Drone injures Police Officer
- Thread starter Jack1266
- Start date
- Status
Then I'm baffled why you are surprised that he was charged with the offenses that you agree he committed.
Are you complaining that lying to the FBI got them into trouble, or the manner of the raid? That's generally a matter of trying to prevent destruction of evidence, not a reflection of the nature of the offense.
Silverglate sold a lot of books peddling that stupid assertion.
Personally I think that the assault charge was probably unnecessary, but I guess you disagree, in which case you can't really complain.
The difference is that the hearse driver was operating legally until he (presumably) made a driving error. The drone operator was breaking the law just being there - hence the reckless part.
[
But again, every state has its own rules.
It differs by state, but generally (including in my state and under the Model Penal Code) under some circumstances specific intent to cause harm is not required, just intent to do the thing that causes a person to have a fear of harm. In other words, the intent to fly a drone unlawfully might be all that’s required, not intent to actually harm someone. (Edit: actually, knowledge that it was illegal may not be required either, depending on jurisdiction. It should go without saying - nobody should rely on this for legal advice).
But again, every state has its own rules.
Last edited:
Remote Pilots Australia
Well-Known Member
From the FAA website Understanding Your Authority: Handling Sightings and Reports
Handling Complaints Involving UAS
When responding to complaints about drone or UAS operations or a situation involving a drone, there are several things to consider. Law enforcement officers should focus on the underlying activity in drone complaints – if you take the drone out of the incident you can apply already existing law to infractions committed (for example, reckless endangerment, voyeurism, or harassment)...
...Depending on the situation, it may involve a violation of FAA regulations and/or state/local laws. Violations can include operating an aircraft without registration or necessary airman certification, operating an aircraft in an unsafe manner so as to endanger persons or property, and can be either administrative or criminal.
Handling Complaints Involving UAS
When responding to complaints about drone or UAS operations or a situation involving a drone, there are several things to consider. Law enforcement officers should focus on the underlying activity in drone complaints – if you take the drone out of the incident you can apply already existing law to infractions committed (for example, reckless endangerment, voyeurism, or harassment)...
...Depending on the situation, it may involve a violation of FAA regulations and/or state/local laws. Violations can include operating an aircraft without registration or necessary airman certification, operating an aircraft in an unsafe manner so as to endanger persons or property, and can be either administrative or criminal.
It's the rather silly central thesis of a 2011 book by Harvey Silverglate, Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent.
Was reading this thread and getting agitated and felt like I had to respond to some of the comments. Then sar104 said everything I was thinking but more effectively!
Anyone ever notice the cops flying drones above crowds? It happens all the time! If their drones fall out of the sky or hit someone I would expect they would be charged with reckless endangerment as well! It seems that anything that happens to a cop is incredibly serious and life threatening but the same thing that happens to the public is no big deal when a cop is the offender!
I've never noticed LE drones directly over crowds, but if they do and if they crashed and caused injury, why do you think that would not be subject to the same laws? Has that happened? Or are you just indulging in whataboutery without even an event to point to?
It is well known the cops live under a different set of rules and everyone else. We had one not too long ago where one officer hit a car yet the cars insurance had to pay for it. In my state it is a requirement that all vehicles have a front and back license plate. But in our town the cops only have it on the back.
It doesn't matter what "is well known". Inventing stuff that hasn't actually happened to criticize an existing law still doesn't work.
In your state I'll bet it's illegal for private vehicles to use emergency flashing lights, and yet the cops use them. Shouldn't be allowed - would that be your position on that too?
dirkclod
Well-Known Member
Guys this is not going to turn into a LE bashing thread and it stops now.
I know this is a touchy subject to post in but if its going to be a bash LE post
I'm telling you it's best you don't post .
Something to say about the OP ok but thats it .
I know this is a touchy subject to post in but if its going to be a bash LE post
I'm telling you it's best you don't post .
Something to say about the OP ok but thats it .
dirkclod
Well-Known Member
OK guys one has decided to post after I said not to and really don't see where this can stay on topic and before I start with warnings it stops now .
- Status
Similar threads
