reporter arrested for drone use at accident

Cops don't seem to need authority in the this day and age, or at least they don't think they do, which is operationally identical.
 
It seems now that "interfering" with police includes anything down to and including "doing something they just don't like".
 
In Florida there is a sub set of law enforcement that is so ashamed of their behavior hat they regularly arrest and incarcerate people for recording a traffic stop AFTER informing the cop they were recording, which is absolutely legal and they know it, but harassment and verbal as well as physical violence against these people is commonplace.
 
Last edited:
This! :yes:

They are all little Hitlers.
Well, not all... but too many.

I have a nephew who is now a cop, after a tour in the sandbox. Pretty level headed guy, but I'm sure they'll break him of that before too long.
 
Well, not all... but too many.

I have a nephew who is now a cop, after a tour in the sandbox. Pretty level headed guy, but I'm sure they'll break him of that before too long.

every profession has its share of dildos. Unfortunately, the 99% that are doing a good job get overshadowed by the 1% a-hole factor.
 
every profession has its share of dildos. Unfortunately, the 99% that are doing a good job get overshadowed by the 1% a-hole factor.

1% of cop population couldn't do all the dirty dirty the police do, nor could a bad 1% get by if the other 99% were good. They are all bad apples, except Dorner, he turned good and burned for it.
 
every profession has its share of dildos. Unfortunately, the 99% that are doing a good job get overshadowed by the 1% a-hole factor.

They are all bad apples, except Dorner, he turned good and burned for it.
I think the truth lies somewhere in between. 1% would be the police union's estimate, "all of them" would be the consensus of the prison population.
 
I think the truth lies somewhere in between. 1% would be the police union's estimate, "all of them" would be the consensus of the prison population.

No way to get by as an honest cop. All the dirty won't trust you if you don't play dirty.
 
every profession has its share of dildos. Unfortunately, the 99% that are doing a good job get overshadowed by the 1% a-hole factor.


There's waaaay more than 1% of LEO being dildos these days. They never clean house.
 
I think the truth lies somewhere in between. 1% would be the police union's estimate, "all of them" would be the consensus of the prison population.

The real problem is that the police union would likely argue that the other 99% should "have the back" of the 1%, and the rest of us should be sympathetic because they all have a tough job. The courts all too often appear to agree. In other words, there is little accountability for bad cops.


JKG
 
Even if he was going to use the photos in the paper (which would make it a commercial operation - and illegal) I don't see how local cops had any authority to stop him. The FAA would be the only agency with jurisdiction...

How is that illegal?
 
Reading that story, it appears that the reporter made the mistake of talking to police.

When they approached him, he should have declined to talk, asked if he is free to go, and just left.
 
Reading that story, it appears that the reporter made the mistake of talking to police.

When they approached him, he should have declined to talk, asked if he is free to go, and just left.
Or just declined to talk to them, and stayed... since he wasn't breaking any laws. I would object to being chased out of a place where I had a right to be.
 
No way to get by as an honest cop.

1) I did, for 8 1/2 years in Dade County, FL, from 1982 to 1990. Most spent in "Central District". Think: where the riots were. Lot of good arrests, putting people in jail who needed to be there.

2) Most of the officers I rode with were honest. Rogue cops were the ones who got shunned. Being around them put your job, your freedom and even your life in jeopardy.

3) In the academy, we were specifically introduced to the term "contempt of cop". The lesson was that there was no such thing, and that if you could not find a State Law which had been violated to just walk (drive) away.

4) Most of my time was spent as a Field Training Officer, and part of my job was to weed out recruits who were overly "badge heavy". A single fraudulent report or fabricated arrest report was enough to get washed out, if proven.

I will stipulate there are bad cops and dishonest cops. But I think it's natural that we focus on the abuses we hear about, some of which are admittedly pretty blatant. You just don't tend to read about all the honest cops that just day after day and night after night just get the job done and go home. It's much like the public perception of how dangerous small planes are - when it's off your radar until there's a crash, you're perception is bound to be skewed.

Same thing going on here, I suspect.
 
Last edited:
With all the good cops at the accident how did the one bad cop haul this guy off to jail?
 
I have a few speculations in mind but would like to be more informed before I say on a public forum. No comment


:mad2:.................

Now you are starting to sound like a cop..........







Oh... never mind...:redface:
 
What about the guy they shut down who was delivering beer with a drone, I think they cited commercial use in that case
 
Big brother,LEOs they want the ability to watch us,but don't even consider video or still pictures of them. What are they afraid of.
 
Big brother,LEOs they want the ability to watch us,but don't even consider video or still pictures of them. What are they afraid of.
What really turns my cork is that AFaIK you can go to jail for lying to a federal agent (just ask Martha Stewart) but they (and any other LEO) can legally lie all they want. Why is this acceptable?

I'm quite OK with penalties for lying under oath but this seems way wrong to me.
 
How is that illegal?

I would argue that since he is a reporter by profession, if pics from his R/C helicopter (UAV) are printed in his paper, UAV photography could be seen as a condition of employment and therefore a commercial operation.
 
What really turns my cork is that AFaIK you can go to jail for lying to a federal agent (just ask Martha Stewart) but they (and any other LEO) can legally lie all they want.
And they will act extremely offended if you point that out as the reason you're reluctant to take them at their word. To the point of looking for additional things to throw at you.
 
What really turns my cork is that AFaIK you can go to jail for lying to a federal agent (just ask Martha Stewart) but they (and any other LEO) can legally lie all they want. Why is this acceptable?

I'm quite OK with penalties for lying under oath but this seems way wrong to me.



When I was 23 I got hauled out of a bar by a team of undercover LEO's for suspected underage drinking. After the questions regarding the authenticity of my very authentic in-state ID became ridiculous, I exercised my right to remain silent.

At which point I was falsely accused of drug possession, given the good cop bad cop routine and then chewed out and dressed down like the Drill Sargent in Full Metal Jacket.

Entrapment was the name of the game. The police officers knew full well they were lying out of their asses, but they were ****ed that I exercised my rights and were literally just trying to **** me off enough to draw a response. After a few minutes of this crap they simply let me go (with a few choice words about my character)

I know LEO's need some leeway when dealing with criminals. But some of their SOP's are completely unethical. IMO..

Locally in Fayetteville, NC the government recently ordered the PD (over great protest from the PD) to cease "asking" and bullying citizens into consenting to searches without warrants after traffic stops. Bravo!
 
Last edited:
Oddly enough, at the present time, there appears to be no statute or regulation prohibiting commercial use of R/C aircraft.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...-lawsuit-coming-to-american-skies-102754.html

Well, that article does present a good case...

FWIW I haven't heard of anyone using UAV's for commercial purposes getting anything more than a cease and desist letter from the FAA.

Though I understand the FAA has been quick to issue such a letter for any commercial use reported to them. Agriculture, real estate agents, etc...

Awhile back a friend of mine who is big into agriculture knew that I had an FPV r/c airplane (drone!!) asked me about using it for taking NDVI images of crops. I looked into it and told him that commercial use of it was illegal but that we could buy an NDVI camera and do aerial photography all day long from a little cessna. Turned out to be a nice occasional job for me.

In fact it would cost about the same for me to fly 20-70 NM, orbit for 10 minutes, take the pics from a light aircraft than it would for me to drive out to a site, launch an FPV airplane, capture the pics and then drive home.
 
Last edited:
There appears to be no statute or regulation prohibiting commercial drone use. When the FAA fined a guy for doing it, they used the "careless or reckless" regulation, but the case is currently on appeal before the NTSB.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...-lawsuit-coming-to-american-skies-102754.html

In opposition to much of what is said in the article above, I see that the FAA's new home page has a link to the following, which attempts to bust "myths" about the FAA and unmanned aircraft:

http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=76240

I see a lot of policy statements, but conspicuosly lacking are citations to regulations or statutes.

I found this statement particularly entertaining: "There are no shades of gray in FAA regulations." :rofl:
 
Interesting. A few weeks ago, I was wondering whether people were still doing cloud seeding. Now I know.
 
Back
Top