Law Officer Claims My TRUST DOCUMENT Fake?

[sar104]

Sarcasm; the domain of those with nothing material to contribute!

You started this argument when @Vic Moss pointed out, correctly, that a recreational pilot is required by law to produce their TRUST if requested by LE. In post #105 you replied:

"That is simply not correct"​

So @Vic Moss then quoted the applicable law, 49 U.S.C §44809 (a) (7):

The operator has passed an aeronautical knowledge and safety test described in subsection (g) and maintains proof of test passage to be made available to the Administrator or law enforcement upon request.​

To any reasonable person, that would have been the end of the argument, but no, you doubled down with no attempt at any defense, simply:

"I am confident in my position"​

When that didn't work, you then tried to deflect by disingenuously rewriting the discussion and rambled on about why no one would get arrested, which was not the argument and was never even asserted.

It’s sad to see that your perceived role on this forum is strictly “output” and you are not open to input.

Input is welcome. Trolling is not.

This forum is seems intended to inform and bring multiple perspectives to its users. I don’t believe your expertise extends beyond what you have read and interpreted based on your strictly layman level of understanding. The level of activity you have on this forum alone indicates you have lots and lots of free time for internet folly and “the sky is falling” government victimization claims.

You clearly have a lot of incorrect beliefs.

What exactly is your level of expertise? If you are trained and sworn Law Enforcement or an Attorney, please share that information so forum users can measure your opinion against your level of expertise.

How about you worry less about qualifications and appeal to authority, and instead actually address factual points made? Have you noticed that so far in this discussion on regulations you haven't actually cited a single law or regulation, or made a single specific pertinent argument? All just your beliefs, opinions and bragging about your qualifications.

I am a UAS Team Leader for a Police Department and a DoD principal investigator focused on aviation.

There you go again. And that's simply not believable at all. No one in either of those positions can credibly be so ignorant.

You have been afforded expert level perspective and you seem to refuse to consider it. I morn your narrow view of reality. This hobby (and profession) deserves more “how” and a lot less blatant “yes or no” as you profess In your “I saw it in writing so I must be so” mindset. Open your mind to the fact that actual practice may be different than you imagine when you read regulations.

By you - no - so far you have not demonstrated any discernible expertise in any subject at all.

I work in the referenced field every day and I, nor any of the thousands of Officers I encounter every year would or will ask for or even care about someone’s Trust Certificate. That’s a fact and I don’t blelieve you are in a position to dispute it beyond “the regulation says…..”. My input is intended to quell what appeared to be a concern the Law Enforcement might begin aggressively asking for “papers” from anyone seen operating a UAV. That is completely not happening and in my professional opinion will not happen if the OP is flying safely and within guidelines.

Sure you do. But that aside, the argument wasn't about what LE officers care about - it was simply about whether recreational pilots were required, by law, to produce proof of passing the test to LE if requested. Which they are.

I welcome you to back up your claims with facts. I challenge you to provide ANY case law that demonstrates ANY law enforcement agency (local Police Department or Sherrif’s department) in the United States overtly serves as an enforcement arm of the FAA. You will find none because it does not occur.

More deflection - that wasn't the argument. The "facts", i.e. the law, have been clearly pointed out to you, multiple times.

Having a profession in which I deal with “armchair attorneys” every day, I’m sure you will continue your argument.

I will, because you are wrong. Feel free to continue flailing or call it a day - it makes little difference to me.

To the forum members; Don’t fall prey to the fear mongering about Law-Enforcement. We are not an enforcement arm for the FAA and if you are flying in accordance with safe practices and respecting privacy, no legal harm will come to you at the hands of the “evil” police.

So now it is "fear-mongering" to talk about the actual laws governing sUAS operations?

let it go Vic. You are swatting at the air. If you would like an actual conversation. IM me and we can connect voice to voice. I’d be happy to review any case law you can produce and perhaps inform you further about how the nexis of written regulations and actual enforcement practices work in the real world.

I look forward to speaking with you at your earliest opportunity. Or we can agree that we disagree and move on.

I have a number of questions I would like to ask of the members of this forum, but your myopic and dictatorial reaction to simple input makes me wary of doing so as I’m sure it does many many other visitors

And now you can't even figure out who you are responding to?

 

[cgmaxed]

You started this argument when @Vic Moss pointed out, correctly, that a recreational pilot is required by law to produce their TRUST if requested by LE. In post #105 you replied:

"That is simply not correct"​

So @Vic Moss then quoted the applicable law, 49 U.S.C §44809 (a) (7):

The operator has passed an aeronautical knowledge and safety test described in subsection (g) and maintains proof of test passage to be made available to the Administrator or law enforcement upon request.​

To any reasonable person, that would have been the end of the argument, but no, you doubled down with no attempt at any defense, simply:

"I am confident in my position"​

When that didn't work, you then tried to deflect by disingenuously rewriting the discussion and rambled on about why no one would get arrested, which was not the argument and was never even asserted.

Input is welcome. Trolling is not.

You clearly have a lot of incorrect beliefs.

How about you worry less about qualifications and appeal to authority, and instead actually address factual points made? Have you noticed that so far in this discussion on regulations you haven't actually cited a single law or regulation, or made a single specific pertinent argument? All just your beliefs, opinions and bragging about your qualifications.

There you go again. And that's simply not believable at all. No one in either of those positions can credibly be so ignorant.

By you - no - so far you have not demonstrated any discernible expertise in any subject at all.

Sure you do. But that aside, the argument wasn't about what LE officers care about - it was simply about whether recreational pilots were required, by law, to produce proof of passing the test to LE if requested. Which they are.

More deflection - that wasn't the argument. The "facts", i.e. the law, have been clearly pointed out to you, multiple times.

I will, because you are wrong. Feel free to continue flailing or call it a day - it makes little difference to me.

So now it is "fear-mongering" to talk about the actual laws governing sUAS operations?

And now you can't even figure out who you are responding to?

LOL. I new you wouldn't be able to resist responding to Hammerhead. And you weren't even sarcastic. Just the facts. Impressive response. And that's no sarcasm.

 

[cgmaxed]

Relax Vic! My my so many feelings.
You are correct that I mentioned you in my reply to SAR’s dissertation. Two birds one might say with one poignant stone.

It’s clear that your personality is such that you need to feel that you and SAR are singular authorities on this forum. Attacking anyone you don’t agree with. But the fact remains that you are spreading false expectations for flyers trying to feed insecurities about law enforcement by applying a grammarschool level understanding of how the fhings you read online actually work in the real world.

Now…… because your personality will not allow you any other course of action, you are granted the last word. You can take another swipe to convince users of this forum (that is supposed to be focused on UAVs and their usethat you are somehow a superior, infallible being, incapable of learning or accepting any alternate perspective.

I don’t care if you agree with me about the expectations flyers should have with regard to interactions with law enforcement.

You are a narcissist, sir and I feel sorry for the impact that trait must have on the rest of your life. To try to create artificial significance by throwing virtual sand in the faces of those who are simply contributing additional information on an Internet forum is sad, but as I said, go ahead and validate this assessment of your “issues” by posting yet again with some kind of criticism or explanation to justify your effort to pick a fight just because you don’t agree with a post.

Good bye, Vic. I’m blocking you so I can enjoy the vase majority of the people on this forum who are thoughtful, helpful, and considerate of all perspective.

I assume your responding to VIc's #121 Post? is that right? But you replied to Sar104s post #123. I know Sar will see your post, but Vic won't, unless he is still actively following this thread. Just letting you know.

On behalf of the MavicPilot members, I apologize for those members, that have created an atmosphere of great discord in this forum. This is a great forum to be apart of. Stay frosty, as they say.

 

[dirkclod]

Guys your starting to go round and round here.
Everyone stay civil and stop repeating posted material
and this can go on otherwise it will be over. ?

Well guys I told you but guess you didn’t believe me.
I‘ll let @BigAl07 look at this and he can reopen it or not
but as of now

CLOSED​

 

[BigAl07]

Well guys I told you but guess you didn’t believe me.
I‘ll let @BigAl07 look at this and he can reopen it or not
but as of now

CLOSED​

Agreed! Unfortunately this thread is a GONER!!

Thread CLOSED!!