Drone rule draft
 

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 12:23:38 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:30:01 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

I figure that any civilian drone dumb enough to land or be forced to
land in our backyard is our possession and since I have no interest in
flying toys, I guess I'll be able to sell it on eBay. Is there a market
for used drones? :)

That would be an interesting case to defend.
Typically any other parts from a plane crash still belong to the owner
and if it is the government, they can really get aggressive about
getting them back. People trying to sell shuttle parts from the
reentry crash were visited by FBI agents.


I'm sorry...my cats thought your drone was a bird and they ate it. ?

Might work.
BTW we are having a problem with dead cats here. Nobody is sure
whether it is a bobcat or a coyote (both have been spotted recently)
but they have found a couple of shredded cats here in the last couple
weeks. I am thinking that it is more "bobcat" but who knows.
Watch out for your kitty.

Drone rule draft
 

wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 12:23:38 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:30:01 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

I figure that any civilian drone dumb enough to land or be forced to
land in our backyard is our possession and since I have no interest in
flying toys, I guess I'll be able to sell it on eBay. Is there a market
for used drones? :)

That would be an interesting case to defend.
Typically any other parts from a plane crash still belong to the owner
and if it is the government, they can really get aggressive about
getting them back. People trying to sell shuttle parts from the
reentry crash were visited by FBI agents.


I'm sorry...my cats thought your drone was a bird and they ate it. ?

Might work.
BTW we are having a problem with dead cats here. Nobody is sure
whether it is a bobcat or a coyote (both have been spotted recently)
but they have found a couple of shredded cats here in the last couple
weeks. I am thinking that it is more "bobcat" but who knows.
Watch out for your kitty.

My house cats never go outside except to the vet if needed.


--
Sent from my iPhone 6+

Drone rule draft
 

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:07:24 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

wrote:

BTW we are having a problem with dead cats here. Nobody is sure
whether it is a bobcat or a coyote (both have been spotted recently)
but they have found a couple of shredded cats here in the last couple
weeks. I am thinking that it is more "bobcat" but who knows.
Watch out for your kitty.

My house cats never go outside except to the vet if needed.

Good policy. I don't even let Mr Ed get out of my sight and he is a
125 pound dog that won't be bothered by much.
Even the 300# hogs are scared of him but that may be because people
use dogs to hunt hogs and the hogs know it.
A panther or a bear could spoil his day.

Drone rule draft
 

On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 12:49:56 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 12:23:38 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:30:01 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

I figure that any civilian drone dumb enough to land or be forced to
land in our backyard is our possession and since I have no interest in
flying toys, I guess I'll be able to sell it on eBay. Is there a market
for used drones? :)

That would be an interesting case to defend.
Typically any other parts from a plane crash still belong to the owner
and if it is the government, they can really get aggressive about
getting them back. People trying to sell shuttle parts from the
reentry crash were visited by FBI agents.


I'm sorry...my cats thought your drone was a bird and they ate it. ?

Might work.
BTW we are having a problem with dead cats here. Nobody is sure
whether it is a bobcat or a coyote (both have been spotted recently)
but they have found a couple of shredded cats here in the last couple
weeks. I am thinking that it is more "bobcat" but who knows.
Watch out for your kitty.

My Lab has been barking and growling at night occasionally. The possums and raccoons don't bother him, but a coyote would. Then I saw one last weekend crossing the road leading out of our neighborhood. Looks like a little coyote hunting is in my future. The suppressor will come in handy. :)

Drone rule draft
 

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 09:50:11 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/25/2015 7:40 AM, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 7:35:56 AM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:29:59 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/24/2015 5:40 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:44:51 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

My only issue is I think it should be illegal to fly them over other
people's property without permission. How they enforce that is up to
the powers to be.

===

You don't need permission to fly a private plane over other people's
property except for FAA altitude restrictions. Why should a drone
need permission? With the right cameras you can photograph just about
anything from a legally operayed plane or helo.



Because in most places the minimum altitude for fixed wing is 1500 ft
and 500 ft for helicopters. The issue of "reasonable expectation of
privacy" takes on a new meaning when $100, camera equipped drones can be
purchased by anyone and flown 50 - 100 feet over your backyard. Flying
something that low over private property is a nuisance, IMO, regardless
of cameras or video capability and virtually any yahoo with an extra
$100 can do it.

Realistically, it probably isn't that big of a problem because *most* RC
enthusiasts are sensitive to privacy and nuisance issues and don't screw
around causing a problem with a neighbor. However, without any laws on
the books, some people are going to take matters in their own hands when
there is an issue. The purpose of a law or regulation is to
take the ambiguity out of the equation.

True, but the FAA has no business in establishing local nuisance laws. As I said
before, I think that should be handled at the city level.

--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Or the state...

www.wltx.com/story/news/2015/11/23/bill-would-ban-low-level-drone-flights-over-private-property-sc/76287598/



I don't care where the law or regulation comes from. As you and John
have pointed out previously the FAA traditionally only deals with
matters of safety. The video in your link accurately points out that
laws often are needed to keep up with technology.


Well, this will only make matters worse:

http://tinyurl.com/qd42xby

$100 would be overkill.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Drone rule draft
 

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 09:57:06 -0500, John H.
wrote:



Well, this will only make matters worse:

http://tinyurl.com/qd42xby

$100 would be overkill.

This would be an unregulated drone (4.6oz)

Drone rule draft
 

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:19:23 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 09:57:06 -0500, John H.
wrote:



Well, this will only make matters worse:

http://tinyurl.com/qd42xby

$100 would be overkill.

This would be an unregulated drone (4.6oz)

Which means only the Shadow will know who's flying over your back yard with the
camera.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Drone rule draft
 

On Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 9:56:57 AM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 09:50:11 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/25/2015 7:40 AM, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 7:35:56 AM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:29:59 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/24/2015 5:40 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:44:51 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

My only issue is I think it should be illegal to fly them over other
people's property without permission. How they enforce that is up to
the powers to be.

===

You don't need permission to fly a private plane over other people's
property except for FAA altitude restrictions. Why should a drone
need permission? With the right cameras you can photograph just about
anything from a legally operayed plane or helo.



Because in most places the minimum altitude for fixed wing is 1500 ft
and 500 ft for helicopters. The issue of "reasonable expectation of
privacy" takes on a new meaning when $100, camera equipped drones can be
purchased by anyone and flown 50 - 100 feet over your backyard. Flying
something that low over private property is a nuisance, IMO, regardless
of cameras or video capability and virtually any yahoo with an extra
$100 can do it.

Realistically, it probably isn't that big of a problem because *most* RC
enthusiasts are sensitive to privacy and nuisance issues and don't screw
around causing a problem with a neighbor. However, without any laws on
the books, some people are going to take matters in their own hands when
there is an issue. The purpose of a law or regulation is to
take the ambiguity out of the equation.

True, but the FAA has no business in establishing local nuisance laws. As I said
before, I think that should be handled at the city level.

--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Or the state...

www.wltx.com/story/news/2015/11/23/bill-would-ban-low-level-drone-flights-over-private-property-sc/76287598/



I don't care where the law or regulation comes from. As you and John
have pointed out previously the FAA traditionally only deals with
matters of safety. The video in your link accurately points out that
laws often are needed to keep up with technology.


Well, this will only make matters worse:

http://tinyurl.com/qd42xby

$100 would be overkill.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Thanks, one of those is on its way. I have a specific use for it... I'm going to spy on my roof!

Drone rule draft
 

On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 06:59:53 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Thursday, November 26, 2015 at 9:56:57 AM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 09:50:11 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/25/2015 7:40 AM, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 7:35:56 AM UTC-5, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:29:59 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/24/2015 5:40 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:44:51 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

My only issue is I think it should be illegal to fly them over other
people's property without permission. How they enforce that is up to
the powers to be.

===

You don't need permission to fly a private plane over other people's
property except for FAA altitude restrictions. Why should a drone
need permission? With the right cameras you can photograph just about
anything from a legally operayed plane or helo.



Because in most places the minimum altitude for fixed wing is 1500 ft
and 500 ft for helicopters. The issue of "reasonable expectation of
privacy" takes on a new meaning when $100, camera equipped drones can be
purchased by anyone and flown 50 - 100 feet over your backyard. Flying
something that low over private property is a nuisance, IMO, regardless
of cameras or video capability and virtually any yahoo with an extra
$100 can do it.

Realistically, it probably isn't that big of a problem because *most* RC
enthusiasts are sensitive to privacy and nuisance issues and don't screw
around causing a problem with a neighbor. However, without any laws on
the books, some people are going to take matters in their own hands when
there is an issue. The purpose of a law or regulation is to
take the ambiguity out of the equation.

True, but the FAA has no business in establishing local nuisance laws. As I said
before, I think that should be handled at the city level.

--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Or the state...

www.wltx.com/story/news/2015/11/23/bill-would-ban-low-level-drone-flights-over-private-property-sc/76287598/



I don't care where the law or regulation comes from. As you and John
have pointed out previously the FAA traditionally only deals with
matters of safety. The video in your link accurately points out that
laws often are needed to keep up with technology.


Well, this will only make matters worse:

http://tinyurl.com/qd42xby

$100 would be overkill.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Thanks, one of those is on its way. I have a specific use for it... I'm going to spy on my roof!

Anything to please. Good luck.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!