Drone flies into fans at MLB game

FloridaPilot said:
Can you honestly say that we have more rights/or the same now than we did say 30 years ago?

IMO it's the citizens that do dumb things, (Ex: fly a drone into an airport that affect airplanes) which forces government to get involved to create laws that restrict everyone, even responsible people.




It's a delicate balance and it will be until the end of time.
Click to expand...



We have all the same rights, rights can not be taken away by definition.

That said we have a ton more government interference and overreach, spanning from the 1A, 2A, 4A and as cited above obviously at least 3 7A violations.


And sorry, I don't care what dumb things some people may do, my rights trump your "safety" and "comfort", ill say it again, my rights trump your "safety" and "comfort", you got a issue with a dumb person you can deal with a individual, but far too many brave men and women have given it all to protect our constitution (which is what our country actually is).
 
Tantalum said:
I've thought about it, we both have dogs so that might give us some common ground, then chat about planes, etc. I really hate to be "that guy" though who gets involved in someone else's business.. I'd rather just grumble about it on an internet forum lol
Click to expand...


Nah!

Go over and shoot the chit with him, offer him a beer and just talk, he probably doesn't know, or didn't think he was being a issue to you. Heck if you're nice about it you might even make a friend, besides it's good to have open lines with the people who live around ya right? :)
 
No your rights end at my nose, and you don't have a right to unreasonably endanger me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FloridaPilot said:
Click to expand...

I don't see what's dangerous, seems a remote location, presuming the area was only populated with participating parties and he has a good backdrop, nothing there I have a problem with, not my cup of tea, but doesn't look like he's endangering anyone but perhaps himself, which is his decision.
 
gsengle said:
No your rights end at my nose, and you don't have a right to unreasonably endanger me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


Have you been assulted by a drone? Or had your property damaged by a drone?
 
Irrelevant. If you fly one in the approach path at my airport and it weighs 40lbs, you're endangering me. Just like you don't have the right to shoot at me, until you happen to hit me... just sayin.

We all need to be reasonable here to live together in shared space. Or how bout we leave it to the private sector to decide say what side of the road we should drive on?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The idea that this specific story is something the FAA has an interest in investigating is absolutely hilarious to me. All they can (and should) do is encourage the private sector to develop systems that prevent drones from flying in controlled airspace.

That said, I do recognize the hazard that some drones create. (This MLB stadium drone does not fall into that category.) I had a near midair with a drone at 7,500 feet last July in Saginaw, Michigan. Saginaw is the U.S.'s least busy approach control airspace, and yet it happened right there. Had it hit me, I would have probably lost an engine and a windscreen. The thing was massive.
 
James331 said:
We have all the same rights, rights can not be taken away by definition.

That said we have a ton more government interference and overreach, spanning from the 1A, 2A, 4A and as cited above obviously at least 3 7A violations.


And sorry, I don't care what dumb things some people may do, my rights trump your "safety" and "comfort", ill say it again, my rights trump your "safety" and "comfort", you got a issue with a dumb person you can deal with a individual, but far too many brave men and women have given it all to protect our constitution (which is what our country actually is).
Click to expand...
I hate to break it to you but operating an aircraft of any sort, no matter how big or small, is not a right.
 
Soooooo no drone has hurt you / your "nose"?



I don't play make believe anymore, or have time for hypotheticals


When did this 40lb plus drone fly into your approach path??



You and the PD should make a effort to find the person who did that and find out if this is a didn't know better education thing, or a criminal matter.... and deal with THAT person.

I had nothing to do with flying in your approach path, my drone was no where near you, so keep your regulations away from ME and EVERYONE else.


Race your own race bud
 
James331 said:
I don't see what's dangerous, seems a remote location, presuming the area was only populated with participating parties and he has a good backdrop, nothing there I have a problem with, not my cup of tea, but doesn't look like he's endangering anyone but perhaps himself, which is his decision.
Click to expand...

But can you see how this can potentially hurt someone? and it will, then they will put laws in place. To protect people from themselves.
 
MassPilot said:
I hate to break it to you but operating an aircraft of any sort, no matter how big or small, is not a right.
Click to expand...

No, but not getting killed by a government drone without due process is.
 
FloridaPilot said:
But can you see how this can potentially hurt someone? and it will, then they will put laws in place. To protect people from themselves.
Click to expand...

"Potentially" doesn't get you on the bus.

And I don't need/want to be protected from myself, I'd be happy taking any associated "risk"

Also was stated, the only drone that have hurt/killed anyone were government drones, how's trying to force citizens to fly their drone a certain way going to change how government drones are used?
 
James331 said:
We have all the same rights, rights can not be taken away by definition.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree: So you are saying that I have the same gun rights in Florida that I do in New York?
 
James331 said:
No, but not getting killed by a government drone without due process is.
Click to expand...

If you don't believe colliding with forty lbs of metal that happens to fly is 1) possible and 2) potentially life threatening, you're either trolling us, or are obstinate because a political philosophy trumps common sense. Nah, never seen that happen in the good ole USA....

Someday a jet will come down, and then watch the overreaction. All of which could be avoided by just using common sense from day one. But that's too easy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FloridaPilot said:
I respectfully disagree: So you are saying that I have the same gun rights in Florida that I do in New York?
Click to expand...


Yes.

However you risk people enforcing illegal laws at your expense, so it's not a matter of being lawful or your rights, as it is a risk assessment when dealing with criminals.
 
gsengle said:
If you don't believe colliding with forty lbs of metal that happens to fly is 1) possible and 2) potentially life threatening, you're either trolling us, or are obstinate because a political philosophy trumps common sense. Nah, never seen that happen in the good ole USA....

Someday a jet will come down, and then watch the overreaction. All of which could be avoided by just using common sense from day one. But that's too easy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

So no drone has hurt you
No drone actually flew in your approach path.
No known history exists of private drones damaging aircraft, not a drop of blood spilled

So what's the issue again??
 
 
The bigger, more capable drones are still pretty pricey, but like all gadgets the price will come down over time and there will be many more of them flying around causing problems.
 
gsengle said:
And probably a cheap ADSB transponder...
Click to expand...

Facepalm.

You know a cheap one is going to be on UAT... and therefore won't respond to Mode-S interrogation...

And what altitude is required for guaranteed UAT coverage in CONUS...?

To get the level of coverage you'd need to look at drone transponders, you're talking an enormous and expensive upgrade to the already perfect NexGen UAT tower site system to add more sites... you know, that system which already poops rainbows out of unicorns, because it does so much wonderful stuff.

For only $8B or so. So far. Not including maintenance.

No. Just no. The stupid is exceedingly high enough already in NexGen.
 
denverpilot said:
Facepalm.

You know a cheap one is going to be on UAT... and therefore won't respond to Mode-S interrogation...

And what altitude is required for guaranteed UAT coverage in CONUS...?

To get the level of coverage you'd need to look at drone transponders, you're talking an enormous and expensive upgrade to the already perfect NexGen UAT tower site system to add more sites... you know, that system which already poops rainbows out of unicorns, because it does so much wonderful stuff.

For only $8B or so. So far. Not including maintenance.

No. Just no. The stupid is exceedingly high enough already in NexGen.
Click to expand...

I bet they will be really cheap soon, especially for unmanned aircraft. And I have a dual band traffic unit. I bet they could get the uat box down to $50. Look at what a gps chip costs these days. If your drone is the size of a small aircraft, it's gotta have a way to be avoided...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FloridaPilot said:
The drone problem is very real

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/22/drone-users-warned-to-fly-safe-after-plane-near-miss.html

http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/31/rogue-drone-allegedly-flew-within-wingspan-of-commercial-airplane/

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/soci...fected-10000-travellers-stranded-after-drones

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...ngspan-plane-approaching-heathrow-near-misses
Click to expand...

Lol, sensational stories and busy body squirrelly pilots!

It's like that scumb bag pilot who dinged that airliner on the ground and than said it was a drone strike FAIL.

So yeah, as a student of history, I just don't see the issue here, if these things were this dangerous, for how long they have been around, we would have actually seen the dangerous drone cause damage, yet nada.

Again, according to the known history we have on drones, as an American, you are more likely to be assassinated by the federal government and a reaper drone, than being killed or maimed by your neghibors DJI Phantom.

That's a fact.

Yet I don't see the outcry and fear of a reaper killing you and your kids, why not??
 
Last edited:
Couple conversation points? people behaving stupid isn't why gov't overeaches. It overeaches for re-election, for sustainment of bureacracy, and because people are more inclined to value security over freedom, to a skewed degree; or at least skewed to my mind. As a people, we bring the nanny state down on ourselves.

Also, calling BS on the "previlige" argument. Maybe syntactically correct, but still BS - you pass the checkride, pass the written, the Feds don't have a choice in the matter; absent cause, they are required to give you the ticket. Like voting, or walkng down the street, or writing an op-ed that the Feds suck - real hard to convince a judge to support canceling your "previliges" without cause.

Regarding getting "killed by a goverment drone without due process" - I'm good with it. It's a fairly efficient way to kill some folks who just, well, need killing.
 
That 8yr old and that 16yr old needed killing eh?

In fact seeing how there was no due process, there but the grace of god go you too

But hey, based on facts and history YOU are more likely to be murdered by federal drone strike than a hobby drone crashing into your bug smasher. So if you ain't worried about that hellfire missile, STFU about the kid and his quad copter.
 
I'm not worried about the murder. I'm worried about mid airs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
I'm not worried about the murder. I'm worried about mid airs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Your worries are not backed up with facts or history.

Much like children being worried about monsters under their bed.
 
James331 said:
Your worries are not backed up with facts or history.

Much like children being worried about monsters under their bed.
Click to expand...

You control what you can control in the ways you can control it. And even if one were more of a concern than the other it is a logical fallacy to say that the lesser concern is therefore not a concern, even if you're right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
James331 said:
Again, according to the known history we have on drones, as an American, you are more likely to be assassinated by the federal government and a reaper drone, than being killed or maimed by your neghibors DJI Phantom.
Click to expand...

James you condemn sensationalist reporting, but this is your big argument? I'm not a known senior commander in Al Queda, so unlike the Awlaki family, the chances of getting killed by a government UAS is not the same as theirs was. You really are grasping at straws on this one. You realize they weren't killed in america right? You realize they were tried in a federal court in Yeman and convicted? This isn't comparing apples and oranges, it's comparing apples and light bulbs. Your argument is absolutely flawed, and the fact that you don't see it is very telling of your irrational mentality.
 
Were they Americans?
Yes.


Were they killed by a drone
Yes.


Also I don't think that's how the 7A works, last I checked we don't execute based on some 3rd world courts ruling, trail by peers, that would be Americans. Also I didn't realize his son and 8yr old daughter were also convicted. Do you have a link to the court transcripts?


But back to the issue.

So three Americans killed by a gov drone
Zero Americans killed by consumer/private/hobby drones

0<3

You can argue with me all you like, but it's simple math, and based on 3 being greater than 0, as a American you're more likely to be killed by your own government than your neighbors drone.
 
Haha, yeah whatever man. You are absolutely delusional if you believe what you are typing.
 
Direct C51 said:
Haha, yeah whatever man. You are absolutely delusional if you believe what you are typing.
Click to expand...

I'm delusional if I believe 3 Americans were killed by our governments drone strike?

That no Americans have been killed by hobby drones?


Uhh, what I believe is irrelevant, those are FACTS bud, like public record kinda facts.

0 is a smaller number than 3, that's not opinion, it's math.


You and I, as Americans, are more likely to be killed by our own government than some quadcopter. I know it's not the company line, I know if you are or were a government worker it's kinda is a bitter pill to swallow, but it's 100% fact and 100% math. Sorry if it offends you, but it is the truth.
 
James331 said:
I'm delusional if I believe 3 Americans were killed by our governments drone strike?

That no Americans have been killed by hobby drones?


Uhh, what I believe is irrelevant, those are FACTS bud, like public record kinda facts.

0 is a smaller number than 3, that's not opinion, it's math.
Click to expand...

You're leaving out a bunch of inconvient details that don't apply to most of us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
You're leaving out a bunch of inconvient details that don't apply to most of us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


Details would matter if it was like 3 Americans killed by a government drone strike, 3 Americans killed by quad copters, which is more dangerous?

But it's 3 Americans killed by a government drone strike, and a big fat 0 killed by quad copters and the like.

Point is if you're worried about non government "drones" hurting you, you're suffering from irrational fears, which is OK, just try not to let those irrational fears turn into phobias.
 
The point is these are two completely separate and disjoint issues that have no bearing on each other. It's irrelevant if we should in your opinion be more concerned about the other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
James331 said:
but far too many brave men and women have given it all to protect our constitution
Click to expand...
So now that it's convenient for your current argument, they are brave men and women protecting your freedom. I'll take that over your usual assessment of the military, the members being murderers that blindly serve the evil empire (paraphrasing).
 
gsengle said:
The point is these are two completely separate and disjoint issues that have no bearing on each other. It's irrelevant if we should in your opinion be more concerned about the other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It's a comparison, like how smoking is more dangerous than drinking coffee or whatever.

We compare things to put them in perspective.

If you're not worried about your government assassinating you, you really shouldn't worry about random quadcopters.
 
James331 said:
It's a comparison, like how smoking is more dangerous than drinking coffee or whatever.

We compare things to put them in perspective.

If you're not worried about your government assassinating you, you really shouldn't worry about random quadcopters.
Click to expand...

Don't worry the tin foil hat will protect ya!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Don't worry the tin foil hat will protect ya!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Ahh, call someone citing facts you don't like and that arnt dance around the flag as a tin foil hat lol.

Actually a tin foil hat would be overkill..... BECAUSE NO ONE HAS BEEN KILLED BY A QUADCOPTER lol


But I'm sorry I hurt your pro government feelings, so I'll re phrase.



You based on facts (22 deaths per year) you are more likely to be killed by a cow than a quadcopter.



Better?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top