Fundamental to all of this is that somebody wants photography restricted. They want to blame the privacy issue on us so as to take the focus off of Corporate and/or Governmental agencies as the real cause.

It is not about crazy or stupid people needing to be regulated. The flying of RC aircraft and/or drones has never been a serious danger to the public.

Violations of our privacy are happening, but it's not us doing it.

Drones are being flown every day that are so high as not to be seen by us and they use cameras far more sophisticated than we know. Spy problems can not be solved by restricting the pro photographer or the hobbyist.

And, So, we come back to question:

Is There a reason for us to want more laws that restrict photography?

If it's true that our government could take our freedoms away without us being able to do anything about it...

Then, it has to be true that we already live in a police state.

Police State or not? We can only judge it by it's apparent power in the moment.

Judge it now, then, you say.

by it's power alone, it is causing a large group of photographers to consider siding away from the photographer's best interest and in giving it's power away to people who think that they know better.

Why is it that so many people want to make and enforce new laws? Even against behavior that has not been a problem in the past?

We do not need new laws. America has more laws and more people in jail than any other society has ever had since the beginning of history. At about 4 percent of the worlds population, America currently jails over 25% of the worlds prisoners.


For those who want to add new laws against picture taking RC aircraft, new people will be jailed and/or fined and the police state will continue.

There is a drone looking into every house in every town. It's called the FEDS and I wonder if this is the drone we all really want to down?

If a bird in the engine could take an airplane, then they need to keep the birds out of there.

Wow ! Best shot of a hummingbird that i can remember.

Well, I need a rear camera for my car because my neck it not as limber as it once was.

But, I need a front camera for my car, in case it's in an accident, and I need to prove that it was not my fault.

and, I might need an interior camera to protect me against improper arrest and detention.

and, I might need a gun...

You need to prove the story is correct first, before you use it in determining our use of cameras.

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.

No, I don't see why we should further regulate aerial photography.

It could have been somebody tossing a molitof cocktail in that seating arena so why don't we do something about molitof cocktails?

Somebody is creating all of these problems in order to get restrictions on us. There are no real new problems, only old problems that were never a problem until they want to turn them into problems for personal gain.

Are we to agree with them and lose this technology to them?

We are photographers and shouldn't somebody be speaking up for the photographer?

I agree with you 100%. We all need to protect our right to photograph and to fly drones.

When we stop to look at why people are against Drones, I doubt that much of it is coming from our neighbors flying camera drones, not even from the most irresponsible among us.

What people are concerned about are these 500 lb. drones flying unseen thousands of feet above us that can see and hear us in the privacy of our homes. Dangerous RF and EMF frequencies have been experimentally radiated that were undetectable by it's victims.

Ending militarized drone activity against citizens should be our first priority. We should also look to outlawing police drones that spy without court orders and we should not outlaw drones that photograph police enforcement.

They really want to stop us from flying drones that take pictures. They do not want to stop the real problem that comes from them.