?

 

[mavic3usa]

Drone news out of Springdale, Arkansas (not my location); read the interesting comments likely from the citizens and the residents opinions: Springdale Police Department

 

[mavic3usa]

He said please don't throw the guy in the slammer, we just want the cool footage.

Canada: Rock band wants footage from illegal drone at concert

Canadian rock band Arkells has found themselves intrigued by an unauthorized drone that filmed their set at a concert this weekend.

dronedj.com

 

[mavic3usa]

Waiting for the outrage to ensue, blaming companies for any new upcoming drone laws due to their actions. Or do we still believe teenagers flying their drones over the post office looking into mail trucks is what drives drone legislation at the state and local level? Remember "this is why we can't have good things" or "This is going to lead to new laws and further bans." Are we willing to share the blame with companies and the commercial sector or is it still all about kids flying their toy drones up and down the boardwalk and over the police station.

However this case turns out, you can expect additional drone legislation in teh state of AR: Unauthorized Drone Surveillance Leads To Legal Battle In Arkansas

 

[Droning on and on...]

However this case turns out, you can expect additional drone legislation in teh state of AR: Unauthorized Drone Surveillance Leads To Legal Battle In Arkansas

Hardly. Arkansas law necessary to deal with situation already exists... There is no need for additional legislation. From the article:

...it was a potential violation of Arkansas law, which considers using drones for surveillance or gathering info about critical infrastructure without prior written consent unlawful.

The article goes on further to state,

This case highlights the growing tensions between Drone Technology and privacy concerns.

No it doesn't. This example shows only that if you use a drone for surveillance of critical infrastructure in AR without permission, you can get in trouble. It implies nothing about the general public issue of "privacy".

"Surveil" a new housing subdivision under construction and I'll bet there would be no problem.

 

[dave canada]

but of course been watchin it coming for ten years now and population must be contained

 

[Slawaw]

I have a simple question. Why don't they ban cameras? DJI drones are just cameras with propellers. In war, they are used only for observation and online artillery adjustment. We used to use Mavic 3 to drop grenades - it's very ineffective. Although spectacular.

If I decide to destroy a competitor after the end of hostilities, then the DJI drone will be the last choice

Lawmakers naturally want to ban everything. I assume that FPV-drones and DJI drones heavier than 250 grams will be banned. For flights up to 120 meters in height and range, small and light drones that are not capable of flying in strong winds and carrying dangerous cargo will be enough.

The purchase and use of commercial drones will be very tightly controlled. The purchase and production of flight controllers, motors for FPV will be prohibited.