Drone Police - they're getting deployed

[dhsprogis]

I don't think the "wild west" is over. In fact, I think it is just beginning. The FAA claims exclusive authority to the airspace. Yet, cities, towns, and even private land owners are claiming jurisdiction over flight. Even this LEO document acknowledges "local Laws, Ordinances, Directives". The battle over airspace has not even begun. That said, do you want to be the one that case law is decided around? Seems like an expensive and inconvenient way forward.

I plan to continue to flying according to FAA rules but I plan to be super respectful of any officials and land owners when they approach. I had just such an encounter two or three weeks ago at Sunday River. I was flying at dusk after the mountain was empty. I was trying to capture groomers on the mountain - not too close. I had launched from the parking lot and was mid-flight when a guard drove up and started asking questions. He was courteous and so was I. He respected that I was mid-flight and let me finish before he drilled me. When he did, I mentioned that I was staying on the mountain and skiing there as well so I had a right to be there. He mentioned that they did not allow drones. I mentioned that I did not see that restriction posted or in the documentation. He said it was new. I mentioned that my flight was not endangering anyone - the mountain was clear. He mentioned that the rules were not clear on the distinction but agreed that the reason for the rule was to protect skiers. He allowed me to keep flying but insisted that I not fly during operating hours of the mountain. I agreed. Everything was cool.

Here is one of my flights:

 

[spankybear]

Does this mean you don't show your driver's license when being pulled over by a cop?

Depends on state law... and the reason the pulled you over. They can not just pull you over for nothing

 

[drewstrob]

Can't understand the self-Lawyering types who want to push every technicality button.

You're saying you don't understand people who desire to know and exercise their rights in an attempt to prevent their further loss?

 

[Nakelp86]

No one needs to identify themselves in any way unless they are being detained. They can only be detained if they are suspected of a crime. Just as LEO cannot suspect you are not, lets say, legal to be in the US and therefore require ID (there needs to be _reason_ for that assumption), I'd say that they don't have a right to ask for ID for the same reason and while you are flying.
According US Code, you'd need to show local law enforcement the registration certificate:

An operator of an aircraft shall make available for inspection a certificate of registration for the aircraft when requested by a United States Government, State, or local law enforcement officer.

But there is no mention of any requirement to show ID and I'm pretty sure rulings on the US Constitution would trump local and US Code.

So again, the LEO card states to do things if the person is suspected of flying unsafe or being unregistered. There would need to be something indicating either of these things before they could ask for registration and ID info.

The reason can made up on the spot.
You are standing on a private land, you are scaring local crows and other wild life, someone called about noise, the dogs are barking etc.
Heard some stories before. This is why the guidance rules are so vague, any interpretation can be stretched to fit them.

 

[N017RW]

If you think creating a confrontation with a LEO is going to prevent further loss you're wrong.

That is for the courts.


By Henry Kett, 1814:
"I hesitate not to pronounce, that every man who is his own lawyer, has a fool for a client."

More commonly stated as:
"A man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client."

 

[88VMX12]

The flights were fun while they lasted! It will be regulated so strictly before you know it. I am glad as of right now I live in the middle of no wheresville and all the farmers around me use them. I guess if they regulate the farmers too much they ultimately are messing with the hands that feed us all!

On another note I don't mind talking to officers as long as we don't have a huge influx of guys that have the small man syndrome and we have to deal with a bunch of pricks, that think they know everything. The bad thing is once someone calls you in and exaggerates of what you were doing or not doing, you have to prove your innocence.

 

[Sneaky_ru]

DRONE LIVES MATTER!

We should totally start a riot!

 

[Kaos]

Please don't base your opinions about police from a couple of instances that have been posted. Local LEO are not out looking for people violating federal rules for drones.
It is no different, you have a few idiots that fly drones and you have few idiots that are LEO, the vast majority of each actually have common sense and will never meet. The extreme majority of LEO are trying to do their job and could care less about Joe Bob or Mary Sue flying their drone. Treat LEO like you want to be treated. Do what the LEO says do, if you disagree then after the contact report the incident by making a formal complaint with the department.
So funny how the sheep get so offended when the sheepdog barks at them.

 

[J.James]

By Henry Kett, 1814:
"I hesitate not to pronounce, that every man who is his own lawyer, has a fool for a client."

More commonly stated as:
"A man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client."

Ya cept for in reality that is one of the worst legal advise right there. Considering that fact that statistically most people that ever represent them selves as there own attorney in a court win there case about 90% of the time compared to just over 10% of people prevailing when they have some one else representing them. No matter how good a lawyer is no lawyer is ever going to care about any ones case or fight as hard for someone as a person would for them selves when its there own money or freedom at stake. Nore would most lawyers ever know as much about a persons case and personal details as well as there client does. Also under the law in the us a lawyer can only represent some one if the person is either deemed by the court to be mentally incompetent to represent them selves or if the person waives there competent and gets a lawyer under the law its an admission to the court that one is not competent to represent them selves as soon as they retains a lawyer.

I know even in my own situation most of the time I ever had a lawyer for any thing they only seem to care about $ and how to maximize the billing. which is why if some thing can be worked out fast and out of court they dont even both trying. BUT if they can get any thing to go all the way to a trial or full on drawn out battle thats the road most lawyers will take.

Yet on the other hand I never lost a case were I represented my self. and I just cant say that in any case were lawyers were involved. from small traffic court things to big civil and even a big disputed probait court case that I filed and pursued on my own after the family paid 4 different lawyers only to have them not even do any thing or even get the ball rolling in court and even when they did all they wanted to do was play nicely nice with the other sides lawers. nore did a single one of them even understand any of the issues and matters at hand even the other sides lawer was just bilking them for money to help them try to get away with robbing some ones entire estate and also trying to steal a pcs of property that they had no rights to or any reason to even try to claim they did and there lawer was even well aware of what a crook the person was and still represented them and keep billing the person intill it was clear they are not one to ever pay bills or debts ever . and even some of the aspects that any of them might of known about any case they still have to refer to notes and records and what not to even refresh them selves on the case instead of knowing all the details to the t all in there head and in documentation. In fact i only personally know 2 lawyers that are that good with cases for there clients were they don't even have to look at there notes or there files and have every thing in there head and sharp as whips. Ironically to they are not only top in there field they both also happen to be public defenders which tend to have a bad rap as being the worse lawyers around or who cant get a real lawyer job and they even think that who ever put out that silly claim that a person who represents them selves is a fool should not be giving legal advise because unless someone is just a blithering nut bag most people that represent them selves do better in court on average then someone with a lawyer does esp on small easy cases.


I'm also pretty sure that the phrase you cant fight city hall. more then likely was a rumor started by some one at some city hall in the back room. Cause the more people that would just believe it and give in with out a fight on any matter already just lost with out any fight. and I'm sure they would love it down at "city hall" if every person thought that you cant fight city hall and no one ever even bothered trying to fight city hall.

 

[Providian623]

Our local Sheriff is a friend of mine. A couple of days ago we were together and I asked him if our county, or two local cities, had any rules governing drones, other than the federal statutes. He advised me "no" and then asked ME, what the federal guidelines were. I am a retired LEO, so that tells me, a lot of smaller counties aren't bothering with drone regulations, at least not yet. Now as far as showing personal identification, one of the first things we were taught in the academy was try to identify who we were talking to. It's a safety issue, and it's also checking for outstanding warrants, but mostly the safety thing and it's force of habit. As far as being stopped on a highway by a LEO, probable cause was what ever I wanted it to be, because if I followed a vehicle for 3 - 4 minutes I could LEGALLY find several traffic violations. None of us, including law enforcement, drive perfect. As far as people in this forum talking big noise about all the things there are NOT going to do, just remember, you don't get to write the report, the officer does and he isn't going to spin it in your favor if you've given him a lot of grief. So while you are waiting for your court date, your drone is going to be sitting in property/evidence and the charge/s won't be related to you flying the drone, only the probable cause for the contact will be related to the drone. Don't be stupid, because, even if you are correct, you won't win the argument out on the street.

 

[Providian623]

Ya cept for in reality that is one of the worst legal advise right there. Considering that fact that statistically most people that ever represent them selves as there own attorney in a court win there case about 90% of the time compared to just over 10% of people prevailing when they have some one else representing them. No matter how good a lawyer is no lawyer is ever going to care about any ones case or fight as hard for someone as a person would for them selves when its there own money or freedom at stake. Nore would most lawyers ever know as much about a persons case and personal details as well as there client does. Also under the law in the us a lawyer can only represent some one if the person is either deemed by the court to be mentally incompetent to represent them selves or if the person waives there competent and gets a lawyer under the law its an admission to the court that one is not competent to represent them selves as soon as they retains a lawyer.

I know even in my own situation most of the time I ever had a lawyer for any thing they only seem to care about $ and how to maximize the billing. which is why if some thing can be worked out fast and out of court they dont even both trying. BUT if they can get any thing to go all the way to a trial or full on drawn out battle thats the road most lawyers will take.

Yet on the other hand I never lost a case were I represented my self. and I just cant say that in any case were lawyers were involved. from small traffic court things to big civil and even a big disputed probait court case that I filed and pursued on my own after the family paid 4 different lawyers only to have them not even do any thing or even get the ball rolling in court and even when they did all they wanted to do was play nicely nice with the other sides lawers. nore did a single one of them even understand any of the issues and matters at hand even the other sides lawer was just bilking them for money to help them try to get away with robbing some ones entire estate and also trying to steal a pcs of property that they had no rights to or any reason to even try to claim they did and there lawer was even well aware of what a crook the person was and still represented them and keep billing the person intill it was clear they are not one to ever pay bills or debts ever . and even some of the aspects that any of them might of known about any case they still have to refer to notes and records and what not to even refresh them selves on the case instead of knowing all the details to the t all in there head and in documentation. In fact i only personally know 2 lawyers that are that good with cases for there clients were they don't even have to look at there notes or there files and have every thing in there head and sharp as whips. Ironically to they are not only top in there field they both also happen to be public defenders which tend to have a bad rap as being the worse lawyers around or who cant get a real lawyer job and they even think that who ever put out that silly claim that a person who represents them selves is a fool should not be giving legal advise because unless someone is just a blithering nut bag most people that represent them selves do better in court on average then someone with a lawyer does esp on small easy cases.


I'm also pretty sure that the phrase you cant fight city hall. more then likely was a rumor started by some one at some city hall in the back room. Cause the more people that would just believe it and give in with out a fight on any matter already just lost with out any fight. and I'm sure they would love it down at "city hall" if every person thought that you cant fight city hall and no one ever even bothered trying to fight city hall.

We had three Public Defenders our local State Attorney couldn't beat, even if they didn't show up, and his staff was very good. They were just better. I'd cringe when I'd find out they were representing people I'd arrested because even thought the three were good friends of mine I knew I was going to be jumping through all kinds of hoops and would end up being beaten to a bloody pulp on the witness stand.

 

[jlummel]

Can't understand the self-Lawyering types who want to push every technicality button.

Remember they took down Al Capone on a technicality! The way to avoid being bit on the butt by a technicality is to be aware of it before those who might use it against you are, and to take action to eliminate it from their arsenal of tricks.

Understand, most people getting nailed on a technicality simply can't believe THAT'S what they are getting nailed on. I'm sure you've experience that "WTF!" feeling at some point in your life (and probably more than once or twice too)!

Some of us proactively nip it in the bud, and you should pay attention when these things are brought up. Even if it's not your personality type to be more cautious, there's wisdom in being aware of the issues raised by those who DO have that type of personality!

Sort of like having a sharp thinker doing all the heavy lifting for you, so you can sit back and veg out! People usually have to pay good money for that and here you get it for free...

Remember, you gotta play to win.

On the main topic of this thread, when I was a young liberal (and had heart) I used to antagonize cops every time I was stopped and learned some useful things such as, while they can't force you to produce ID, it's totally within their purview to ask for it. And if you are driving a car, in most states (if not all), you ARE required to produce a license when asked, which is usually ALSO your ID. And if you are being stopped while driving, if at all possible pull onto private property before you stop, it limits what they can cite you for if you aren't on the road. And to keep your hands where the officer can see them the whole time.

But I'm a conservative now and have a brain and learned that most cops are not bad people and that they are just trying to do their job and want desperately to just return to their families at the end of their shifts. And almost always they have a bad day because of dealing with too many liberals like what I used to be (who 'feel' first, and 'think' later, well sometimes they think later, that is).

Being human, as the day goes on it seeps into every encounter a cop has. Sometimes you just get the wet end of the shitstick and get a cop having a real bad day.

And given I'm a CCW permit holder and often carry, I find it most useful to be the brighter spot in that cop's day, though that's not always possible. But I'll try to deescalate a situation with an aggressive cop before responding in kind.

While I'm not happy about this latest intrusion by government into an activity I enjoy, it's an unfortunate fact of life (like needing reading glasses or a 'roid pillow when you get older). And unlike Obamacare (remember to vote), this FAA registration AND the enforcement of it is here to stay and will never go away (though it may mature over the years). And the local regulation of this activity will only increase as well.

And it's just ONE MORE THING that your local police department will have on their plate (the rock and the hard spot for them). I'm of the firm belief that making it easy for local law enforcement to get home to their family at the end of the shift will be paid back to the community and those of us who engage in this activity.

Most of the time everything WILL work out well and we as a group have created goodwill, and that's a good thing to have to spend when the time comes and we need it.

 

[capt. john]

well this is my view of this whole thing.... first theres rules for flying and for those who break those rules and have checked the box to abide by those rules when flying can and will at some point have a problem if cought by the athorities but this will only happen if u have the license..... plus i think this is a way for them to know how many drones r out there being flown..... this was never a issues for the radio controled airplanes or helicopters untill we mounted cameras onto them calling them drones

 

[henick]

Can't understand the self-Lawyering types who want to push every technicality button.

You can't understand making them work for every single bs they want to stick on you? Satan will be handing out free sleigh rides before I help make anyone's life easier that tries to make mine more difficult when I am not hurting anybody and being respectful about my actions.

 

[JKDSensei]

I am a retired LEO. As far as being stopped on a highway by a LEO, probable cause was what ever I wanted it to be, because if I followed a vehicle for 3 - 4 minutes I could LEGALLY find several traffic violations.

Exactly. Your rights are about worth the paper they were written on these days.

And this is exactly how the vast majority of cops operate.

 

[N017RW]

If you have legal problems consult a professional.


It's good advice in any circumstances.

 

[MikeK]

A cop cannot pull you over without probable cause. It would be like a cop pulling along side of you and asking to see your license.

The probable cause requirement, as stipulated in the Fourth Amendment, was arbitrarily changed to reasonable suspicion by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968.

(Excerpt)

Reasonable suspicion is a standard established by the Supreme Court in a 1968 case in which it ruled that police officers should be allowed stop and briefly detain a person if, based upon the officer’s training and experience, there is reason to believe that the individual is engaging in criminal activity. The officer is given the opportunity to freeze the action by stepping in to investigate. Unlike probable cause that uses a reasonable person standard, reasonable suspicion is based upon the standard of a reasonable police officer.
Definitions Of Probable Cause Vs. Reasonable Suspicion

(Close)

In my opinion, reasonable suspicion, as defined by the Court, is little more than a hunch and the USSC has demonstrated contempt for the Constitution by issuing such a dynamic ruling. Nonetheless, until this highly questionable ruling is reversed we are bound by all that it implies, which is if a police officer wishes to question a citizen he needs no specifically identifiable cause. All he needs is a hunch called "reasonable suspicion."

 

[Deputy Dog]

Was out testing some settings on my P3P in the Phoenix area and the sheriff stopped by showing me this. We talked for a bit but he said law enforcement is getting spun up to deal with the increased drone activity. So I guess he was practicing on me. Had the registration, pilots license ( didn't need to but showed him anyway) and most of the voodoo.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/law_enforcement/media/LEO_guidance_card.pdf

If you were not doing anything wrong, he has no lawful reason to ask for your I.D. or license. Let him haul you in, slap you down, or write you a citation....he'd lose in court and you'd own his Police Department. Your flight record would blow him and all his lawyers right out of court. As soon as you presented your flight record, they'd be begging for an out of court settlement and wouldn't be able to say that they were sorry enough times. Drone pilots, stand up for your rights and remember, you have video and digital proof of what you were doing when approached by Law Enforcement.

 

[MikeK]

There was a time in America when the automobile was an oddity. But as time wore on and these oddities became more common and began banging into people and things some sort of control was clearly necessary and it came in the form of registration, licensing -- and enforcement.

It won't be long before hobby drones will no longer be oddities but a familiar sight, then an annoyance to some, and then there will be damages caused by careless and incompetent operation.

Right now the concept of registration is relatively new and occurs to most as more of a curiosity than an impending reality. But it's a matter of time before a hobby drone drops into a baby carriage or smacks someone right between the eyes, or causes a major traffic accident. And then the hammer will fall.

While I don't look forward to the time when the equivalent of license plates will be required on all hobby drones, there is no way to ignore the alternative. Pretty soon the term "crowded skies" will have a brand-new meaning.

 

[bluntnose]

A cop cannot pull you over without probable cause. It would be like a cop pulling along side of you and asking to see your license.

@ Hilijoc: Correctemundo. What the FAA has done is invite the locals to violate constitutional rights on a wholesale basis. One of the many things that a new national drone pilot organization needs to do is give pilots a written legal opinion to show to the local officer (who only knows what the FAA info sheet tells him), to the effect that what the FAA is asking locals to do will indeed subject them and their municipalities to massive lawsuits costing the city mucho dinero (and possibly the helpful officer his job).

Folks, we need an organized national group, and we needed it yesterday.

I'm just sayin . . . . .