Registration enforcement

[J.James]

What a bunch of garbage. I do in fact know what I'm talking about. I've been a Leo for 21+ years and have been involved in forfeitures. Please take your YouTube law degree somewhere else.

Simmer down there man and sorry this whole thing is getting a bit more heated then it should.

Tho im pretty sure what you are refering to as far as forfeitures esp any involving courts are done like when a person is a big big time drug dealer and a federal level and such. BUT if you have been involved in law enforcement at all then YOU KNOW that there is such things a police officers acting as road pirates and takeing peoples stuff at the side of the road and making the people have to go to court to fight to get it back.. NOW YOU MANY NOT of done it to any one or engage in being a road pirate but as some one whos worked around law enforcement and around courts I know as well as you should that it does happen. Or More correct has happened. But there has been a ruling recently that does stop it practice on the federal level and now they do at least have to give some one dude process if its a federal forfeiture case. and Some states but not all. now bar it. and that is one area were things are being reformed somewhat.

 

[J.James]

What is it you are actually afraid of happening to you?
That your drone will be unfairly/illegally confiscated and that there will be no legal recourse to recover it?
Or did I miss your explanation?

I could be wrong but i think they were just asking a ? of who is going to be enforcing it as in faa fed level people or local leo. Maybe just to know who even has authority to ask someone to even see there reg card.

From what I can gather from reading the FAA's site that the faa will be the ones doing the actually follow up enforcement if some one is in some sort of violation of the regs or the requirements. But they are not going to have faa field agents going around looking for some one flying there drone in some manner they dont like. But it sounds as if the local LEOS will be allowed to respond to calls or complaints and to investigate then they have to do a report and send it to the FAA to follow up on the report and then take it from there.

Tho the good thing is that from what they have in there info for law enforcement its not seeming like they are telling cops how to enforce any laws or guidelines for flying. Tho it does sound like they have giveing them the authority to stop and talk to some one and can ask if the flyer has the reg card with them and the numbers on the craft. Tho I still have to read up some more stuff to see if there is any thing under that law that says some one really has to show there card to a police officer if they are not even accused of doing any thing against the law. THo we may have agreed to that i the reg agreement but when I was reading that today I don't recall any think like that and it was just that you agree to fly safe and in line of site and to follow all regulations yada yada oh and to have fun. WHICH I'm wondering how that part is going to be unforced or even how they are going to know if some ones really having fun or not. lol THo that one would be funny as heck if a cop said hey it says in the rules you must fly safe and have fun. SO SMILE so I dont have to fill out a report for not haveing fun while flying.

 

[aka1ceman]

FAA says hey guys, "go register while we figure out the details. "

....since when has it been a good idea to sign an agreement that the other party has yet filling out? Would you do that with a loan? Business agreement? Why is it so hard to comprehend on waiting to see what the details are first? Afraid you won't get $5 back? What's $5? Why rush?

 

[NEair]

Simmer down there man and sorry this whole thing is getting a bit more heated then it should.

Tho im pretty sure what you are refering to as far as forfeitures esp any involving courts are done like when a person is a big big time drug dealer and a federal level and such. BUT if you have been involved in law enforcement at all then YOU KNOW that there is such things a police officers acting as road pirates and takeing peoples stuff at the side of the road and making the people have to go to court to fight to get it back.. NOW YOU MANY NOT of done it to any one or engage in being a road pirate but as some one whos worked around law enforcement and around courts I know as well as you should that it does happen. Or More correct has happened. But there has been a ruling recently that does stop it practice on the federal level and now they do at least have to give some one dude process if its a federal forfeiture case. and Some states but not all. now bar it. and that is one area were things are being reformed somewhat.

Ok let me address this and let's drop it ok? I joined this site because I enjoy flying my phantom and taking cool videos and photo not talking shop so to speak.. The only time I have heard the term "road pirate" is in cop block videos. In those videos they use that term to define officers writing what they call victimless traffic tickets; i.e. Taking their money for speeding. I've never heard it used for stealing someone's possessions. In my time I have never seen an officer steal someone's possessions. I have seen them seize property as evidence that has been returned after the court system prowess. Has what you described happened? Probably but I've never first hand seen it and quite honestly if I did it would be handled right then. As for the forfeiture laws most states have them, my state does and it doesn't get used because it is useless. In the few times that we have used forfeiture we have used the Feds. That process is a pain and involves a lot of oversight. The case has to be presented to them (usually dea because it involves drug money and a us attorney). After reviewing the case they decide to adopt it; the local charges are dropped and federal charges are brought up. From that point on everything goes through the federal courts.

After all that lets agree to disagree, go out and have fun flying!


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[J.James]

After all that lets agree to disagree, go out and have fun flying!

actully I bet we prob agree on a lot of stuff. like go out and have fun flying

and from what I can pick up about you it dont seem like you would be one of them road pirate types i mentioned. Which I bet many of them were not really all by the book any way. like the ones that sit by the side of an interstate and target out of state people to get there cars or cash. It used to be some what common to hear about it on the news from down south and it would be some one with plates from up north. But being you mentioned courts and stuff also dont sound like you spent much time waiting in the bushs to pounce on easy pray.

but ya I DO agree go out and have fun flying. and from what I seen yesterday on the faa site lol were they had a link for whats expected of some one based on what kind of drone they have and when I clicked the for fun and hobby it had 2 main rules.
1 fly safe.
2 have fun

So I'm going to take that as a requirement lol. Tho i'm still wondering how they are going to enforce the 2nd rule and what the fines are going to be if some one dont seem to be having enough fun. . Tho I dont want to push my luck and find out first hand.

Tho the last time I ever had the police over after a report of a ufo. Thats exactly what the one cop also said as he was leaving after also commenting on how cool my phantom was. "well fly safe and have fun" I told him I'm at least try to have fun but no guarantees.

 

[MrTommy]

A local Leo wouldn't necessarily enforce a federal law. They could stop the violation from continuing, gather evidence and then provide that evidence to the proper federal organization.

And we all know cops have tons of time while on duty doing what cops do, to get involved in asking Joe Citizen to see "his papers" at the local softball field.

 

[Choppa]

As a commercial helicopter pilot, any law enforcement officer can ask for my credentials (License, government ID and Medical) for which I am supposed to have on me all the time. I can and would be violated if I refuse to show it. Same applies to drone pilots. You must keep on you and show when asked, provided they show you their ID.

 

[aburkefl]

And since being a law enforcement person does not also carry the requirement to know the law, we can take comfort knowing that there will never, ever be any spontaneous transfers of ownership of $1000+ Phantoms to local officials.

But wait...maybe you should look at this...Civil forfeiture in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since flying without registration is "illegal"....that means ANY cop can take your Phantom on the spot. Proof not necessary.
Don't believe it? Read the link.

It's called Civil Forfeiture and it's as simple as a cop believing you are doing "anything" illegal....like being a peeping Tom with your Phantom.
In Florida it's now illegal (for drones) to fly over private property w/o permission.
No arrest necessary. No warrant needed. Proof not necessary. Just hand it over.

This is just one part of the slippery slope that everyone against registration keeps "annoying" everyone about who's fine with it.

You keep agreeing with government power grabs and eventually YOU will get snagged in the web.

Enjoy !

I live in central Florida (about 45 miles NW of Orlando).
Contacted the local police department (I have a couple of family members working there). They are unaware of any Florida statute about flying over private property - in any kind of craft. The only place they say they can cite me for flying illegally is a state park just north of town.

There have been numerous comments on local radio and TV noting that the airspace over Disney World is restricted.

I also understand it's illegal to fly in a national park. However, I've never actually seen this written or stated by anyone who I felt was a "solid" source.

 

[JKDSensei]

And we all know cops have tons of time while on duty doing what cops do, to get involved in asking Joe Citizen to see "his papers" at the local softball field.

Maybe they have more time on their hands than you think.....

Google the following.......and get comfortable...(and remember most incidents never surface due to the "Brotherhood".

"Police Officer+on-duty+DUI+DWI+arrested"

 

[JKDSensei]

I live in central Florida (about 45 miles NW of Orlando).
Contacted the local police department (I have a couple of family members working there). They are unaware of any Florida statute about flying over private property - in any kind of craft. The only place they say they can cite me for flying illegally is a state park just north of town.

There have been numerous comments on local radio and TV noting that the airspace over Disney World is restricted.

I also understand it's illegal to fly in a national park. However, I've never actually seen this written or stated by anyone who I felt was a "solid" source.

Exactly. There are actually too many laws for even a lawyer to know them all. Even lawyers have specialties and even then they have to research cases. No way in hell the average cop knows much more than the basics.

 

[Larry L]

Drug laws are Federal and enforced by the local LEOs. There are plenty more examples.

Yes, I understand drug laws, etc. My point is since it is dealing with the FAA, those cases are handled in Federal Court. I can see a police officer stating you were flying reckless, etc.
case in point, my dads Comanche was spotted flying really low & doing stupid crap over a neighborhood, someone called in & gave his tail number. Guess who got a call from FAA? It wasn't the local police[emoji1]. The good thing was it was the mechanic who was doing the annual. He wound up paying a pretty good fine.

 

[Ronnie O]

Ive been an active member of the CA State Bar for over 15 years and have been flying rc helis for over 13 years.

My take is simple. Local law enforcement does not have jurisdiction to prosecute a person for violating faa regulations but they can and have stopped people from flying in no fly zones or dangerously generally. In a recent incident a police heli that almost collided with a phantom followed it home and had ground units go to the house of the owner. As i recall The FAA stated that the owner would probably not be fined because he didn't not intentionally fly in the police helis path but they did chime in and used the Leo's statements to support their position. I think they would do the same (use the Leo's findings/evidence) to support prosecuting / fining violators as well.

Drone operator wants to apologize to CHP pilot for near miss in Martinez

I try to treat my phantom like it was one of my autos or watercraft. That is I operate them safely, register and insure them as appropriate and take responsibility if something does go wrong and it's my fault. Think about it, if you have a fender bender in your car it's usually not a big deal, reports are filed, copays are paid and the insurance companies take care of the rest but if you pull a hit a run and get caught you are facing monetary penalties as well as jail or prison time. Rc heli operators should be treated no better or worse IMHO.

 

[WetDog]

OMG...GoodNnuff LIKED one of my posts ?!?!?!?

THE SKY IS FALLING THE SKY IS FALLING !!!!!!!!!

No, that's just the Phantoms....

 

[GoodnNuff]

Local law enforcement does not have jurisdiction to prosecute a person for violating faa regulations but they can and have stopped people from flying in no fly zones or dangerously generally.

Hmm, there are at least three local (Seattle) pilots who are being prosecuted for their drone flights, and none of the cases involves the FAA:
Man charged for Seattle drone crash that knocked woman out

and:
Two ticketed $1,025 each for flying drones near killer whales off San Juan Island

 

[WetDog]

The police went after the Seattle driver for reckless endangerment. If you read the article you quoted, the DA made it clear that it wasn't a drone issue, per se, it was the dropping-a-heavy-object-onto-a-random-person.

The flying-near-killer-whales is a violation of the Marine Mammal Act. I'm not exactly sure how the Department of Natural Resources can write tickets on the MMA but LEOs can and do assist when they see a Federal-level violation occurring. I know that in Alaska, the State Troopers will nail your *** if they see you harrassing protected wildlife. Since I've never been picked up for this - the closest I've come is to wap a Steller's Sea Lion on the nose when it tried to bite my kayak paddle - I'm not sure how that operates.

 

[GoodnNuff]

The police went after the Seattle driver for reckless endangerment. If you read the article you quoted, the DA made it clear that it wasn't a drone issue, per se, it was the dropping-a-heavy-object-onto-a-random-person.

Yes, I completely understand that. I just don't want anyone reading this forum to be under the false impression that a drone pilot can only be prosecuted by the FAA for breaking the FAA's laws.

As I've said a few dozen times on this list, the only thing that came out of the infamous Pirker case, was a precedent for charging drone pilots with reckless endangerment - basically a catch all for anyone flying too close, too high, where they shouldn't, for hitting something that should have been avoided, for flying over something you shouldn't have, etc.

By the way WetDog, I have been wanting to ask how you like your Inductrix? I picked one up a few weeks ago and have been flying it daily (too rainy for outdoor flights here now). I love that little quad! Much more stable and responsive than my Blade Nanos or Glimpse.

 

[Couchie]

Welp I've read through this whole thread and am sitting on my couch just shaking my head....

This thread has gone so many different ways that it'll take a jeweler to figure out how many carats are here.

I'm going to keep my reply short and sweet.

I've been in LE for over 21 years and I can tell you that we as officers don't have time to hunt down a drone operator who is flying his/her drone just because he/she is flying.

I will tell you though that if you do something stupid with your drone and someone lodges a complaint, we have to investigate. If after an investigation, the complaint is deemed legitimate, then obviously we have to make a report. It is no different then someone running over your mailbox and taking off. If there is some criminal action that has taken place, we have to investigate. If you are not doing anything wrong, then don't worry about it!

Now I'm sure those who are in the frame of mind that ALL cops are bad, you will have your opinion that we're going to break out our laser guided missile systems that POTUS seems to think we have and shoot down your drone just because you are at 401' AGL. There is nothing I can say that will change your mind and quite frankly I don't care.

Just fly your drone, use common sense, be safe, and you'll be just fine!

 

[The Suburban Hippie]

For those that are Naive enough to think that if they do nothing wrong, the police will just leave them alone, here is a study by Ohio State University on 10,000 wrongful prosecutions. You are naive, and foolish.

http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm

 

[GoodnNuff]

For those that are Naive enough to think that if they do nothing wrong, the police will just leave them alone, here is a study by Ohio State University on 10,000 wrongful prosecutions. You are naive, and foolish.

http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm

LOL.
I've spent 57 years naively thinking that if I do nothing wrong, the police will leave me alone.

So far they have.

Now your link talks about Index Crimes:
(Index crimes, which are reported by the FBI, are murder and non-negligent

manslaughter, forcible rape, aggravated assault, robbery, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft and arson.)

And these were all due to eyewitness misidentifications.

Not too worried that flying my drone in a safe manner is going to lead to a wrongful conviction.\

Oh, and welcome to the list. Fear mongering is a fine art here! Enjoy.

 

[DroneDog]

Couchie,
Glad in your state that you will still respond to a mailbox being damaged, in my state forget about it, we have been told by a state police detective that if its under $500 they will not respond. Yes, I live in a rural area so we rely on the state police & not townies. Not a fun thing when we have property stolen to be told that.

And to the helo pilot, in your state maybe you have to carry a DL's when you are out & didnt drive to the site but in mine I do not have too. I have no reason to give a false name to a LEO, local state or fed, I can lose my professional license, & several other things like my ccwp for that & that is not worth it to me, my license alone is too precious & hard won. Sides, I have no reason to hid who I am, they can just look in the local paper to see my picture with my lawful given name.

Now, in doing a rough web search I could not find anything current but did find these..
Illinois Legal Aid | Am I Required to Carry an ID?
Yes, its Illinois, not the eastern state I'm in. But it does address US law, somewhat. And for whats it worth, my state does the Real ID act garbage but I do not have one, I refused so my license is stamped "Not for Federal ID" or something similar but its still a valid state DL. Threw a VA statie for a loop when he stopped me one time. And if I need to go into a federal building I have other ID among them my passport. Heheheh

And this big case in CA but went to USA supreme court (SC).. Kolender v. Lawson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now, I know if I am "Suspected" then I can be taken under disorderly conduct (DC) or suspicious conduct, or some other "trumped" up charge. Hence I wear a shoulder cam when flying my drone, mainly so I dont get the abuse that teen in CT did by the woman. I have something to prove my intent & actions & not just what my drone may have.

But I found the notes on the wikipedia page most interesting...
1. US Supreme Court upheld circuit court holdings:

• A person can not be required to furnish identification if not reasonably suspected of any criminal conduct.
• A reasonable suspicion of criminal activity alone is insufficient to justify a patdown search
• The person stopped is not obliged to answer, answers may not be compelled, and refusal to answer furnishes no basis for an arrest.
• Vagrancy ordinances cannot turn otherwise innocent conduct into a crime.
• Personal liberty, which is guaranteed to every citizen under U.S. Constitution and laws, consists of the right of locomotion, to go where one pleases, and when, and to do that which may lead to one's business or pleasure, only so far restrained as the rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. One may travel along the public highways or in public places; and while conducting themselves in a decent and orderly manner, disturbing no other, and interfering with the rights of no other citizens, there, they will be protected under the law, not only their persons, but in their safe conduct. Any law that would place the keeping and safe conduct of another in the hands of even a conservator of the peace, unless for some breach of the peace committed in his presence, or upon suspicion of felony, would be most oppressive and unjust, and destroy all the rights, which the Constitution guarantees.
• An innocent person cannot generally know when a police officer has reasonable cause to believe that his behavior warrants further investigation for criminal activity, and therefore cannot know when refusal to identify himself will be a crime.
• No one may be required under peril of life, liberty or property to speculate as to the meaning of penal statutes.
• Police knowledge of the identity of an individual they have deemed "suspicious" grants the police unfettered discretion to initiate or continue investigation of the person long after the detention has ended. Information concerning the stop, the arrest and the individual's identity may become part of a large scale data bank. The serious intrusion on personal security outweighs the mere possibility that identification may provide a link leading to arrest.[4]

I have no issue with LEO's, in many different jobs I've held over the years I've worked closely with them & currently I know of a couple staties that are family friends. Like many things in life, there are bad apples, doesnt matter if its LEOs, paintball, UAS, paperrazi, concealed carry gun owners or even gun owners in general, vehicle drivers, motorcyle riders or even bicyclists.
I just dont fear them, nor do I give them attitude, they have a job to do just as I do. Course YMMV