I was arrested for flying a drone *updated with video*

[Asgard]

can't quite believe I just read a full sized aircraft pilot whining about not being able to fly inside protected airspace.

It's highly unlikely anything about him is full size

 

[neggy]

OP has done me quite a service. My wife gave me a Mavic Air and a ton of extra equipment for Christmas. Been spending a good bit of time getting the Part 107 license, getting it all set up, starting up the iPad mini she bought me. However, I live within 5 miles of a Class B Airport, so no can fly at home. Can't fly at night, can't fly above 400 AGL, can't fly in a TFR, can't fly beyond line of sight. Have a cabin but it's within 5 miles of a private airstrip so operating by the letter I would have inform the operator of the strip before I fly. If I break these rules I risk a suspension of my actual pilots license which would mean I don't work. The juvenile, unprofessional approach of some (not all) on here helps me understand that this is not for me. Hope she can get most of her money back.

There is so much wrong with your comment I wonder how you got your ATP with so little knowledge of the FAR's

Part 107 CAN fly in class B, and it is pretty easy now that there is an almost instantaneous waiver process.

I have flown within 2 miles of KBOS with A320's 1200' above me with a waiver.

Part 107 can fly within 5 miles of an airport with NO NOTIFICATION requirement
My winter home is 2.2SM from 94FL, I have never called them.
My home in NH is surrounded by private helipads, hospital LZ's , I have a private grass strip 2 miles away.
I have never had to notify because I am part 107


Part 107 can fly at night, you need a 107.29 waiver AND as a Pilot you should already know about having green, red and white lights visible from 3 SM, which the Mavic lighing does not comply to so add on lighting is required.

Would you fly under the VFR minimums without filing for IFR or SVFR?

VLOS is no different than VFR IMHO

If you can't see your aircraft in the sky, how would you know where you were in relation to other aircraft?
Do you fly the Scare Bus without scanning the sky?

Whoop dee doooo, as an ATP you had to take half the test the non pilots did.

I am Part 61 and 107, I don't whine about the rules, but it seems I have a better understanding of them than you.


Please tell me you are not flying for JBU or NK, because I am on their A320's on a regular basis and I hope their Captains and FO's know the FAR's better than you


And as for the "good bit of time" comment I call BS. A Licensed CURRENT pilot gets to take the Readers Digest version of the Part 107. By this time I hope you can read a effn sectional and understand CRM. I assume they covered weather when you took your Part 61 Ground School.

"Good bit of time?" Anyone with a brain can use the FAA study guide and pass with a few hours of studying.
As an ATP you should be able to study for an hour and pass the test. If you can't you need to find another career. The world needs ditch diggers too.

 

[cderoche]

the Park is super anti-drone, which I do not understand.

In just the few weeks since this incident, they wrote a new ordinance and voted it into law.

This new ordinance is illegal and unenforceable.

My new mission is getting them to rescind their new drone ordinance.

When I was a kid I used to watch in amazement when people fly model planes in the local park, they were loud, fast, smokey, and sometimes crashed into things pretty hard. I don't recall a single person ever thinking gee I need to call the police on these guys. The only thing I can think of today is the drones have cameras on them, and I guess people are worried about their privacy (yeah right). Although, in some big cities there are literally cameras filming on every street corner, and cameras filming in every bank, convenience store, etc. and no one cares. Not to mention the average social media user posts their entire life and events online. So I am very confused by peoples' reaction to a drone flying in a park. They are a bit noisy by small drones are not bad if you're flying up high enough. The Park Police while they do have a job to do, it is also their job to properly interpret the laws they are trying to enforce. (former cop talking). You can't just charge someone with a crime because it's in the ball park, which is why your charge was thrown out. I'm sure no one ever challenged that before because of the small fine, and I'm amazed your property was confiscated without arrest involved. Maybe different states handle these things differently. Understand also he has a job to do, a hard job, and if someone calls in complaint he has to investigate. Cops aren't lawyers, and even lawyers mess up, I agree with the earlier post don't be smart mouthed even though you were 100% in the right, because on the street when you get the cop that has a chip on his shoulder, you will lose in the moment, even if later you win. Hope they change that silly law soon.

 

[mi8radire]

I can finally talk about this now that the legal matter is settled.

Audio here:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

A few weeks ago, I was flying my mavic. An officer approached and told me drones are not allowed in the park. I was polite and told him that I’m pretty smart when it comes to drone law and I did not know it was illegal to fly here. I asked if he could show me where this rule was written. I’ll call him “good cop”

I already knew that a: there is no such rule, and b: even if there was, Michigan has a strong preemption law that prevents local units of government from enacting or enforcing any rule regarding the possession or operation of unmanned aircraft.

This officer called for backup. A second officer arrived. I’ll call him “bad cop.” He was pretty hostile and came towards me with a little
Booklet and said basically “it says right here, ascending or descending....” pointing at rule 23, which prohibits manned aircraft, manned hot air balloons, or manned parachutes from ascending or descending in the park.

I said “can I ask you a question?”

He said yes

“Am I in an airplane?”

That was it. He had me turn around and put my hands behind my back.

He searched me, and laughed when I told him I do not consent.

Then stuffed me in the back of a police car. They pulled me out after a few minutes and searched me again. I was able to hand them a copy of the state preemption law, which I was able to reach because it was in my back pocket. Then they stuffed me back in the patrol car.

My mavic and iPad were confiscated, and just to let me know who’s in charge, he took my personal cell phone too.

After about 30-40 minutes I was released with a misdemeanor citation for “unauthorized flying of drone in park” citing rule 23.

They kept all of my stuff. I was able to get my cell phone returned after a couple of days. I still haven’t gotten my mavic or iPad back.

All of the audio was recorded on my Apple Watch. I will post it here shortly.

I’m a 40 year old professional. I’ve never been in handcuffs before this.

View attachment 57583

View attachment 57584

That cop(the 2nd one) must have serious mental issues... let the law aside... police officers are in public service they must treat you in respect... after all you didn't do anything. If I were you I would suit the PO himself for harassment...

 

[Comrepco]

My new mission is getting them to rescind their new drone ordinance.

And so it begins ............... Personally, I'd fly somewhere else ..

 

[macoman]

And so it begins ............... Personally, I'd fly somewhere else ..

Agreed, at the end of the day. The OP is just a citizen. You can't beat law enforcement. Even if you are right, it will cost too much money and time consuming. You can save all these effort by just going to another park that allow drones.

 

[OldBlueHeron]

Not worth the fight, or the bad press.

 

[PhoebeSnow]

the Park is super anti-drone, which I do not understand.

In just the few weeks since this incident, they wrote a new ordinance and voted it into law.

This new ordinance is illegal and unenforceable.

My new mission is getting them to rescind their new drone ordinance.

The same thing happened in an upscale village in western New York State. Having no idea of federal drone laws they passed unenforceable local drone flying ordinances. To my understanding the village police do not intend to enforce them as they contradict federal regulations on flying. It would seem that those that fly drones need a strong advocating association for drones as the NRA is to fire arms. I'm not passing judgement here on the NRA so don't overread into this but when you see how strong their lobbying power is it would appear that the way drones are being treated such a strong organization would be beneficial to push back on all of the ignorance.

 

[mstuartk]

Especially questions that might trigger them and their insecurities.

What is it that "does not trigger" them any longer? Clearly that cop had his mind made up when he arrived! Yes, thay have a job to do but they are not authorized to take away your lawful rights as a citizen in the process. Sometimes it is attitudes like yours that promote police to think they can do anything they want!

 

[macoman]

Where do you get these, how much?

You can find it pretty much everywhere. They are available in Amazon and eBay.

 

[The Bob]

What park is this?!!?! I am from Michigan and have never seen this crap. I fly Grand Rapids area when I am in town.
Have you contacted the local media with this story? I would disclose it all and give the officer some early retirement plans/career change.
I know people talk big but I would have dug deep and ruined that officer's life and made sure he never wore a badge again.
Oh and the department would compensate me; buy me a new drone and pay the court fees in the end.

 

[FLPilotshark]

I don't see how you can say that, his sun glasses scream cool. He needs a toothpick though.

LOL, toothpick WOULD HAVE BEEN OFF the rector scale! Glad you took the advice of getting an Attorney! Let's put this way, I know the laws very well in FL about UAV's since I am currently studying to take my Part 107 Airmen exam. Plus, my dad was a cop his entire life and retired as a sheriff and was in the Airforce. I also have a family member who is one of the best defense attorneys in my area along with his firm... Yea, I am glad you got in a little ripper on him that he did not like, that's why he put you in the back of the car b/c he was being nothing more than an Icehole to you. This goes for everyone, Always, remember, most people don't have the money to hire a lawyer or even able to get their drones back which is complete BS!! I had a similar experience with a friend that he did not get his UAV back for 6 months. It's not what you know it's who ya know! Like I said above this would have been dismissed in 10 minutes in court.

See I work a little differently, then you mate since I have an attorney in my family and there would have been a motion-filled on this police officers actions since he clearly did not now the drone laws. You mentioned that he searched you well if he did not read your Maranda rights 1st, and he went to go search you and happen to found something illegally, it would have been thrown right out of court for an unlawful search! YOU could have had an ounce of YAA with ya and it would have been dismissed.


I would have gone after the Icehole cop. You file a complaint, that will always be in his record, no matter if it does nothing at least there was a complaint made..

Here is a pretty interesting Article is which 100% a fact!

2 key facts about Americans’ attitudes toward the Police

1. Nearly half (49%) of Americans say “most” police officers think they are “above the law.” African Americans (61%), Hispanics (61%), and Democrats (61%) are considerably more likely than whites (46%) and Republicans (36%) to say that most police officers think they are above the law. Instead, a majority of whites (54%) and Republicans (64%) say police don’t think they’re above the law.
2. 60% say it’s more important to protect the innocent than punish the guilty. When asked which would be worse, 60% say it would be worse to imprison 20,000 innocent people, while 40% say it would be worse to have 20,000 guilty people who are free. Majorities of Republicans (55%), independents (60%), and Democrats (64%) all agree it’s worse to imprison innocent people. However, Donald Trump’s early core supporters stand out with a majority (52%) who say it’s actually worse to not punish the guilty. Other Republican voters disagree. For instance, 65% of Ted Cruz’s early primary supporters say it’s worse to imprison the innocent

 

[Floater]

Those who are NOT FAA Part 107 licensed commercial drone pilots, should probably leave off the "COMMERCIAL" part on the vest. You wouldn't want them to bust you for impersonating a "FAA Licensed Commercial Drone Pilot"!

To be completely accurate, it should say "CERTIFICATED" or perhaps "CERTIFIED". The FAA does not licence anyone. Pilot certificates are similar (although disturbingly not identical; near as I can tell a remote pilot certificate holder is not an "airman" like a manned aircraft pilot, technician or parachute rigger).

 

[surftheisland]

The cop don't how to read correctly. That's offence to the state. Unsecure cops has to be questioned.

 

[RPSM]

I had my attorney handle it. The chief of park police (this park system has its own police force) was flabbergasted that anyone would pay an attorney when I could just go in front of the judge, say I’m sorry, and pay a $25 fine.

My Council gave the prosecutor 2 options: Dismiss the charges or prepare for a jury trial.

I just heard back this evening that the prosecutor refused to authorize the charge.

I’m a free man and don’t have to go to court.

Bravo sir.

 

[Rwebdaddy]

Police have a job to do and we shouldn't question them.

Really?

 

[Thwyllo]

Police have a job to do and we shouldn't question them.

Sarcasm is alive and well I see..

 

[Endeavor]

There good cop and bad cops. As with most humans the bad ones are also those who may be able to read but do not understand what words mean when grouped together in sentences. The bad cop was a victim of Dunning-Kruger effect. He was (is) so stupid he doesn't understand that he is stupid.

 

[PhoebeSnow]

Police have a job to do and we shouldn't question them.

Clearly they were not educated on the subject material for which they charged the Mod. If they were in the right the prosecutor would have charged ahead.

 

[skyeboysteve]

I have no way of knowing. It is my understanding that apple iPhones are quite secure. There was the San Bernardino case a few years ago where fbi was supposedly unable to crack an iPhone and apple refused to help. Supposedly they only became more difficult to access since that time.

The sd card would be much easier to copy as its in no way secured. However, there are just some boring flights on there. I don’t think there is anything of interest. I’m a pretty boring person who is quite serious about following the rules when it comes to uas.

Don’t let yourself feel too confident about this. Yes since San Bernardino, if an iPhone hasn’t been connected to a USB port in a couple days it will refuse connection without a pin. However... there are now two or three companies out there that offer little portable computers to Law Enforcement that by using brute force can crack a six digit passcode in 4-6 days! All they need to do is put your phone in a lead box or microwave and you won’t be able to remotely wipe it while the device tries unlocking your phone. They also won’t get a search warrant first either until they find something incriminating then they’ll make up something to give a judge to get a search warrant for what they already searched to make it “legal”.

We’re seeing this more and more in the USA: LE (from the FBI to local police) unconstitutionally SEARCHING for a crime instead of investigating a known crime—but I digress.