Neighbour upset for flying next to his property.

[Lubelaczek]

Heres an Idea Id like to share:

Your complete lack of safety thought together with your inexperience will one day lead to a situation you will regret.
FLYING OVER ROADS AND HOUSES IS DANGEROUS.
It might not be your fault...there could be a motor failure that forces the mavic off course and uncontrolable.
THATS WHY THERE ARE REGULATIONS.
When your drone lands in a cot in someones garden and maims a child... I will fund the prosecution.
if you feel your 'cleverly' getting one over the rules and dont care about your neighbours concerns, it will end in tears. YOURS, when your taken to court.
Your a ****.

I was going to ignore this... and I will after that, but just few words:
I am so jealous that you were conceived with all the knowledge and never had to learn a bit. We all feel sorry for you because learning is such amazing and exciting process. Obviously you live in Matrix, had all "wiseness" uploaded to your skull and missed all the fun of it.
You are paranoid no less than people who don't own and don't understand concept of recreational drones. In your opinion every time the drone is in the air a disaster is inevitable. Someone will get hurt, houses will be destroyed, buildings will be leveled, forest will be burned, planes with hundreds on the board will go down... Armageddon.
For that reason I strongly suggest don't sit behind wheel of your car. Accidents are there waiting to happened. Trees, pedestrians, buildings and other cars. Don't use a razor to shave, you may slit your throat. Don't eat or drink you may choke...
We are trying to exchange here our experiences, so everybody can draw own conclusions. You are well of the tracks.

I was going to answer each point in turn but quite frankly Im sick of trying to explain to ******** what the law is.
Good luck. You have a lot to learn.

Word of advice: If something makes you "sick" - AVOID IT!
Until you get better and immune to source of your infection stay away from healthy people.

 

[Lubelaczek]

One thing about this law I never understood... is that a total distance or is it a horizontal distance. I can't fly over someone, but is 25 ft up and one foot over completely acceptable?

I understand that this is "3D point to point distance" like a spherical radius. But this is my interpretation... Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Toruk Makto]

I don't want to trouble you for an answer, just promise me you will try and get some help...here is a gentle pointer in the right direction.

Why am i so angry?
Why am I so angry? - Stress, anxiety and depression - NHS Choices

Good luck in your future exploits. I wish you all you deserve.

 

[bpendleton]

Can someone please cough up an actual 25 feet reference? The FAA talks about not flying over people, but I don't see it any of the actual regulations, nor on the FAA website.

 

[bpendleton]

(see "it" meaning anything about "25 feet").

 

[zoomie]

One thing about this law I never understood... is that a total distance or is it a horizontal distance. I can't fly over someone, but is 25 ft up and one foot over completely acceptable?

Distance in any direction. Yes, technically 26' would be fine. They had to put a number somewhere and someone just decided 25' however logical or illogical.

 

[zoomie]

Can someone please cough up an actual 25 feet reference? The FAA talks about not flying over people, but I don't see it any of the actual regulations, nor on the FAA website.

Sure. It's an AMA thing: https://www.modelaircraft.org/files/105.pdf Section 6. Technically the AMA isn't a governing regulator, but it's part of their "code" of conduct.

 

[bpendleton]

Sure. It's an AMA thing: https://www.modelaircraft.org/files/105.pdf Section 6. Technically the AMA isn't a governing regulator, but it's part of their "code" of conduct.

Thanks, I wasn't aware of that, especially given that the AMA is just one organization that might be used for a set of community-based guidelines. I suppose, combined with the FAA guidance, it's "25 feet from" "except not over". Gets tricky when you talk about flying at a great height - what's the radius defining whether you're "over" someone. Even 25 horizontal feet might not be a good definition if it's windy and you're flying high. But thanks for sharing the link, I hadn't seen that one, and it never came up, even tangentially, in any of the studying I did for the part 107.

 

[xman1]

Good luck in your future exploits. I wish you all you deserve.

Hi Toruk,

I don't agree that the activities you describe are dangerous. They sound more like the paranoia mindset of a lawmaker so don't get caught up in that. Is there risk? Always in everything you do but it is so small that no one thinks it an issue here. There is risk in simply living for example.

I can not recall more than one episode of a drone actually hitting someone for example and that was flying over a parade in Seattle I think. This is why the FAA rules state not to fly over groups of people for that very reason as the likelihood of hitting someone is far greater in the event of failure than if it is only a couple people hanging out. With only a couple people, chances of a failure and actually hitting something is probably so small it is un-calculable. Pretty sure you probably have a better chance of getting hit by lightning or killed by a meteorite.

Using the above mindset, you could argue that a drone motor could fail causing your drone to fall out of the sky, on impact the battery could be damaged and you could create a forest fire so all drones should be banned. It is ludicrous.

This is really a culture difference I think. In America, we take responsibility for our actions. In the UK, they try to regulate away personal responsibility as they don't think you grown up enough to think on your own. To each his own I guess but there is no 50 meter rule here in the USA.

 

[Toruk Makto]

Hi Toruk,

I don't agree that the activities you describe are dangerous. They sound more like the paranoia mindset of a lawmaker so don't get caught up in that. Is there risk? Always in everything you do but it is so small that no one thinks it an issue here. There is risk in simply living for example.

I can not recall more than one episode of a drone actually hitting someone for example and that was flying over a parade in Seattle I think. This is why the FAA rules state not to fly over groups of people for that very reason as the likelihood of hitting someone is far greater in the event of failure than if it is only a couple people hanging out. With only a couple people, chances of a failure and actually hitting something is probably so small it is un-calculable. Pretty sure you probably have a better chance of getting hit by lightning or killed by a meteorite.

Using the above mindset, you could argue that a drone motor could fail causing your drone to fall out of the sky, on impact the battery could be damaged and you could create a forest fire so all drones should be banned. It is ludicrous.

This is really a culture difference I think. In America, we take responsibility for our actions. In the UK, they try to regulate away personal responsibility as they don't think you grown up enough to think on your own. To each his own I guess but there is no 50 meter rule here in the USA.

I disagree with all your infetences and still stick by what I have said.

If we could see the video we could tell if there we people present or indeed cars driving on the road.

In any case, as Ive said, I wish you all you deserve and hope that your actions arnt the start of thoses suposed statistics you quoted rising.

 

[Rnl]

I would not show you **** would do no good, you've been an a**

 

[Bazzam]

I disagree with all your infetences and still stick by what I have said.

If we could see the video we could tell if there we people present or indeed cars driving on the road.

In any case, as Ive said, I wish you all you deserve and hope that your actions arnt the start of thoses suposed statistics you quoted rising.

Toruk Makto, I always feel more intelligent and enlightened after reading your thoughts and ideas. Thanks

 

[Lubelaczek]

I disagree with all your infetences and still stick by what I have said.

If we could see the video we could tell if there we people present or indeed cars driving on the road.

In any case, as Ive said, I wish you all you deserve and hope that your actions arnt the start of thoses suposed statistics you quoted rising.

Ignored... Next post.

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

If we could see the video we could tell if there we people present or indeed cars driving on the road.

Your forgot the babies, puppies, and flowers.

Also, you may want to try breaking the pills in half next time.

 

[Toruk Makto]

I would not show you **** would do no good, you've been an a**

Why not show the video to your supporters to prove me wrong?

I believe your flew your mavic dangerously and without any consideration to safety or the public. When someone complained you tried to justify your irresponsibility by bullying and belittlement.

Show your video and prove you were responsibly and not some kind of peeping tom.

 

[Lubelaczek]

Why not show the video to your supporters to prove me wrong?

I believe your flew your mavic dangerously and without any consideration to safety or the public. When someone complained you tried to justify your irresponsibility by bullying and belittlement.

Show your video and prove you were responsibly and not some kind of peeping tom.

Wil make no difference to you. Why bother, troll will be always trolling...

 

[Zoro]

Where this gets grey is that people are legally permitted to have privacy where they expect it. That's obviously super vague. Back in the day before drones or quadcopters became so popular, people did expect privacy from a view above their homes unless your next to a hill/mountain or something. The typical way of looking in would be limited from the street.

As people become more aware that their backyards are exposed from the new technology, it'll be their burden to "protect" themselves there. They'll always want things to be "how they used to be." Ignorance on their part, but as drone fliers, we should be respectful too as the OP has been. We need to protect our name and make sure that people don't think we're a bunch of jerks. Sometimes that'll mean backing down even when we're within legal right. It's more of a social issue than a legal one.

The only reason we're so free to fly drones is b/c it's still fairly new to the consumer market. It's still not big enough to really gather the attention of too much regulation. If we want it to remain that way, we need to stay shaking hands with our neighbors and not creating a big upset. Part of this is educating pilots I believe part of the role of this forum is to do.

If we can prevent one newb from flying into someone else's property, that's better for everyone.

I agree with much that you say, however, there will always be that one person who will ruin it for everyone. 99.9% of people are compliant and thoughtful but it just takes one guy. Same with guns, 99.9% of gun owners are compliant with the laws and regulations...... it's the criminals who aren't compliant and ruin it for everyone. You will never talk sense into those people.

Google can already see into your back yard, your backyard is already on the internet for the world to see. I was shocked once when a guy on a forum who I got into a spat with published photos of my house with my cars and license plates. The reasonable expectation of privacy is a thing of the past. If you are in public you have given up your rights to privacy. The way I see it, it is up to you to make sure you protect yourself from others who want to invade your privacy. Most people are already on edge knowing the Government records your phone conversations, all the info on your computers, drones are just on more straw on the camels back, even though compared to government intrusion into our lives, drones are nothing in comparission.

That said, on a human level I don't want to cause my fellow humans to get angry and will do my best to avoid that. I don't need government regulations to dictate morals and thoughtfulness to me.

Let's face it, the alarmism of drone safety is hyped beyond reason. A teenager can pass a driving test, and get a car. Cars kill people everyday. Drones have never killed anyone. The issues around drone regulations are based on government control over your ability to access the same things they can access, basically YOUR privacy. They certainly don't want us competing with them.

In socialist or communist countries drones are highly regulated if not down right illegal. Ask yourself why that is...... for safety? Yea right!

 

[Lubelaczek]

I agree with much that you say, however, there will always be that one person who will ruin it for everyone. 99.9% of people are compliant and thoughtful but it just takes one guy. Same with guns, 99.9% of gun owners are compliant with the laws and regulations...... it's the criminals who aren't compliant and ruin it for everyone. You will never talk sense into those people.

Google can already see into your back yard, your backyard is already on the internet for the world to see. I was shocked once when a guy on a forum who I got into a spat with published photos of my house with my cars and license plates. The reasonable expectation of privacy is a thing of the past. If you are in public you have given up your rights to privacy. The way I see it, it is up to you to make sure you protect yourself from others who want to invade your privacy. Most people are already on edge knowing the Government records your phone conversations, all the info on your computers, drones are just on more straw on the camels back, even though compared to government intrusion into our lives, drones are nothing in comparission.

That said, on a human level I don't want to cause my fellow humans to get angry and will do my best to avoid that. I don't need government regulations to dictate morals and thoughtfulness to me.

Let's face it, the alarmism of drone safety is hyped beyond reason. A teenager can pass a driving test, and get a car. Cars kill people everyday. Drones have never killed anyone. The issues around drone regulations are based on government control over your ability to access the same things they can access, basically YOUR privacy. They certainly don't want us competing with them.

In socialist or communist countries drones are highly regulated if not down right illegal. Ask yourself why that is...... for safety? Yea right!

I could not say out any better. Gov hates competition.
You are 100% right. There is always that one guy who does not follow the regulations. Worst part of it is the fact that obedient drone users, like myself, are being attacked for no rational reason and with no common sense used.
I know, and most of you too, that 1 or 2 lbs of flying plastic, nuts, bolts and wires is no danger compared to thousands pounds of metal passing by all of us every day, with speed exceedng 70 mph, less than 5 feet away... Yet, drones are considered lethal and Public enemy #1.

 

[JeepDSL]

Guns kill people - ban guns
Knives kill people - ban knives
Cars kill people - ban cars
Airplanes kill people - ban airplanes
Consumer drones????

 

[TylerDurden]

I was going to answer each point in turn but quite frankly Im sick of trying to explain to ******** what the law is.

Good luck. You have a lot to learn.

You are going to assume UK law applies in NY? And HE has a lot to learn?