You're absolutely correct on that point. My understanding, though, was that those records stayed at the firearms dealer and were (supposedly? hopefully?) kept locked up in a secure place. While this does create a method of the police being able to trace a firearm back to the original purchaser, it is a bit different (in my eyes, at least) than having a central agency keeping all that information in one place. With the government's track record of keeping information confidential and secure, I'd be very hesitant to register anything... (If it tells you anything, the only information I gave in the last Census was my name... and even then it took the Census person several visits to my home to get it - and it was given out by another person who happened to be visiting me on a day when I was out at work and not around to chase the Census person away.)
BREAKING!!! U.S. Will Require Drones to Be Registered
- Thread starter gfredrone
- Start date
You're absolutely correct on that point. My understanding, though, was that those records stayed at the firearms dealer and were (supposedly? hopefully?) kept locked up in a secure place. While this does create a method of the police being able to trace a firearm back to the original purchaser, it is a bit different (in my eyes, at least) than having a central agency keeping all that information in one place. With the government's track record of keeping information confidential and secure, I'd be very hesitant to register anything... (If it tells you anything, the only information I gave in the last Census was my name... and even then it took the Census person several visits to my home to get it - and it was given out by another person who happened to be visiting me on a day when I was out at work and not around to chase the Census person away.)
Those records are also required to be available for inspection at any time. Personally, I do not believe for one second the transmitted data on a gun purchase isn't being recorded at the Federal level. I don't trust government any further than I could pick up the White House and throw it.
This is a well thought out response, and I don't intend to attack it on a point by point basis. You have your opinions and beliefs, and I have mine. I think we are headed for some kind of government oversight to this issue because it is getting more and more coverage in the media. I hate it that it will be the media that will bring it about - but that's just a fact of life these days. I don't disagree that registration won't stop bad behavior (registration doesn't stop drunk drivers) - BUT if a drone is found on the White House lawn - and it is registered to someone... they can go and punish the party involved for doing something stupid.
I think you're making a big assumption that the registration would be as simple as "mailing it in" and thus easy to thwart - I imagine it being much more like going to the tax collectors office with proof of ID.
I guess I can't argue with the colossal waste of money it will be... but again... my argument has been more of about if this is the way they choose to deal with the drone "problem" (in quotations deliberately because I don't think it's a real problem yet)... this would be the least disruptive to our hobby. MUCH less disruptive than passing a law saying we can only fly at AMA approved fields or something like that (which would ruin the hobby IMO).
Unfortunately I think you and I can agree - that it's the idiots out there who are doing really dumb and reckless things that are bringing the negative press to our hobby. I wish there were a way to just hammer the idiots into non existence.... but alas, there are idiots everywhere....
PS. I actually misunderstood gun registration laws and didn't realize that you aren't required to register a gun in most states. So my assumption was wrong there. I am not, by the way, anti-gun... just anti idiots having guns
just like I am anti idiots having cars or drones....
Last edited:
At least you don't live in New York where they tell you what kind of gun you can & can't have (S.A.F.E. act passed in a midnight deal and no public knowledge), and also how many bullets you can put in a magazine at one time. And were also on the forefront of UAV legislation. I can't wait to see what Cuomo and Schumer cooks up this time. They stick their noses into everything.
I'm buying up my pre ban drones and selling them after the registration starts for top dollar, just like those 30 round banana CLIPS (/sarcasm).
Seriously though, they don't seriously think they're going to get everyone that owns one now, to register it do they? Why single out one model and exclude another? Will they include RC Heli's? Planes? It seems pretty arbitrary and probably won't hold up in court.
Seriously though, they don't seriously think they're going to get everyone that owns one now, to register it do they? Why single out one model and exclude another? Will they include RC Heli's? Planes? It seems pretty arbitrary and probably won't hold up in court.
First, they have to find the drone.
Maybe this will be a way to return flyaways??
There has never been a personal drone contact with a manned aircraft, and when it happens, the aircraft crew is probably not going to be aware of it, and then, the drone pieces will be scattered over a square mile.
All that will be announced is a task force to study the issue. I am at a loss to see how this can be implemented without an NPRM process which takes at least a year. Personally, I think it's an illogical response to the public hysteria over something that's never happened.
It has nothing to do with money.
One of the biggest problems will be to define a drone. How do you define a fixed-wing drone that doesn't define a hobby airplane model? How do you define a multirotor drone without including a model Sikorsky H-34 Seahorse od SH-60 Seahawk?
Why don't you put your location into your profile so we can tell where you are?
Agreed and they're using the
Agreed. They are saying they want to catch people flying near airports. They are singling out the Phantoms, which have software built in to keep them from flying near airports already. This proves it's just another attempt by .gov to interject itself into our lives, for no other reason than control.
They are solving nothing. They are preventing nothing. Bloated gov't waste.
Agreed. They are saying they want to catch people flying near airports. They are singling out the Phantoms, which have software built in to keep them from flying near airports already. This proves it's just another attempt by .gov to interject itself into our lives, for no other reason than control.
They are solving nothing. They are preventing nothing. Bloated gov't waste.
Here is a similar article with a few more details...
U.S. regulators plan to require recreational drone owners to register their devices, an ambitious bid to rein in reckless users that faces a tight timeline and a thicket of legal and practical questions.
The Transportation Department plans to announce Monday that it wants to soon require registration for all unmanned aircraft “except for toys and those with minimal safety risk,” according to a draft news release reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.
The department plans to create a task force of more than two dozen government and industry representatives to recommend the specifics of a registration policy, including which drones should be included, how users will register and whether the rules will apply to drones already sold, according to people familiar with the plans. The draft news release says the department wants to “create a culture of accountability” for drone operators.
Several people said the government aims to issue final registration rules before Christmas, an exceptionally fast timeline for aviation regulations. Typical aviation rulemakings take years.
The Transportation Department said it planned to make a drone-related announcement Monday but declined further comment.
Regulators and lawmakers have struggled to keep up with the proliferation of drones as new technology has made them smaller, cheaper and easier to fly, increasing concern that the devices pose a threat to people in the air and on the ground. Industry executives estimate hundreds of thousands of drones have been sold in the U.S.
Registration would be one of regulators’ most ambitious steps to crack down on unsafe flights and enforce existing rules, including that drones can’t be flown near airports or beyond the sight of an operator.
Defining which drones would require registration is expected to be a key issue for the task force, several committee members said. Commercial drones are to be regulated by separate rules expected to be completed next year.
Regulators are expected to require registration for the most popular recreational drones—four-rotor copters called Phantoms made by China’s SZ DJI Technology Co. that sell for roughly $1,000—and similar models. Members said regulators might be willing to exclude smaller devices, such as the 2-ounce, $100 MiniDrones sold by French manufacturer Parrot SA.
Several drone-industry executives and former government officials expressed skepticism that regulators would be able to meet the year-end goal. One person familiar with the government’s plans said the agency intends to declare the rule an emergency, allowing regulators to short-circuit a process that normally requires monthslong reviews and public-comment periods.
Completing an aviation rule in three months would be “unprecedented,” said Jim Williams, who retired in June as the top drone official at the Federal Aviation Administration and is now a consultant for the law firm Dentons. “It would be the most amazing feat of governance I’ve seen in my 33 years in the federal government.”
People associated with the industry raised a host of other logistical questions: Will drone sellers be required to collect customer information? How will the policy account for homemade drones? Can the FAA simplify and streamline a registration process that for manned aircraft typically takes about three months?
The expedited timeline worries many, including those who support registration to help educate users about airspace rules.
“It’s a step in the right direction,” said Gretchen West, an adviser at law firm Hogan Lovells LLP. But the government’s timeline “makes me nervous what the outcome will be.”
Others noted that the commercial-drone rules have been in the works since 2005. “After 10 years of rule making, we suddenly have this scramble to do something within a month, which is terribly short under any circumstances,” said Brendan Schulman, DJI’s head of policy.
Mr. Williams, the former FAA official, and others also questioned how regulators plan to deal with a 2012 law that generally prohibits the FAA from regulating recreational drones. FAA officials have cited that law as the reason they don’t plan extensive regulations for recreational drones, similar to those for commercial devices.
“This is a serious open question,” said task-force member Greg McNeal, a Pepperdine University law professor and co-founder of AirMap, an airspace-information app for drone users.
The person familiar with the government’s plans said that federal lawyers are expected to argue that drones are legally aircraft, and thus the FAA can require them to be registered under other laws.
U.S. regulators plan to require recreational drone owners to register their devices, an ambitious bid to rein in reckless users that faces a tight timeline and a thicket of legal and practical questions.
The Transportation Department plans to announce Monday that it wants to soon require registration for all unmanned aircraft “except for toys and those with minimal safety risk,” according to a draft news release reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.
The department plans to create a task force of more than two dozen government and industry representatives to recommend the specifics of a registration policy, including which drones should be included, how users will register and whether the rules will apply to drones already sold, according to people familiar with the plans. The draft news release says the department wants to “create a culture of accountability” for drone operators.
Several people said the government aims to issue final registration rules before Christmas, an exceptionally fast timeline for aviation regulations. Typical aviation rulemakings take years.
The Transportation Department said it planned to make a drone-related announcement Monday but declined further comment.
Regulators and lawmakers have struggled to keep up with the proliferation of drones as new technology has made them smaller, cheaper and easier to fly, increasing concern that the devices pose a threat to people in the air and on the ground. Industry executives estimate hundreds of thousands of drones have been sold in the U.S.
Registration would be one of regulators’ most ambitious steps to crack down on unsafe flights and enforce existing rules, including that drones can’t be flown near airports or beyond the sight of an operator.
Defining which drones would require registration is expected to be a key issue for the task force, several committee members said. Commercial drones are to be regulated by separate rules expected to be completed next year.
Regulators are expected to require registration for the most popular recreational drones—four-rotor copters called Phantoms made by China’s SZ DJI Technology Co. that sell for roughly $1,000—and similar models. Members said regulators might be willing to exclude smaller devices, such as the 2-ounce, $100 MiniDrones sold by French manufacturer Parrot SA.
Several drone-industry executives and former government officials expressed skepticism that regulators would be able to meet the year-end goal. One person familiar with the government’s plans said the agency intends to declare the rule an emergency, allowing regulators to short-circuit a process that normally requires monthslong reviews and public-comment periods.
Completing an aviation rule in three months would be “unprecedented,” said Jim Williams, who retired in June as the top drone official at the Federal Aviation Administration and is now a consultant for the law firm Dentons. “It would be the most amazing feat of governance I’ve seen in my 33 years in the federal government.”
People associated with the industry raised a host of other logistical questions: Will drone sellers be required to collect customer information? How will the policy account for homemade drones? Can the FAA simplify and streamline a registration process that for manned aircraft typically takes about three months?
The expedited timeline worries many, including those who support registration to help educate users about airspace rules.
“It’s a step in the right direction,” said Gretchen West, an adviser at law firm Hogan Lovells LLP. But the government’s timeline “makes me nervous what the outcome will be.”
Others noted that the commercial-drone rules have been in the works since 2005. “After 10 years of rule making, we suddenly have this scramble to do something within a month, which is terribly short under any circumstances,” said Brendan Schulman, DJI’s head of policy.
Mr. Williams, the former FAA official, and others also questioned how regulators plan to deal with a 2012 law that generally prohibits the FAA from regulating recreational drones. FAA officials have cited that law as the reason they don’t plan extensive regulations for recreational drones, similar to those for commercial devices.
“This is a serious open question,” said task-force member Greg McNeal, a Pepperdine University law professor and co-founder of AirMap, an airspace-information app for drone users.
The person familiar with the government’s plans said that federal lawyers are expected to argue that drones are legally aircraft, and thus the FAA can require them to be registered under other laws.
They just said they will have to physically have access to the drone to then trace it back to the user. But what if the user doesn't crash or land where they can get it? From what I took from this is they have no idea how they are going to get this to work or how they are going to have jurisdiction to even do anything about it.
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
I was mainly referring to a UAV that falls from the sky into a person or does damage to property. Obviously if it gets sucked into a turbine it is dust at that point.
I can't post the video. But it was a live stream on YouTube from the DOT
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
If they wanted to I'm sure they could triangulate your signal in extreme cases, like say a UAV delivering contraband to a prison.
Skip to 9:40 to see it.
So they CAN move fast if they want to.
What a sour faced panel.
I am referring to what the secretary of the DOT just said during this news conference. I'm sure in extreme cases they might shoot it down if it was carrying drugs or something.
All that does is tell you who owns it, not who flew it.
True... but it's a clue I guess. Other people could be driving your car.... other people could be driving your boat.... but we still register those.
This article about the press conference:
Feds to require drone registration after close calls
kept mentioning a 5 mile radius around airports. I live a mile from an airport, but it is a tiny airport with nothing but Cessna's putt putting about. They mean 5 mile radius for large airports, right? I don't want to be prevented from flying in my own back yard.
Feds to require drone registration after close calls
kept mentioning a 5 mile radius around airports. I live a mile from an airport, but it is a tiny airport with nothing but Cessna's putt putting about. They mean 5 mile radius for large airports, right? I don't want to be prevented from flying in my own back yard.
Similar threads
- Sticky
