Drone injures Police Officer
- Thread starter Jack1266
- Start date
- Status
Hearse Runs Over NYPD Cop's Leg During Huge Rabbi Funeral in Brooklyn; Another Cop Hit on Head by Drone
A police officer was seriously injured after being run over by the hearse during a well-known rabbi’s funeral in Borough Park, Brooklyn.
www.nbcnewyork.com
Accidents happen NYPD took it on the chin. No big deal
Make a mountain out of a molehill - Wikipedia
Last edited:
This isn't going to be pretty for any of us in this industry. Many people have been waiting (ok honestly they've been hoping) for something like this to happen to say "Told you so".
Hopefully we don't see too many knee jerk regulations because of this "stunt". I'd much rather see ENFORCEMENT take place over additional regs.
Hopefully we don't see too many knee jerk regulations because of this "stunt". I'd much rather see ENFORCEMENT take place over additional regs.
AMann
Well-Known Member
Assault? As dumb as the pilot may have been flying above people, I doubt the intent was to hit anyone with it.
Well all that’s pretty minor, a kid lost an eye to being hit in the face by one in England, and a kid lost his life after being slashed in the throat trying to catch his falling RC helo here In the states.
Gotta be careful with these toys!
Well all that’s pretty minor, a kid lost an eye to being hit in the face by one in England, and a kid lost his life after being slashed in the throat trying to catch his falling RC helo here In the states.
Gotta be careful with these toys!
I came across that story in Drudge. Over at CBS news, the said:
Now, I have to ask, who here thinks that "injuries not considered serious" warrant an arrest for reckless endangerment, assault, and violation of law for flying a drone in a restricted area?
I get it that the guy shouldn't have flown his drone, but this is a classic case of over-reacting and trying to make an example out of some schmuck who made a bad decision. If all bad decisions were treated with this kind of overkill, we'd all be locked up.
Now, I have to ask, who here thinks that "injuries not considered serious" warrant an arrest for reckless endangerment, assault, and violation of law for flying a drone in a restricted area?
I get it that the guy shouldn't have flown his drone, but this is a classic case of over-reacting and trying to make an example out of some schmuck who made a bad decision. If all bad decisions were treated with this kind of overkill, we'd all be locked up.
I’m sure he’ll end up pleading and paying a fine but it’s too bad he won’t take it to trial. Any half-asleep public defender could beat overreaching charges like that not to mention a charge of violating a law that local and state governments have no jurisdiction over.
Records of court proceedings are public and usually found online. Somebody should find the link so we can follow this
Records of court proceedings are public and usually found online. Somebody should find the link so we can follow this
Probably the news crew. I noticed they only had their first shot from a drone after that he was from the ground!
First off, let me wish both officers involved a speedy recovery.
Focusing on the drone incident:
This is an event of many layers. The funeral appears to be orthodox, and very crowded with like minded attendees.
This doesn't appear to be an event a casual observer would attend. While drones can fly a good distance to get this footage, I wonder if that was the case, or if one of the attendees launched the drone from the outskirts of the event.
If the latter, then we have a devout follower breaking the law, then landing on the law while upholding the law of their devotion; presumably
Is the fact that the drone fell from the sky a sign of any sort?
Don't hate. It was just an observation.
Focusing on the drone incident:
This is an event of many layers. The funeral appears to be orthodox, and very crowded with like minded attendees.
This doesn't appear to be an event a casual observer would attend. While drones can fly a good distance to get this footage, I wonder if that was the case, or if one of the attendees launched the drone from the outskirts of the event.
If the latter, then we have a devout follower breaking the law, then landing on the law while upholding the law of their devotion; presumably
Is the fact that the drone fell from the sky a sign of any sort?
Don't hate. It was just an observation.
- Joined
- May 27, 2017
- Messages
- 14,458
- Reactions
- 19,469
- Location
- Los Alamos, NM
- Site
- www.mavicpilots.com
Probably because reckless endangerment and assault do not require serious injury to result. To illustrate, if you shoot at someone and miss - is that "no harm, no foul" in your book?
Absolutely! That the law was written for a reason - to keep people from flying over crowds because this can happen.
I sincerely hope they throw the book and the table and the lamp at him. How SERIOUS of an incident do we need to happen in order to get some enforcement?
AMann
Well-Known Member
Well...
Toddler's eye sliced in half by drone - BBC News
An 18-month-old boy loses an eye after it is sliced in half by the propeller of a drone flown by a family friend.
www.google.com
True that.Well...
Toddler's eye sliced in half by drone - BBC News
An 18-month-old boy loses an eye after it is sliced in half by the propeller of a drone flown by a family friend.
I'm not saying there shouldn't be ANY penalty, but I also think equating a falling drone to a ballistic projectile fired at someone with the intent to injure or kill them is a bit disingenuous.
The drone 'might' fall. And, yes, a large drone hitting a person in the right spot 'could' cause a serious injury. But a bullet hitting someone in any spot will cause a critical injury. Firing at someone (whether they miss or not) isn't an accident - it's deliberate and, depending on the scenario, either justified or attempted murder. I'm going to go out on limb here, and assume that Yehiel Rosenfeld had no intention of crashing his drone - especially into a cop!
In that same article, it states that "One officer was struck and injured by the hearse." It would be interesting to see if that hearse driver was arrested, and is facing similar assault and reckless endangerment charges. I'm guessing both incidents were accidental.
I wonder if this had been a police drone that fell and hit a normal civilian, whether they would have arrested the government official flying it...
- Joined
- May 27, 2017
- Messages
- 14,458
- Reactions
- 19,469
- Location
- Los Alamos, NM
- Site
- www.mavicpilots.com
Yes - but you completely misunderstood the point of my analogy. I was not equating them - I was illustrating a difference by logical extrapolation - that the outcome of a reckless act or assault does not change the fact of the act. You appeared to be arguing that since the injuries were not serious, it could not be reckless endangerment. But reckless endangerment doesn't require any injuries at all - it simply requires a reckless action that creates a risk of serious injury.
Remote Pilots Australia
Well-Known Member
Whether it "warrants" arrest I have no idea, it's all in the context of the incident isn't it? I wasn't there so I'll leave it to the investigating authorities to decide that.
Reckless endangerment and violation of aviation laws are probably relevant charges for the authorities to be considering, assault not so much so in my eyes. The operator may have been stupid but I doubt his actions were malicious.
I'm going to assume this guy was a commercial operator to be flying in the middle of NY over a public event.
I'm a commercial operator, I'm pretty sure it'll be true in the U.S. as it is here that we're held to a pretty high standard and probably rightly so. For someone to "Run out of Gas (battery?)" while flying over a crowd ... that's a pretty basic mistake you know. We're supposed to have pre flight checklists and procedures to make that sort of thing impossible, for it to happen indicates a pretty gross breach of the duty of care by the operator. You might be more forgiving of a recreational pilot running out of power as they are not trained to that standard, but they wouldn't be flying over a huge crowd either or so you'd hope. I wonder what would happen to a manned aviation pilot who went out for a days flying with half a days fuel? I'm sorry but it goes beyond what did happen and has to take in what might have happened because commercial operators are the vanguard of the field, we're held to higher account (rightly) because we are allowed more scope and when we, supposedly the trained professionals, screw the pooch it has considerable flow on effect to you guys, the recreational flyers and destroys what little confidence the public have in us as a whole.
Regards
Ari
If you guys only knew the real story.
Its surprising the story even broke.
Cop hit by a slow moving hearse they say?
3MPH and Yo,U don't see the Officer standing there stopping traffic.
Rank & File got disrespected and the PIC almost got off Scott free!
Its surprising the story even broke.
Cop hit by a slow moving hearse they say?
3MPH and Yo,U don't see the Officer standing there stopping traffic.
Rank & File got disrespected and the PIC almost got off Scott free!
No, quite the contrary. I do realize that what he did IS reckless endangerment and assault. My point is, should he have bee an arrested and charged so excessively? To me, it appears as selective over-prosecution.
Just like how some people have SWAT teams raid their homes at 5AM for lying to congress/FBI, and others do exactly the same thing (LIVE on CSPAN) and it's no big deal.
The average American commits 3 felonies by dinner time every day. That doesn't mean he absolutely shouldn't be fined/charged. But I think some discretion and restraint needs to be applied to what (at least from the outside) appears to be an accident. If the guy aimed for the cop, I'd be in full support... But this simply looks like anti-drone vitriol that only reinforces the "all drones are evil" narrative.
Again, I'm sure the hearse driver violated the law when he ran over the other cop. Whether the guy gets cited/fined for a traffic infraction, or whether the DA decides to go for something more serious is discretionary. The idea that because it was a drone it requires a litany of charges that wouldn't apply to other similar 'accidents' is my point.
- Status
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
1. Mini 2
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
New Threads
-
-
Air 3 Loch Kinardochy - Spring Highland Sunshine- Started by AlbionDrones
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Forum statistics
