more talk of "drones" in the news



D

Dewster

Member
Austin913 said:
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/articl...le=Drone-soars-over-vineyards-but-is-it-legal

been following these types of postings on here and RCG. R/C planes and heli's have been around for some time now... but all of a sudden they're unmanned aerial vehicles or drones. just like the gun debate, it all seems to be psycholinguistic programming to instill fear or unease.
Click to expand...

Excellent description. RC planes and helicopters have flying with cameras before the term drone came into existence. Now multirotors are lobbed in the same pool with the technology that militaries use.
 

D

Dewster

Member
andrewrob said:
Fly by drone shootings and using them for dope smuggling. Interesting theories by the police there.
Click to expand...

The Mexican drug cartels have used sophisticated means to smuggle drugs. They've used submarines, boats, planes, ultralites, not too mention low tech tunnels, vehicles, etc. I couldn't see a multirotor as being an effective way for smuggling the loads they need to be profitably practical. Now a fixed wing drone/s could be feasible because of the distance they are capable of flying, but once again, are they capable of carrying enough of a load to be profitable?

There is a lot of fear surrounding drones and the potential negative use of the technology. Fear is what is going to drive the laws surrounding this technology. There hasn't been a case, that I know of, that would justify the restrictions some of the state/countries are attempting to implement.
 

kloner

kloner

Aerial DP
a bundle of weed coming across is 20 kilo a bail, they usually find 10-20 bails at a time walking across on peoples backs. hundreds to thousands of em in semi trucks or through tunnels. There are predator drones flying over the border watching it all happen. They have gotten pretty good at it.....

narco like meth, heroin and other stuff is alot lighter, but none the less.

the cia and fbi have been reading forums and out of hundreds of thousands of posters they gotta pick out that guy to set presedence..... ridiculous. I think i've seen the posts making fun at guys using them to deliver drugs, but seriously, don't think that draws more attention than conventional methods...... come on. there aint a rig that could go far enough to not be detected flying dope across a border in the quntities it'd take to be profitable. The mexicans are in the mountains growing it in the usa to not deal with crossing with it. watch nat geo or discovery channel, every grow they come across is mexican cartel related
 

E

Eggbeater

Member
This September, in Texas, it will be against the law to take or possess ANY image (digital. IR magnetic etc) of private property without written consne t from the pwoperty owner. That means virtually you will not be able to use a camera or gimbal as somewhere in the picture will be private property. If we do not organize and educate right now, it will be everywhere. It is a nationwide movement started by PAC's who are out to basically defame Obama and drones. They are citing protection of our children and anything that will instow fear. The fact is, after they take away your right, they will give it to who they want...Goggle, private corps, etc. Maybe we can use technology to get rid of "representatives" and vote often and direct? By the time all the dealers and manufacturers get the message, it will be too late. I'm not investing in camera gear for sure.
 

R

RobertsUp

Member
Wait. The regulation you describe doesn't mention aerial photography at all.

So in Texas it will become illegal to stand in front of any house and take a picture of it with a cellphone?

Then Google maps will be illegal in Texas. I wouldn't worry.

You're flying from a public sidewalk. Or nearby. I wouldn't worry.

Rob
 
Last edited by a moderator:

E

Eggbeater

Member
Please reread house bill "HB912". It is not a regulation. It is a proposed LAW that will take effect Sept, 2013.

1.UAV means "Unmannmed Aerial Vehicle".

2.It will be illegal to take, possess anywhere, or distribute an image of someone else's property.

3.These images are photographic (digital), magnetic, infrared...ANY IMAGE of any type.


4.If your image contains all or part of someone else's peoperty, you must be able to prove you have their permission. This means anything in the background of your shot. No lanscapes...not sunsets. Guaranteed your shot will have private property somewhere in the picture. Even a shot taken from a "public" place.


5.Yes...initially this law will make Google and any other satellite-based imaging illegal. But that's when you start to get screwed.


6.Exceptions will be granted. Google and anyone else who has the money or lobbying power will get rights to something you don't have anymore. They can and you can't. Your "right to privacy" just got sold to the highest bidder.

7.Miiltary drones were invented and used to reduce the number of risks of deaths to troops. They work if used properly. The problem is these armed and dangerous tools have been linked to our hobby so that now we are operating killer drones all of a sudden. And the next phase will be...

8.Once this initial step is complete, it will be an easy step to link mutltirotors and ALL remote control aircraft in the near future. I see this as the beginning of a serious threat to the whole RC hobby.

I hope I am wrong. But I think I am not. If you disagree, then just do nothing.
 

D

Dewster

Member
Eggbeater said:
Please reread house bill "HB912". It is not a regulation. It is a proposed LAW that will take effect Sept, 2013.

1.UAV means "Unmannmed Aerial Vehicle".

2.It will be illegal to take, possess anywhere, or distribute an image of someone else's property.

3.These images are photographic (digital), magnetic, infrared...ANY IMAGE of any type.


4.If your image contains all or part of someone else's peoperty, you must be able to prove you have their permission. This means anything in the background of your shot. No lanscapes...not sunsets. Guaranteed your shot will have private property somewhere in the picture. Even a shot taken from a "public" place.


5.Yes...initially this law will make Google and any other satellite-based imaging illegal. But that's when you start to get screwed.


6.Exceptions will be granted. Google and anyone else who has the money or lobbying power will get rights to something you don't have anymore. They can and you can't. Your "right to privacy" just got sold to the highest bidder.

7.Miiltary drones were invented and used to reduce the number of risks of deaths to troops. They work if used properly. The problem is these armed and dangerous tools have been linked to our hobby so that now we are operating killer drones all of a sudden. And the next phase will be...

8.Once this initial step is complete, it will be an easy step to link mutltirotors and ALL remote control aircraft in the near future. I see this as the beginning of a serious threat to the whole RC hobby.

I hope I am wrong. But I think I am not. If you disagree, then just do nothing.
Click to expand...

These proposed laws are ridiculous. I cannot see them being passed. What ever happened to freedom of speech? You would think that we were in Russia during the 80s. I guess these laws are meant to protect rich celebrities from Paparazzi.

I do find it ironic that no one complained when the government used drones to help law enforcement search for the beltway snipers. I don't think a single soul, including the politicians, made a single peep about its use.

I had a good day with my multi-rotor copter. The wind was calm, the sun shined and I put my craft up in the air. I had my Sony Action Cam filming a beautiful day. And yes... There was the backdrop of several homes in the background. Is called Mother Earth. Am I allowed to film that? Lol.
 

E

Eggbeater

Member
Dewster,
Can you photo anything without a house or skyscraper or private land somewhere in the picture? I hope you are right but my home state Texas is becoming an embarrassment of recent years. The story goes like this...

A man was filming the beauty surrounding the Texas Trinity River. He got home and realized a red streak in the water. He went back and investigated. A meat processor was dumping pig blood into the river. The Trinity is a source for Texas drinking water. The EPA was notified and files/jail time are possible. So what does Rep. Lance Gooden of Terrell, Texas do? He goes after the photographer and writes HB912 I referred to. Maybe he sunbathes in a Speedo by his pool. Who Knows. I think he is safe from anyone wanting a picture of that. The question is, can't he find something meaningful to do at work?

FYI, Texas once had a law which didn;t pass banning lawnmowers being started before 10am because it woke up some politician. They said it was about having "cleaner air". They need to wake up all right.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.
Top