NOOB FAA registration question

[SuperSkymaster]

I’ve been interested in drones for several years and finally bought a Mini 2 and a lot of accessories. I’ve watched a lot of YouTube videos, how-to’s and reviews, trying to learn as much as possible. I took the TRUST exam right away and am now starting to study for the Part 107 exam even though I have no plans to do any commercial work.

NOOB question: Why are so many people so against registering with the FAA if they are flying recreationally? Is it just they don’t want the government in their business? When I put the prop guards or strobe light on my Mini 2 it is somewhat over the 250g limit. And with the coming of RemoteID, aren’t most rones going to be required to be registered?

 

[thispilothere]

NOOB question: Why are so many people so against registering with the FAA if they are flying recreationally? Is it just they don’t want the government in their business? When I put the prop guards or strobe light on my Mini 2 it is somewhat over the 250g limit. And with the coming of RemoteID, aren’t most rones going to be required to be registered?

I don't see a need for the government to know that I own a drone. Other than it being the arbitrary cut off point, why would under 250g be fine and 251g require registration? The answer is, there's no real reason. It's some bureaucrat's opinion. I have unregistered firearms, why would a relatively harmless drone require it?

All "reasons" boil down to increasingly absurd "what if" scenarios. If someone can articulate a reason that doesn't begin with "what if", I might reconsider.

Also, I'll never use RID.

 

[sar104]

I don't see a need for the government to know that I own a drone.

Presumably you don't see the need for them to know that you own a vehicle either.

Other than it being the arbitrary cut off point, why would under 250g be fine and 251g require registration?

So the distinction should not exist? Why do any limits exist in law? Do you think that they are all arbitrary?

The answer is, there's no real reason.

No - the answer is that you either don't know or are deliberately ignoring the reason. Which is that it was the consensus threshold mass below which a drone represents a low hazard to people on the ground.

It's some bureaucrat's opinion.

No, it's not.

I have unregistered firearms

I'm shocked.

..., why would a relatively harmless drone require it?

Because drones can do serious damage if they collide with aircraft in the NAS, and cause injury/damage if they crash, but they are not shielded from sensible regulation by archaic interpretations of the constitution.

All "reasons" boil down to increasingly absurd "what if" scenarios. If someone can articulate a reason that doesn't begin with "what if", I might reconsider.

All scenario risk analyses begin with "what if". It's like the converse of sticking your head in the sand.

Also, I'll never use RID.

I bet you will if you want to keep flying drones.

 

[Vic Moss]

Because some people are paranoid.

 

[MS Coast]

Because some people are paranoid.

I find it amusing to remind people like that of the existence of comprehensive and widely distributed print and online publications that list almost everyone's name, address, and phone number for anyone to see..

Phonebooks.

 

[Deleted member 154956]

I find it amusing to remind people like that of the existence of comprehensive and widely distributed print and online publications that list almost everyone's name, address, and phone number for anyone to see..

Phonebooks.

Then surely you're old enough to remember that MANY of us remained UNLISTED! I'm of the mindset that I want LESS GOVERNMENT. In fact, WAY LESS GOVERNMENT!.

 

[Chaosrider]

I don't see a need for the government to know that I own a drone. Other than it being the arbitrary cut off point, why would under 250g be fine and 251g require registration? The answer is, there's no real reason. It's some bureaucrat's opinion. I have unregistered firearms, why would a relatively harmless drone require it?

All "reasons" boil down to increasingly absurd "what if" scenarios. If someone can articulate a reason that doesn't begin with "what if", I might reconsider.

Also, I'll never use RID.

If the government wants to know whether or not you own a drone, they already do...

 

[thispilothere]

If the government wants to know whether or not you own a drone, they already do...

So registration shouldn't be needed.

 

[FLDave]

The "government" already knows your SS information, your motor vehicle registration information, you driver's license, your FAA pilot certificate numbers, and much more. Why should a UAS operator registration be different than all other other government registrations we accept?

 

[Chaosrider]

So registration shouldn't be needed.

And also shouldn't be resisted...

;-)

 

[Chaosrider]

Presumably you don't see the need for them to know that you own a vehicle either.

So the distinction should not exist? Why do any limits exist in law? Do you think that they are all arbitrary?

No - the answer is that you either don't know or are deliberately ignoring the reason. Which is that it was the consensus threshold mass below which a drone represents a low hazard to people on the ground.

No, it's not.

I'm shocked.

Because drones can do serious damage if they collide with aircraft in the NAS, and cause injury/damage if they crash, but they are not shielded from sensible regulation by archaic interpretations of the constitution.

All scenario risk analyses begin with "what if". It's like the converse of sticking your head in the sand.

I bet you will if you want to keep flying drones.

TPH: I have unregistered firearms

SAR: I'm shocked.

TCS: All of my firearms are unregistered. Of course, that's because Nevada has no requirement for registration.

As it should be!