Drones for photography
Sep 6, 2015 00:15:28 #
CHOLLY wrote:
See... the GOOD suffer because of the bad. :x
No one is arguing that point. What we are discussing is whether part of that suffering should be new laws and restrictions placed on flying of these things.
Sep 6, 2015 00:29:05 #
Sep 6, 2015 10:35:26 #
Bobspez wrote:
The teacher didn't do this intentionally. Supposedly he was flying in a nearby park where it was legal to fly and the craft got out of his line of sight and control. And no one was hurt. He was prosecuted because he was responsible for the incident, like someone would be if they drove recklessly and caused damage or injury. It's obvious that as a person flying a drone he was held to a much higher standard than someone who accidentally crashed a car.
Bob
Bob
There are already regulations that require flying them "in line of sight". If he failed to do this he was breaking the law. I suspect he was intentionally flying near the stadium.
Sep 6, 2015 10:40:32 #
CHOLLY wrote:
Absolutely.
Over to you. I have already suggested what I consider to be an example of useful, effective regulation. What additional regulation would you propose if you were lawmaker?
Sep 6, 2015 10:51:30 #
You call them "law makers" and then you know what they are going to do.
It's already against the law to toss a molitoff cocktail into anything.
It's already against the law to toss a molitoff cocktail into anything.
Sep 6, 2015 11:05:23 #
You need to prove the story is correct first, before you use it in determining our use of cameras.
Sep 6, 2015 11:06:44 #
And now on the news A student flew his drone into a stadium before the game. We're doomed by idots
Sep 6, 2015 14:06:54 #
Tomcat5133
Loc: Gladwyne PA
Do we honestly believe that the teacher who flew his drone lost control and it just happened to full into the "somewhat small compared to football" tennis court at the US Open while a match was going on? And why would so many people fly these quads at airplanes in airports like Newark. If a bird in the engine could take an airplane why would so many people be flying them around planes at airports?
Sep 6, 2015 14:13:23 #
If a bird in the engine could take an airplane, then they need to keep the birds out of there.
Sep 6, 2015 15:04:45 #
Could it be this is now a hot topic, so even if 1 person a week does it, it will make the news, even if no one is injured, or would have been if the worst happens?
I think one bird, or one drone won't take down a jet plane. I think a flock of birds is needed, and maybe a drone in each engine.
But no drones have actually damaged, much less taken down any airliner.
On the other hand maybe there's a more sinister reason these stories are so hot. The news does a great job af steering clear of any actual relevant items.
Every week 270 people are murdered in the US and 440 people are killed by drunk drivers. By some counts medical errors kill 7,000 people a week and is the third leading cause of death in the US. But a toy drone entering a stadium is big news.
Bob
I think one bird, or one drone won't take down a jet plane. I think a flock of birds is needed, and maybe a drone in each engine.
But no drones have actually damaged, much less taken down any airliner.
On the other hand maybe there's a more sinister reason these stories are so hot. The news does a great job af steering clear of any actual relevant items.
Every week 270 people are murdered in the US and 440 people are killed by drunk drivers. By some counts medical errors kill 7,000 people a week and is the third leading cause of death in the US. But a toy drone entering a stadium is big news.
Bob
Tom Daniels wrote:
Do we honestly believe that the teacher who flew his drone lost control and it just happened to full into the "somewhat small compared to football" tennis court at the US Open while a match was going on? And why would so many people fly these quads at airplanes in airports like Newark. If a bird in the engine could take an airplane why would so many people be flying them around planes at airports?
Sep 7, 2015 02:14:36 #
Folk tend to oversimplify complex issues, and complicate simple ones.
Yes, these aircraft and their use must be regulated for the public good.
PERIOD.
Yes, these aircraft and their use must be regulated for the public good.
PERIOD.
Sep 7, 2015 09:00:23 #
CHOLLY wrote:
Folk tend to oversimplify complex issues, and complicate simple ones.
Yes, these aircraft and their use must be regulated for the public good.
PERIOD.
Yes, these aircraft and their use must be regulated for the public good.
PERIOD.
There are regulations on the books that I consider overly restrictive, and that do not work. I have asked you for suggestions as to what you would consider reasonable regulations that allow for public safety and quadcopter usefulness. And I have proposed my own suggestions. Perhaps we can agree on some items.
Sep 7, 2015 10:26:39 #
Gee I think cars shouldn't be able to go over 70, I think all bars should not have parking (if you don't taxi there then you can't drink), I think the noise levels of motorcycles are too loud, I think I'm full of s@it. Enforce the laws on the books. Laws are basically made for honest concerned people not for abusers. Some laws are good and some bad. Same with people. Lets concentrate on enforcing what we already have.
Sep 7, 2015 10:43:00 #
Seadog wrote:
Gee I think cars shouldn't be able to go over 70, I think all bars should not have parking (if you don't taxi there then you can't drink), I think the noise levels of motorcycles are too loud, I think I'm full of s@it. Enforce the laws on the books. Laws are basically made for honest concerned people not for abusers. Some laws are good and some bad. Same with people. Lets concentrate on enforcing what we already have.
You left out forcing everyone to drive cars with a NASCAR approved crash helmet, roll bars, flame retardant suits and HANS neck device. This could potentially save 10's of thousands of lives annually, and the best part would be bars could again have parking lots.
Besides concentrating on enforcing the laws we have, I think we should concentrate on eliminating a few thousands of laws.
Sep 7, 2015 13:55:49 #
The price we Americans have to pay in order to live in the greatest expression of human will in the history of mankind... is an understanding that in order for us to have THIS civil society, we MUST accept restrictions on individual liberties.
You have the right to own a handgun... but you DO NOT have the right to shoot your neighbor because his dog capped on your lawn.
We accept that without question... NOW. But had to grow into that view over time.
The same for these tools/toys, that can and HAVE been used for illicit reasons against the in tress of this society.
Quit complaining like my granddaughter and act like responsible adults who understand that bad behavior has to be prevented and the only way to do that is through regulation. :roll:
You have the right to own a handgun... but you DO NOT have the right to shoot your neighbor because his dog capped on your lawn.
We accept that without question... NOW. But had to grow into that view over time.
The same for these tools/toys, that can and HAVE been used for illicit reasons against the in tress of this society.
Quit complaining like my granddaughter and act like responsible adults who understand that bad behavior has to be prevented and the only way to do that is through regulation. :roll:
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.