Drones, drones everywhere.

Damned technology the Unabomber tried to warn us man, he tried. So did this guy
 
Drone users/abusers are their own worst enemy. The more they use them in public the louder the outcry from the public of "We're not putting up with this crap" I can see battles looming on the horizon as attempts are made to restrict or ban their use by everyone other than law enforcement, DHS, TSA, ICE, FEMA, FBI, CIA, SSA, NPS, DMV, NBA, NFL, NHL, PGA or any other group that has people wearing black shirts with three big letters on the back.
 
Silvaire said:
Drone users/abusers are their own worst enemy. The more they use them in public the louder the outcry from the public of "We're not putting up with this crap" I can see battles looming on the horizon as attempts are made to restrict or ban their use by everyone other than law enforcement, DHS, TSA, ICE, FEMA, FBI, CIA, SSA, NPS, DMV, NBA, NFL, NHL, PGA or any other group that has people wearing black shirts with three big letters on the back.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Which seems to run counter to: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Which it would appear since the FAA is federal, that the power to regulate the NAS is not a states rights issue. That all drone flying done by the public is allowed(not prohibited), and all flying done by the feds and the states be by grant authority, which is lacking. Oh well, it's just the constitution, no biggie.
 
It has nothing to do with the Constitution, the authors of which had no concept of an urban neighbor buzzing your back yard and pestering your dog with a semi-autonomous quad-copter. It has more to do with the number of a**holes out there who will use "freedom" to make everyone else's life miserable.

It's like having a nice cozy wood fire in your living room. Inevitably there is going to be the jerk who likes to save money by chopping up old pressure treated fence posts for a nice "green" fire :mad2:

Most rules, restrictions and regulations are brought upon us by our own doing.
 
So *******s are excluded from having freedom? You can't have it if we can't have it. And since we don't follow rules we will always have more freedom then you.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Damned technology the Unabomber tried to warn us man, he tried. So did this guy
Click to expand...

Interesting factoid. Pierre Boulle, who wrote the book on which the linked movie is based, was a French spy during WWII. He also penned The Bridge Over the River Kwai, based on his experiences in Southeast Asia.

As for the thread, cops putting themselves above the law and someone is surprised?
 
ClimbnSink said:
So *******s are excluded from having freedom?...
Click to expand...

I didn't say that. What ever "freedom" is relinquished due to the actions of *******s is applied to all of us. They don't get singled out.
 
Silvaire said:
It has nothing to do with the Constitution,

Most rules, restrictions and regulations are brought upon us by our own doing.
Click to expand...

Well, gotta disagree with that. The constitution was formed, as was this country with the theme that the people are the final say in their own lives. Of course, as we advanced, regulation became necessary for the peaceful enjoyment of our lives, but in a case where the public is prohibited(prior restraint, before regulations exist), and state actors are operating at will(SJPD considers themselves to be exempt from FAA oversight), this is a dichotomy that perfectly explains how republics become banana republics, or oligarchies, or fascist states.

If you are defending the actions of the SJPD, and that's what it sounds like, while also advising that the public is prohibited, that's a darn shame, or you fit right in with the forces wrecking the country from within.

As for how most rules are formed, that used to be the case. However, given the last 15 years of regulation, I can't really say that is so anymore. Not sure what I or the other 250 million people in the US did to deserve Obamacare...
 
docmirror said:
...If you are defending the actions of the SJPD, and that's what it sounds like, while also advising that the public is prohibited, that's a darn shame, or you fit right in with the forces wrecking the country from within...
Click to expand...

Whoa, don't know where you're getting all that. There is no effort, that I'm aware of, by any government agency at any level to do anything about this. The FAA itself doesn't even have an official policy yet.

I'm simply saying that whenever a drone user (who may or may not be a jerk) does something with his drone that pesters or offends someone else (who may or may not be a jerk) eventually that person is going to call his City Councilman or his Congressman or Senator and when politicians (of any party) get calls like these they see them as an opportunity to make it look like they're doing something and that's how all of this stuff comes about in the form of new legislation. They are, after all, lawmakers.

As for local, state or federal law enforcement and other agencies or ruling and governing entities of any sort being "above" these rules well let me tell you, that's been going on since before the Constitution was even written and writing it didn't change anything.
 
Silvaire said:
I didn't say that. What ever "freedom" is relinquished due to the actions of *******s is applied to all of us. They don't get singled out.
Click to expand...

How about we stop making laws based on the exceptions of human behavior? Wouldn't that be a novel approach?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top