Auditors

[Daytona500]

I don't like the fact that the auditors have these confrontational encounters but on the other hand there not doing anything that against the law. I for one would like to go out and do some aerial photography of new construction sites were I'm completely legal to do so and not be bothered by anyone that doesn't like it. I think the auditors are trying to get that point across to both the general public and law enforcement. I mean really your doing nothing wrong and people come out and give you a hard time then call the cops and they come out and give you a hard time, when your doing nothing wrong.I just want to take my pictures and be left alone. I don't want to be confronted by anyone. If more law officers were educated to this they just wouldn't bother to show up when some uniformed person calls them. They would just tell them there not doing anything wrong and to not bother them.In fact if they do bother them they are interfering with an aircraft pilot and charges could be brought against them.

 

[Chip]

This contrived confrontation took place nearly ten years ago. What did it accomplish? What is informative? What legal conclusions were reached?

Maybe 10 years old but still timely and right on point. The auditor is operating on the assumption that he has every right to fly a drone at low altitude over private property because there is no such thing as "aerial trespass" and no can have a reasonable expectation of privacy if they are outdoors and can be seen from the air even when in their own fenced backyard. Do those assumptions sound familiar? They should because they are the same ones expressed by the FAA, law enforcement and many others all the time to this day. If you think it was Kool Aid 10 years ago when served by an "auditor" then have the times or your tastes changed?

 

[Torque]

I don't find anything educational about monetized confrontation videos. IMO they make drone pilots look like entitled brats and potentially make all drone pilots look bad. Purposely escalating a situation to "teach the general public about their rights" is simply foolish.

 

[MS Coast]

Maybe 10 years old but still timely and right on point. The auditor is operating on the assumption that he has every right to fly a drone at low altitude over private property because there is no such thing as "aerial trespass" and no can have a reasonable expectation of privacy if they are outdoors and can be seen from the air even when in their own fenced backyard. Do those assumptions sound familiar? They should because they are the same ones expressed by the FAA, law enforcement and many others all the time to this day. If you think it was Kool Aid 10 years ago when served by an "auditor" then have the times or your tastes changed?

I don't understand your point. You seem to be saying that the so-called auditor, the FAA, and law enforcement make the same assumptions.

I still don't see anything informative about that video. What was accomplished, other than puffing up that fellow's ego? Was there any valuable result? What was decided?

 

[Droning on and on...]

I don't like the fact that the auditors have these confrontational encounters but on the other hand there not doing anything that against the law. I for one would like to go out and do some aerial photography of new construction sites were I'm completely legal to do so and not be bothered by anyone that doesn't like it.

Of course, everyone else be damned, you should be able to do whatever you want so long as it's legal.

Most "rules" in a free society are not based in law. That's the nature of "free".

A person can do many things that are legal in Free America, and be a complete anti-social jerk of a person.

You didn't spend millions creating that interesting construction. Someone else did. It's not your property, project, etc. There may be aspects of the project they simply don't want memorialized, for their own valid, legitimate reasons that aren't any of your business.

And that's the point. You seem more than willing to violate their possible concerns for their property and their project. You give it no consideration. Perhaps they've had drones orbiting overhead before, causing a distraction and leading to an accident. You don't know.

It's ironic you don't want to be bothered by people that you seem to have no problem bothering.

 

[Droning on and on...]

I for one would like to go out and do some aerial photography of new construction sites were I'm completely legal to do so and not be bothered by anyone that doesn't like it. I think the auditors are trying to get that point across to both the general public and law enforcement. I mean really your doing nothing wrong

Yes you are, obviously, or no one would come out and confront you. You just don't respect their perspective - at all.

I guarantee you they do think you are doing something wrong. They don't care whether it's legal or not. And what you and your fellow travelers, auditors, fail to comprehend is anything people feel is "wrong" that is not illegal will likely become so, if enough people don't like it.

The fact is, we are an exceedingly tiny minority in the general public. Our non-commercial interests mean squat to the general public. We're no different than skateboarders, worse in some respects.

If you want to film a construction site, talk to whoever's in charge. Explain what want to do, cooperate, offer to share the footage. Film early, late, or on a day they're not working, if that's what they want.

Or abandon the idea entirely for that site if they don't want you to. The surest way to get a local ordinance that you can't takeoff and land within 10,000 feet of active construction is to play lawyer with potential adversaries rather than neighbor.

 

[Droning on and on...]

and no can have a reasonable expectation of privacy if they are outdoors and can be seen from the air even when in their own fenced backyard.

That's where you go off the rails.

I guarantee you the general non-drone-flying public sees this very, very differently and think their expectations of privacy w.r.t. recreational drone flights is exceedingly reasonable.

And that's how laws get made. Push it far enough, and it will be outlawed locally, whether the local city council has the jurisdiction or not. Charges will not be dropped just because you tell the D.A. the law is invalid because the city doesn't have authority over the airspace. You will have to sort that out on appeal.

Stop wrecking this hobby for the rest of us with your confrontational attitude, please.

 

[Daytona500]

Yes you are, obviously, or no one would come out and confront you. You just don't respect their perspective - at all.

I guarantee you they do think you are doing something wrong. They don't care whether it's legal or not. And what you and your fellow travelers, auditors, fail to comprehend is anything people feel is "wrong" that is not illegal will likely become so, if enough people don't like it.

The fact is, we are an exceedingly tiny minority in the general public. Our non-commercial interests mean squat to the general public. We're no different than skateboarders, worse in some respects.

If you want to film a construction site, talk to whoever's in charge. Explain what want to do, cooperate, offer to share the footage. Film early, late, or on a day they're not working, if that's what they want.

Or abandon the idea entirely for that site if they don't want you to. The surest way to get a local ordinance that you can't takeoff and land within 10,000 feet of active construction is to play lawyer with potential adversaries rather than neighbor.

[Edited by moderator] if you really think like that you will never fly your drone

 

[horsepowerphoto]

I loved the auditor in the UK who flew his drone around police training facility and when he was approached by a police officer, he thought he would shove the law into the cops face and try to flaunt he was legally flying there... Little did he know is that the cop was part of the drone unit, and knew all the laws, and busted him for not flying LOS.

 

[GFields]

Let's remain civil or I'll close this thread. Thanks for your cooperation.

 

[mavic3usa]

Is that not a comment in itself?

I think I am being fair by not directly offering my thoughts or opinions on the topic because I consider myself an "activist" (not an auditor, not an advocate) and I understand many will disagree with me even when I keep it totally legal and civil. Instead I can only offer real life examples that are recent and again, I don't have an opinion on this video one way or the other besides letting you know this is not me and these are not my videos and I consider it somewhat relevant to the conversation; some may find it interesting:

 

[MS Coast]

I think I am being fair by not directly offering my thoughts or opinions on the topic because I consider myself an "activist" (not an auditor, not an advocate) and I understand many will disagree with me even when I keep it totally legal and civil. Instead I can only offer real life examples that are recent and again, I don't have an opinion on this video one way or the other besides letting you know this is not me and these are not my videos and I consider it somewhat relevant to the conversation; some may find it interesting:

Considering the lukewarm endorsement and the revealing title involving a "clueless cop," there's no way I'm going to spend 35-minutes watching this, not even on a rainy and extremely windy day when flying is out of the question.

 

[Torque]

Considering the lukewarm endorsement and the revealing title involving a "clueless cop," there's no way I'm going to spend 35-minutes watching this, not even on a rainy and extremely windy day when flying is out of the question.

LOL, I'm actually halfway through this video at this very moment, and just opened the forum list to see if it had been posted yet...
Not an "Auditor" video per se, just more obnoxious confrontational drone pilots recording themselves.

In a nutshell: Drone pilot was an immediate arse to the cop (based on a previous interaction supposedly), cop was an arse back. The result was the RPIC spending 18 hours in a cell, charged with a felony, drone confiscated, attorney hired. The lesson here: If you behave badly towards a person who has the power, or believes they have the power to retaliate for bad behavior directed at them, human nature says that they will retaliate for that behavior. That is all this long video proves to me. I don't know, I have to certify in annual de-escalation classes for work, so maybe I have quite a different perspective on these personality types.

 

[MS Coast]

LOL, I'm actually halfway through this video at this very moment, and just opened the forum list to see if it had been posted yet...
Not an "Auditor" video per se, just more obnoxious confrontational drone pilots recording themselves.

In a nutshell: Drone pilot was an immediate arse to the cop (based on a previous interaction supposedly), cop was an arse back. The result was the RPIC spending 18 hours in a cell, charged with a felony, drone confiscated, attorney hired. The lesson here: If you behave badly towards a person who has the power, or believes they have the power to retaliate for bad behavior directed at them, human nature says that they will retaliate for that behavior. That is all this long video proves to me. I don't know, I have to certify in annual de-escalation classes for work, so maybe I have quite a different perspective on these personality types.

I did a quick search to see if there was anything posted about the ultimate resolution of the case, but didn't find much. One news story about the arrest said that the drone was being hovered low over a electric power substation. Not smart, for several reasons.

I'll be curious about what you find in the second half.

 

[Torque]

I did a quick search to see if there was anything posted about the ultimate resolution of the case, but didn't find much. One news story about the arrest said that the drone was being hovered low over a electric power substation. Not smart, for several reasons.

I'll be curious about what you find in the second half.

The Pilot told the officer he would fly "within 5 feet of the power lines if he wanted, it isn't illegal" or something along those lines. Totally confrontational attitude and that never ends well.

 

[Droning on and on...]

your a total idiot if you really think like that you will never fly your drone

I fly all the time. Even over construction, a few times In the last decade.

With permission, which is almost always easy to get.

And no one comes over and confronts me

 

[Chip]

Stop wrecking this hobby for the rest of us with your confrontational attitude, please.

Rewind the tape. You and others referred to "auditors" as despicable human beings who create and post nothing educational, informative or of any value to anyone. I agree with you that the personalities and tactics of so-called auditors may be offensive but I would not throw out everything they post as garbage. In my opinion, if you intend to continue flying drones as a hobbyist in the USA, it behooves you to study very carefully the laws and regulations and think about how you will handle public and police interactions should they occur.

The challenge was made here to post an example of one video by an auditor that was educational and informative. I accepted the challenge and explained why I thought that one video fit the bill. The auditor and the police discuss two critical issues:

1. can drones commit aerial trespass if they fly over private property lines?
2. does a person have any reasonable expectation of privacy when they are in their private, fenced backyard but visible to a drone flying overhead?

In my opinion, the parties do an excellent job presenting their arguments. Yes, the auditor is a wiseacre and disrespectful but he is making the very same arguments made by the FAA, law enforcement and many others to this day. The video is unique in that the typical roles are reversed and law enforcement is arguing we have a reasonable expectation of privacy in our fenced backyard and if you fly your drone over our property line then you are trespassing.

BTW I am sorry you feel I have wrecked drone flying in the United States. Hopefully it will come back.

 

[Chip]

That's where you go off the rails.

Do some research on aerial trespass and invasion of privacy. I am right on the rails.

 

[Chip]

I don't understand your point. You seem to be saying that the so-called auditor, the FAA, and law enforcement make the same assumptions.

I still don't see anything informative about that video. What was accomplished, other than puffing up that fellow's ego? Was there any valuable result? What was decided?

I did not anticipate such pushback on the video! Like I said before, I think it showcases two people sparring over aerial trespass and reasonable expectation of privacy when drone flies over fenced backyard. The police do excellent job explaining why they will trespass the auditor if he does it again.

 

[Daytona500]

I fly all the time. Even over construction, a few times In the last decade.

With permission, which is almost always easy to get.

And no one comes over and confronts me

you do this and you get on my case because I said I wanted to do it hypocrite much