Taking By POLICE

[tcope]

I didn’t say the FAA owned it, I said the Federal Government owns it.
.

If you still disagree please define “ownership” and how it doesn’t apply in this situation.

The Federal Government does not own airspace. There is nothing that says that they don't own it, only nothing that says that they do. There is nothing to own, it is just air that moves from place to place. The only thing needed is _regulation_ of the space. The only reason something is owned is so that ownership can be transfered to someone else.

If you want to read more on this, the following link provides information and how case law applies :

https://scholarship.law.marquette.e...e.com/&httpsredir=1&article=3130&context=mulr

[/URL]

 

[Mavic Mac]

@Skywatcher2001 - Thanks for the vote of confidence - As I posted, not being, there anything I posted would be completely a subjective opinion, and like a part of our personal anatomy everybody has one. As I use to tell the officers I supervised be very careful of premature accusation.

Hopefully this was a learning experience for all involved, the original poster, the LEOs and the judge that signed the search warrant.

 

[EricJT]

Aw, shucks.

I just want the members of this community who reside in the US to understand that by piloting a drone, you are not giving up your rights as a citizen of the United States. If you aren’t in the US, I’m afraid I don’t know anything about your country’s laws and I’m not going to speculate. Yes, understanding the FAA’s regulations can be daunting and police officers can be intimidating; but situations like what OP has so eloquently described are almost always a result of law enforcement officers doing something to address a perceived violation of a law they think applies. It’s either that, or they knowingly overstep the limits of their authority. In either case, they’re wrong. However...

I do not advocate arguing with the cops at the scene, regardless of whether or not they’re wrong. I speak from experience when I say that’s not a confrontation you want to get into and it rarely ends well. You’ll either have your day in court or the charges will be dropped and your property returned. In either case, you’ll hopefully have an opportunity to meet with the chief law enforcement officer of the agency involved and maybe educate him or her on a subject of which they probably have no working knowledge.

Most of these incidents are because one or more parties involved, whether pilot or law enforcement, hasn’t properly prepared for such incidents by educating themselves on the subject.

I totally agree....avoid confrontation with LEO(s) while maintaining your composure. Here in Canada you do not have to talk to or provide identification unless the LEO states the reason for detaining you and has indicated the charge being contemplated.

Cooperating while not agreeing to giving up any of your legal rights is the safest course of action.

 

[DroningOn]

At the end of the day, a local or state LEO does not have the authority to enforce federal law or FAA “guidelines“ PERIOD.
They can investigate all they want but they can’t compel you to do anything relating to your “drone status”. If you’re breaking a local or state law that’s one thing but to have a traffic cop come up to you and question you about following night time flying rules etc, that just doesn’t work. A polite “have a nice day officer” is all they’ll get from me in that case.

this subject and scenarios like this one have been discussed countless times on these forums over the years. At the end of the day a person never HAS to talk to law enforcement. Never means never. If a police officer wants to cite you or even arrest you for a drone related offense, they better have an actual law (that they have jurisdiction to enforce) to put on the citation or the arrest report. We all know that local cops do not have such jurisdiction so this whole discussion is moot.

 

[Redleg]

Your opinion as a LEO is HIGHLY RESPECTED in this forum. You have every right to a professional opinion as the other 38 posts before you. We all welcome it.

Agreed. And thank you for dedicating so many years of your life to the protection of and service to your community, @Mavic Mac. It speaks to your character. I don’t have the amount of law enforcement experience you do - I moved to the private sector, where the money is.

 

[Burkett57]

I was flying my drone from my own property, when as I landed five cops showed up to ask if I was flying. I said yes . They then asked to look at the drone if I would go get it. I did . I gave the drone but held the remote from them, they then as holding my drone started telling me how I was breaking the law. They stated under rule 107 I was flying at night ,and over people. I then told them I flew under a hobbyist rule not 107 rule. I gave them my paperwork and they couldn't say anything. They told me call the station in 5 days and I can get a police report, took my drone and left without fair reason .week past got report it had I criminal trespassed on it. AS of yesterday a month later , I was called to come get my drone from them. Along with the drone I was given a copy of a search warrant that was written the day after for my memory card etc. I was told they now were not gonna charge me for trespassing they needed some crime reason to get a warrant. Has this ever happened to you,? What are your thoughts?

Get a lawyer. Cops can’t do that it’s not trespassing unless you’re physically Standing on property you can’t be on.

 

[Skywatcher2001]

Yeah, trust me . . . I learned my lessons arguing with LEO's. I'm talking LAPD lessons. I respect them.

Getting back on topic, the OP didn't have to go get his drone for the LEO's. What would have happened if he didn't? That right there is truly speculation but many of us know what (probably) would have ensued. They would NOT have elevated this to a search warrant but the easier course of action would be a threat of arrest. Really no way for the law abiding citizen to win in this scenario. Personally, he obviously had nothing to hide so I believe he took the correct course of action and gave it to them.

 

[BigAl07]

I agree that the PO-PO were quite heavy handed, bu just because you’re not a licensed part 107 pilot doesn’t mean you have extra benefits. You still have to obey the law. It’s very clear, if you’re flying at night, that’s illegal! You can fly within 30 minutes of sunset if you have a flashing light that can be seen from 3 miles away attached to your drone.

For your first post to our forum that's quite a bold (and INCORRECT) statement. You're trying to impart Part 107 regulations on Hobby/Recreational operations who have indeed been given "protection" from Part 107.

Hobby/Recreational operations CAN (as of right now) fly at night so long as they are in Class G (Uncontrolled) airspace. They must follow all other laws/regulations during that flight but they can LEGALLY fly at night. Part 107 (currently) requires the Daylight Waiver ~107.29 for G airspace (Waivers can not currently be combined in controlled airspace via LAANC).

Now it's important for EVERYONE to understand one fine point.... Hobby/Recreation flights are allowed under an "Exception" to Part 107 and it's actually called ~44809 The Exception for Limited Recreational Operations . Consider it a "protective bubble" against the full Part 107 requirements. If you do something that busts your bubble (pun intended) you lose this PROTECTION from Part 107 and and by default you are held accountable to Part 107 regulations even if you don't hold Part 107 credentials. Part 107 is DEFAULT as we are all Civil Operators unless we are operating under an Exception (44089), an Exemption (333), or some type of other COA (Public Safety/Govt).

 

[BigAl07]

It would be helpful if you reviewed the rules on night flying. I'm pretty sure they are the same if you are 107 or not.

Ummm no... see my previous post. They are NOT the same (currently) as Part 107.

 

[Thomas B]

At the end of the day, a local or state LEO does not have the authority to enforce federal law or FAA “guidelines“ PERIOD.
They can investigate all they want but they can’t compel you to do anything relating to your “drone status”. If you’re breaking a local or state law that’s one thing but to have a traffic cop come up to you and question you about following night time flying rules etc, that just doesn’t work. A polite “have a nice day officer” is all they’ll get from me in that case.

this subject and scenarios like this one have been discussed countless times on these forums over the years. At the end of the day a person never HAS to talk to law enforcement. Never means never. If a police officer wants to cite you or even arrest you for a drone related offense, they better have an actual law (that they have jurisdiction to enforce) to put on the citation or the arrest report. We all know that local cops do not have such jurisdiction so this whole discussion is moot.

Actually, local LEOs are authorized by FAA to enforce as well as report (to FAA) any illlegal drone operations. Instructions are given to them. The FAA document for local LEOs is extensive. This is from a Sept 2019 document on FAA’s website.

Public Safety and Law Enforcement Toolkit

www.faa.gov

 

[DroningOn]

Actually, local LEOs are authorized by FAA to enforce as well as report (to FAA) any illlegal drone operations. Instructions are given to them. The FAA document for local LEOs is extensive. This is from a Sept 2019 document on FAA’s website.

Public Safety and Law Enforcement Toolkit

www.faa.gov

I noted in my post that local law-enforcement can investigate anything they want but they do not have the authority to take any legal action or compel you to provide evidence. That “public safety tool kit“ does not bestow on every level cop a Federal badge.

 

[Thomas B]

I noted in my post that local law-enforcement can investigate anything they want but they do not have the authority to take any legal action or compel you to provide evidence. That “public safety tool kit“ does not bestow on every level cop a Federal badge.

Local LEO can detain pilots as we both have seen in reports on the forum... regardless of the level of law involved.
True 5th amendment protection applies.
Point is they are authorized by FAA to act on FAA regs without being a federal officer. Whether local LEOs will do so is a whole new discussion.

 

[Skywatcher2001]

Actually, local LEOs are authorized by FAA to enforce as well as report (to FAA) any illlegal drone operations. Instructions are given to them. The FAA document for local LEOs is extensive. This is from a Sept 2019 document on FAA’s website.

Public Safety and Law Enforcement Toolkit

www.faa.gov

You know Thomas, it's interesting reading some of this from the LEO's perspective (what they are being taught). I mean, looking at the 10 page Public Safety Drone Playbook it's all right there. Maybe needs some updating but essentially its all there. I wonder how many LEO's actually read that playbook and keep it in their patrol units. . . interesting read.

This is from their LEO's Playbook: If I am reading this correctly, they are suppose to pass the info on to the FAA for investigation.

 

[DroningOn]

Local LEO can detain pilots as we both have seen in reports on the forum

They can’t legally, that is the whole point. Whether or not some “do” is a different issue.

 

[Thomas B]

You know Thomas, it's interesting reading some of this from the LEO's perspective (what they are being taught). I mean, looking at the 10 page Public Safety Drone Playbook it's all right there. Maybe needs some updating but essentially its all there. I wonder how many LEO's actually read that playbook and keep it in their patrol units. . . interesting read.

This is from their LEO's Playbook: If I am reading this correctly, they are suppose to pass the info on to the FAA for investigation.

View attachment 83297

It is an interesting read.
You are spot on!

 

[Thomas B]

They can’t legally, that is the whole point. Whether or not some “do” is a different issue.

My point is that it will potentially ruin a pilot’s day and potentially result in other penalties. See my post above.
No real disagreement..

 

[Skywatcher2001]

My point is that it will potentially ruin a pilot’s day and potentially result in other penalties. See my post above.
No real disagreement..

Thomas, you hit this one out the park. Every drone pilot should read the toolkit and print this out and present it to any uninformed LEO . . .

This is the Law Enforcement Pocket Card. They are supposed to keep this in their pocket next to our Miranda Rights card:

 

[brett8883]

The Federal Government does not own airspace. There is nothing that says that they don't own it, only nothing that says that they do. There is nothing to own, it is just air that moves from place to place. The only thing needed is _regulation_ of the space. The only reason something is owned is so that ownership can be transfered to someone else.

If you want to read more on this, the following link provides information and how case law applies :

https://scholarship.law.marquette.e...e.com/&httpsredir=1&article=3130&context=mulr

[/URL]

To quote that article you site:

The Air Commerce Act of 1926 and the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938 expressly claim this soveriegnty for the federal government. Twenty-two states have adopted the Uniform State Law for Aeronautics, which recognizes that sover- iegnty may have been granted to the federal government, and does not purport to regulate air flights in respects covered by federal legislation.

The argument for federal supremacy is based not only upon the treaty, war making, and interstate commerce clauses of the Constitution, but also upon the alleged "proprietory [sic] interest" of federal government In navigable airspace.

Proprietary interest=ownership

Proprietary Interests Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

Proprietary interests are profits, rights, ownership shares or advantages held by the full or partial owner of a tangible or intangible asset or property. For example, an author has a proprietary

definitions.uslegal.com

 

[Gryphon962]

At the end of the day, a local or state LEO does not have the authority to enforce federal law or FAA “guidelines“ PERIOD.
They can investigate all they want but they can’t compel you to do anything relating to your “drone status”. If you’re breaking a local or state law that’s one thing but to have a traffic cop come up to you and question you about following night time flying rules etc, that just doesn’t work. A polite “have a nice day officer” is all they’ll get from me in that case.

this subject and scenarios like this one have been discussed countless times on these forums over the years. At the end of the day a person never HAS to talk to law enforcement. Never means never. If a police officer wants to cite you or even arrest you for a drone related offense, they better have an actual law (that they have jurisdiction to enforce) to put on the citation or the arrest report. We all know that local cops do not have such jurisdiction so this whole discussion is moot.

In many states, counties, and cities, they do have laws that restrict where you can takeoff, land, and operate a drone (or model ac). Those authorities do have the authority to make laws that pertain to use of land (not the air). Local LEOs can enforce those laws and do. If those laws exist, they don't need to worry about what the federal laws say or care about who is enforcing them.

I've read the laws for all the local cities. I've even questioned them to clarify if the 'model ac' laws apply to drones (email the community relations officer - you will get a response, often from the city attorney). Recommend that everyone does that before they fly, so that if the LEOs turn up, you know the local law as well as the Federal.

 

[Wildstiles]

Lawyer up!
[Comment removed by Admin]