On 12/15/2015 12:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:46:53 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:08:41 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:


Again, the concern is a 50% increase of drones, RC aircraft, etc.,
starting to be used within the next couple of months.

I also realize that enforcement of the registration requirement is
difficult. It probably would have made more sense to require
registration at the time of sale.

Or have the seller check for an AMA card prior to the sale. But, the AMA card is free
to those under 19, and there is no requirement that the kid knows any flight rules or
safety measures.

Then we would have the "drone show" loophole ;-)

These days anyone who can put am Ikea table together can make a drone
from parts and I already know a guy who is making money doing it. (he
works for my wife). Some of these are pretty sophisticated and still
less than $500 to build. (more properly "assemble" since it is all off
the shelf parts)



You can think of more reasons *not* to address a potential problem than
anyone I know. :-)

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:12:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:46:53 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:08:41 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:


Again, the concern is a 50% increase of drones, RC aircraft, etc.,
starting to be used within the next couple of months.

I also realize that enforcement of the registration requirement is
difficult. It probably would have made more sense to require
registration at the time of sale.

Or have the seller check for an AMA card prior to the sale. But, the AMA card is free
to those under 19, and there is no requirement that the kid knows any flight rules or
safety measures.

Then we would have the "drone show" loophole ;-)

These days anyone who can put am Ikea table together can make a drone
from parts and I already know a guy who is making money doing it. (he
works for my wife). Some of these are pretty sophisticated and still
less than $500 to build. (more properly "assemble" since it is all off
the shelf parts)



You can think of more reasons *not* to address a potential problem than
anyone I know. :-)


It's senseless to develop senseless, unenforceable rules just to say, "We have now
addressed the problem."
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On 12/15/2015 1:32 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:12:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:46:53 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:08:41 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:


Again, the concern is a 50% increase of drones, RC aircraft, etc.,
starting to be used within the next couple of months.

I also realize that enforcement of the registration requirement is
difficult. It probably would have made more sense to require
registration at the time of sale.

Or have the seller check for an AMA card prior to the sale. But, the AMA card is free
to those under 19, and there is no requirement that the kid knows any flight rules or
safety measures.

Then we would have the "drone show" loophole ;-)

These days anyone who can put am Ikea table together can make a drone
from parts and I already know a guy who is making money doing it. (he
works for my wife). Some of these are pretty sophisticated and still
less than $500 to build. (more properly "assemble" since it is all off
the shelf parts)



You can think of more reasons *not* to address a potential problem than
anyone I know. :-)


It's senseless to develop senseless, unenforceable rules just to say, "We have now
addressed the problem."

I don't think it's up to the average lay person to determine what laws
are enforceable and what are not. It's obvious that those who feel most
restricted or affected by a law or regulation designed for the benefit
of the whole will be bitching the most.

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:45:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 1:32 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:12:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:46:53 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:08:41 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:


Again, the concern is a 50% increase of drones, RC aircraft, etc.,
starting to be used within the next couple of months.

I also realize that enforcement of the registration requirement is
difficult. It probably would have made more sense to require
registration at the time of sale.

Or have the seller check for an AMA card prior to the sale. But, the AMA card is free
to those under 19, and there is no requirement that the kid knows any flight rules or
safety measures.

Then we would have the "drone show" loophole ;-)

These days anyone who can put am Ikea table together can make a drone
from parts and I already know a guy who is making money doing it. (he
works for my wife). Some of these are pretty sophisticated and still
less than $500 to build. (more properly "assemble" since it is all off
the shelf parts)



You can think of more reasons *not* to address a potential problem than
anyone I know. :-)


It's senseless to develop senseless, unenforceable rules just to say, "We have now
addressed the problem."

I don't think it's up to the average lay person to determine what laws
are enforceable and what are not. It's obvious that those who feel most
restricted or affected by a law or regulation designed for the benefit
of the whole will be bitching the most.

The total restriction I will suffer will be about 4 minutes on the computer. As I
will 'register' soon, I won't even have to pay the $5 (another collection task to
give someone a meaningless job).

As an average lay person, I can say that this 'law' will be not be enforceable unless
the aircraft operator is trying to fly at a field where the 'law' will be enforced.
That means a field where a club's officers are on hand to enforce the 'law'.

As an average lay person, I can say that the gun control laws are suffering from an
abysmal lack of enforcement. Look at the shootings in any big city.

Trust me, my complaint has nothing to do with the impact upon me, as you imply, but
with the impact on the government - for stupidity.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:45:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



I don't think it's up to the average lay person to determine what laws
are enforceable and what are not. It's obvious that those who feel most
restricted or affected by a law or regulation designed for the benefit
of the whole will be bitching the most.

It is not hard to decide whether a law is enforceable by looking at
what kind of staff they will appropriate to enforce it. That is the
second shoe that will drop. Currently there is no money allocated for
enforcement.
This is "rock soup" government at it's best.
They start with a simple regulation, that is ineffective and they will
keep throwing new resources at it until it is a huge bureaucracy or
hopefully just abandon the idea.

I will not be restricted at all but I will be taxed.

On 12/15/2015 4:27 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:45:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



I don't think it's up to the average lay person to determine what laws
are enforceable and what are not. It's obvious that those who feel most
restricted or affected by a law or regulation designed for the benefit
of the whole will be bitching the most.

It is not hard to decide whether a law is enforceable by looking at
what kind of staff they will appropriate to enforce it. That is the
second shoe that will drop. Currently there is no money allocated for
enforcement.
This is "rock soup" government at it's best.
They start with a simple regulation, that is ineffective and they will
keep throwing new resources at it until it is a huge bureaucracy or
hopefully just abandon the idea.

I will not be restricted at all but I will be taxed.


Just think of how many people that extra buck a year will benefit. :-)

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 17:59:39 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 4:27 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:45:56 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



I don't think it's up to the average lay person to determine what laws
are enforceable and what are not. It's obvious that those who feel most
restricted or affected by a law or regulation designed for the benefit
of the whole will be bitching the most.

It is not hard to decide whether a law is enforceable by looking at
what kind of staff they will appropriate to enforce it. That is the
second shoe that will drop. Currently there is no money allocated for
enforcement.
This is "rock soup" government at it's best.
They start with a simple regulation, that is ineffective and they will
keep throwing new resources at it until it is a huge bureaucracy or
hopefully just abandon the idea.

I will not be restricted at all but I will be taxed.


Just think of how many people that extra buck a year will benefit. :-)


There are about 40 million tax payers (who actually pay) so I doubt
they will be able to do it for a buck but there are lots of stupid
programs and after a while, it ends up being lots of bucks.
The real problem is we won't actually give them the bucks, we will
bill our kids for it ... with interest or worse, just print more
money.

I haven't seen the GAO "score" on this but you can usually double
that. In this case, double the current projection won't be enough
because they have not decided how they will enforce it.
That is when the "rock soup" comes into play.
Lets say they give them $20 million for enforcement, hiring a bunch of
drone cops. Then we have a real FFA failure. They will say we just
spent $50 million on drones so we should spend $100 million more for
real planes ... rinse repeat.

Did you read my TSA post?

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:32:28 -0500, John H.
wrote:

These days anyone who can put am Ikea table together can make a drone
from parts and I already know a guy who is making money doing it. (he
works for my wife). Some of these are pretty sophisticated and still
less than $500 to build. (more properly "assemble" since it is all off
the shelf parts)



You can think of more reasons *not* to address a potential problem than
anyone I know. :-)


It's senseless to develop senseless, unenforceable rules just to say, "We have now
addressed the problem."

===

Absolutely right. That's one of the reasons that the government has
grown as bloated as it is, filled with smiling smug bureaucrats just
doing their job.

On 12/15/2015 1:56 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:32:28 -0500, John H.
wrote:

These days anyone who can put am Ikea table together can make a drone
from parts and I already know a guy who is making money doing it. (he
works for my wife). Some of these are pretty sophisticated and still
less than $500 to build. (more properly "assemble" since it is all off
the shelf parts)



You can think of more reasons *not* to address a potential problem than
anyone I know. :-)


It's senseless to develop senseless, unenforceable rules just to say, "We have now
addressed the problem."

===

Absolutely right. That's one of the reasons that the government has
grown as bloated as it is, filled with smiling smug bureaucrats just
doing their job.


Much more onerous regulations were originally desired, including
mandatory training, testing and *licensing* of recreational drone and RC
hobbyists. The FAA is limited in it's authority to establish
regulations outside of those that are safety related. Plus, it is
dealing with a technology that no one could envision when the existing
regulations were written.

The registration requirement is a compromise between those who wanted
more stringent regulations or laws and the concerns of pilots regarding
the safe operation of their aircraft. It's also within the FAA's scope
of authority.

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:12:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 12/15/2015 12:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:46:53 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:08:41 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:


Again, the concern is a 50% increase of drones, RC aircraft, etc.,
starting to be used within the next couple of months.

I also realize that enforcement of the registration requirement is
difficult. It probably would have made more sense to require
registration at the time of sale.

Or have the seller check for an AMA card prior to the sale. But, the AMA card is free
to those under 19, and there is no requirement that the kid knows any flight rules or
safety measures.

Then we would have the "drone show" loophole ;-)

These days anyone who can put am Ikea table together can make a drone
from parts and I already know a guy who is making money doing it. (he
works for my wife). Some of these are pretty sophisticated and still
less than $500 to build. (more properly "assemble" since it is all off
the shelf parts)



You can think of more reasons *not* to address a potential problem than
anyone I know. :-)


I will address useless bureaucracy when I see it. The closest thing I
have seen for why they are doing this is to "raise awareness", like
these people don't know you are not supposed to fly anything in the
approach pattern of an airport.
The same kind of publicity that they will need to get even a modicum
of compliance would accomplish the same thing without the registration
boondoggle.