FAA Targets UAS Violators for Enforcement... Headline Flying Magazine

[SKentBrown]

Even first time offenders won’t get a break.

Flying Magazine - UAS Crackdown

This is specific to interfering with emergency situations such as wild fires, law enforcement efforts or other first responders.

Follow the rules and be careful where you fly or a fun day could cost you up to $20,000 USD

 

[ac0j]

This is good news. This should sort the idiots from the heard quickly.

 

[Mavic-Markie93]

I support this authorization if it's an obvious case of some idiot flying in an area where a helicopter is trying to land.

But I'm also afraid this kind of authorization will be abused --- such as someone flying a drone over a routine traffic stop and the cops gets ticked off because they are being filmed from the air. The law says civilians can take video of cops in public but the cops also have the right to make people stand a certain distance away from a scene and this includes drones.

So if a cop arrests you for flying over them --- all they have to say is "you were interfering with official law enforcement activity"

 

[tcope]

But I'm also afraid this kind of authorization will be abused --- such as someone flying a drone over a routine traffic stop and the cops gets ticked off because they are being filmed from the air. The law says civilians can take video of cops in public but the cops also have the right to make people stand a certain distance away from a scene and this includes drones.

So if a cop arrests you for flying over them --- all they have to say is "you were interfering with official law enforcement activity"

I'm not sure you read the article. The case is refered to the FAA as only they have authority under the law being discussed. So there is no reason to think the police would 1) issue a citation or 2) issue a citation for an unrelated matter.

What you mention is a completely separate matter/law.

 

[Mavic-Markie93]

I'm not sure you read the article. The case is refered to the FAA as only they have authority under the law being discussed. So there is no reason to think the police would 1) issue a citation or 2) issue a citation for an unrelated matter.

Of course I read the article. The point I'm making is that the cops and FAA have broad interpretation of what "interfering with law enforcement" means when it comes to drones and some of those cases are going to be construed as "abuse of authority".

For example, take the recent PA State Police helicopter incident at Penn State. An official law enforcement action resulted in a helicopter flying very low over a crowd of people. Now what if someone was flying their drone in an adjacent parking lot that was 200 feet away? Would the state troopers and FAA consider that drone "reckless interfering with law enforcement"?

Many of these incidents come down to a judgment call --- and that's where drone hobbyists and cops have disagreements.

 

[tcope]

The point I'm making is that the cops and FAA have broad interpretation of what "interfering with law enforcement" means when it comes to drones and some of those cases are going to be construed as "abuse of authority".

Keep in mind... nothing is different. Nothing has changed. What this post is about is the FAA pointing out that no one will get a free pass on this infraction.

For example, take the recent PA State Police helicopter incident at Penn State. An official law enforcement action resulted in a helicopter flying very low over a crowd of people. Now what if someone was flying their drone in an adjacent parking lot that was 200 feet away? Would the state troopers and FAA consider that drone "reckless interfering with law enforcement"?

As mentioned above, it is and always has been up to the FAA. Nothing has changed (good example as we could even go back to the Pickney (sp?) case with this one)

Many of these incidents come down to a judgment call --- and that's where drone hobbyists and cops have disagreements.

The police only refer (which they are actually required to do anyway). It is still 100% up to the FAA.

 

[Mavic-Markie93]

Keep in mind... nothing is different.

Of course it's different --- instead of a warning or classes for first-time offenders --- FAA is now revoking certificates and issuing $20K fines

 

[tcope]

Of course it's different --- instead of a warning or classes for first-time offenders --- FAA is now revoking certificates and issuing $20K fines

That "change" is not what you were talking about.

Also, the article only pointed out that those were the _maximum_ penalties, not that they were automatically being assigned in every case. Those were always the maximums and still are the maximums.

 

[DroningOn]

Local and state law enforcement and courts do not and CANNOT enforce let alone prosecute violations of FEDERAL law. If my local Barney Fife wants to detain, investigate or cite/arrest me for a violation of a law or regulation it had better be one they have jurisdiction under.

 

[tcope]

Local and state law enforcement and courts do not and CANNOT enforce let alone prosecute violations of FEDERAL law. If my local Barney Fife wants to detain, investigate or cite/arrest me for a violation of a law or regulation it had better be one they have jurisdiction under.

(I'm not sure many people are reading the article)

As mentioned in the article, the police take down the information and refer it to the FAA for review and possible action.

 

[DroningOn]

(I'm not sure many people are reading the article)

As mentioned in the article, the police take down the information and refer it to the FAA for review and possible action.

That’s why you don’t talk to LE in these situations. The right to remain silent only works if you use it!

 

[tcope]

That’s why you don’t talk to LE in these situations. The right to remain silent only works if you use it!

Watched a great YouTube video on this subject a few years ago. One thing mentioned was Miranda Rights.... what you say can and _will_ be used _against_ you. Meaning that they will _only_ use it against you. Several examples were given about how the person's own info can be used to open up doors which otherwise would have never existed. The difficult "art" is declining to answer question and still being 100% respectful.