Your Opinion Of This Police Harassment Of Drone Pilot:

[MikeK]

The point of their stance was that they did nothing wrong and there was no legal basis for the stop. If everyone just "rolled over" some law enforcement would be sure to abuse their power, just like in this case. There was FAA info given to all law enforcement last year - Law Enforcement engagement with Suspected Unauthorized UAS Operations I guess Wayne County and the Troopers can't be bothered to read the rules and how to handle drone interaction. That county has a bit of a reputation for this type of behavior.

Thank you.

 

[MikeK]

I understand why they didn't want to give up their names knowing they were investigating a puppy mill, but I'm always compliant with Police and show them respect, they normally reciprocate if you aren't doing anything wrong.

The problem with submitting to police when they exceed their authority, even very slightly, is it encourages eventual disregard of citizen rights and liberties.

 

[MikeK]

some people go looking for trouble, they went looking for it and they found it! whats the problem?

Those people weren't looking for trouble. They were looking for information -- and doing so in a perfectly lawful manner.

 

[JimHarris]

These police officers and deputies are an embarrassment to their colleagues.

I respect the SHARK team for refusing to compromise their rights and I hope the proper disciplinary action is brought against the offending officers.

 

[toddff]

So a few things I see right from the beginning. Now not knowing this States laws, I maybe off a little, but most States are similar. First thing they point out is that the guy in the truck following them is on the phone which is illegal. Well in most states you can talk on the phone if you have called 911 even if talking on the phone is an infraction. It was apparent the complaint to the police was that these guys were possibly violating his constitutional rights and may have been peeping, which the police were investigating. But this is assumed at this point, but plausible. This would make the police contact and detention lawful. Now asking for the guys ID, well if he was driving he would have to be licensed which again in most sts takes would be required to carry and be licensed. Failure to produce your license or be licensed to drive changes this incident into a crime being committed. Then delaying the officer which the long debate did delay the officer, was also a crime. Investigative car stops by the police are allowed as confirmed by the US Supreme Court. So if these guys would have pulled over, produced their ID/License and explained this to the officers this would have not gone any farther. That's only in the first few moments that I watched.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots

 

[MikeK]

He was originally stopped for suspicion. He had been accused of filming in a secured area

"Secured area?" Secured by what authority? That puppy mill is a private enterprise -- and how did anyone know the drone was filming? Three out of every five times I fly my drones I don't activate their cameras. I'm into flying, not photography -- and I know I'm not the only one. And even if the cameras are active, does the owner of every property I fly over have authority to call police and direct them to "investigate" me?

(had guards for some reason).

That puppy farm has guards probably to protect their property from theft or vandalism. The presence of private guards does not impart any special authority to them. The SHARK group's drone did in no way represent any affirmable threat to that property. And beyond a certain height the property owners have absolutely no lawful concerns regarding the air space.

So he was stopped operating a MV. He is required to present drivers license and whatever else is required in that state while operating a MV.

While you are correct in this regard there also is a fundamental requirement for having some specific cause or "reasonable suspicion" for executing a traffic stop, otherwise the question of harrassment arises.

In this example the reason given for the stop was plainly invalid. If you fly a drone over my house can I call the local police and tell them to stop and "investigate" you because I want to know your business? Because that is exactly what was done by the private guards at the puppy farm. And the cops went along with it.

Operate a MV and refuse to comply, you will be arrested and taken into custody, your car search or "inventoried" to protect the Dept. from false casualty claims and towed.

Yes. You can be arrested. Anyone can. But if you've done nothing wrong you can sue -- which many people do and walk away with punitive damage awards.

Play stupid games and you will when stupid prizes EVERY time.

That is the credo of the stereotypical goon cop. What is seen in this video is not a stupid game. It is an example of law-abiding citizens asserting their Fourth Amendment rights. And doing so operates as a favor to the rest of us.

What an azzhat he was, I couldn't even finish the video. He set the video up to be confrontational deliberately. He gives drone operators a bad name.

The SHARK group is concerned with the potentially inhumane nature of the business conducted by that puppy breeding farm and they were conducting a perfectly lawful investigation. They broke no laws nor did they harm anyone or anything by their completely passive action of flying a drone over the property at a lawful height.

 

[MikeK]

These police officers and deputies are an embarrassment to their colleagues.

I respect the SHARK team for refusing to compromise their rights and I hope the proper disciplinary action is brought against the offending officers.

The Trooper was cautiously polite because he seemed to realize he was on thin ice. But those Wayne County cops seem to be a bunch of loose cannons -- especially the jerk in plain clothes who ordered the man to "Get away from the police car," because it has weapons in it. That guy is lawsuit material looking for a place to happen. He is the perfect example of the cop who habitually abuses his authority but is yet to be appropriately disciplined for it. He came close in this example.

 

[Tomtopping]

"Secured area?" Secured by what authority? That puppy mill is a private enterprise -- and how did anyone know the drone was filming? Three out of every five times I fly my drones I don't activate their cameras. I'm into flying, not photography -- and I know I'm not the only one. And even if the cameras are active, does the owner of every property I fly over have authority to call police and direct them to "investigate" me?


That puppy farm has guards probably to protect their property from theft or vandalism. The presence of private guards does not impart any special authority to them. The SHARK group's drone did in no way represent any affirmable threat to that property. And beyond a certain height the property owners have absolutely no lawful concerns regarding the air space.


While you are correct in this regard there also is a fundamental requirement for having some specific cause or "reasonable suspicion" for executing a traffic stop, otherwise the question of harrassment arises.

In this example the reason given for the stop was plainly invalid. If you fly a drone over my house can I call the local police and tell them to stop and "investigate" you because I want to know your business? Because that is exactly what was done by the private guards at the puppy farm. And the cops went along with it.



Yes. You can be arrested. Anyone can. But if you've done nothing wrong you can sue -- which many people do and walk away with punitive damage awards.


That is the credo of the stereotypical goon cop. What is seen in this video is not a stupid game. It is an example of law-abiding citizens asserting their Fourth Amendment rights. And doing so operates as a favor to the rest of us.


The SHARK group is concerned with the potentially inhumane nature of the business conducted by that puppy breeding farm and they were conducting a perfectly lawful investigation. They broke no laws nor did they harm anyone or anything by their completely passive action of flying a drone over the property at a lawful height.

Well said

 

[Les Davidson]

I don't know the laws in the USA but in the UK we have to give the police our details backed up with ID, such as passport, driving licence. If we provide false details we will be arrested until our ID is confirmed. I see nothing wring in that. Marshall Farms are doing nothing illegal and if they are breeding animals for research then it is up to politicians to change the law. The security are paid by Marshall Farms to protect the business and they would be neglecting their duty if they did nothing. I know I am a UK resident and you can say I should mind my own business but I am only observing.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots

 

[Mr. Salty]

Marshall Farms are doing nothing illegal and if they are breeding animals for research then it is up to politicians to change the law.

Maybe, maybe not. Countless "legal" businesses in the U.S. have been exposed abusing and mistreating animals illegally, and they were exposed when someone took video of the abuse. And the only way politicians change laws is when the public learns of abuse and pushes them to do something.

The security are paid by Marshall Farms to protect the business and they would be neglecting their duty if they did nothing.

Protecting their business against activity that isn't illegal? That's a stretch.

 

[MikeK]

I don't know the laws in the USA but in the UK we have to give the police our details backed up with ID, such as passport, driving licence. If we provide false details we will be arrested until our ID is confirmed. I see nothing wrong in that.

First, one of the many things I like and admire about you Brits is your comparatively proper bearing in all social matters -- including the relatively polite, friendly and agreeable relationship between you lot and your police, who, until recently, had no need to be armed. Please understand that for a substantial percentage of Americans this has never been the case . Most of we yanks have never been submissive to or friendly toward armed authority -- thus the Revolution.

Marshall Farms are doing nothing illegal. and if they are breeding animals for research then it is up to politicians to change the law.

You don't know that Marshall Farms is doing nothing illegal. The SHARK group consists of intelligent, responsible, good-hearted citizens who obviously have some cause to suspect that something isn't quite cricket there, which is why they've seen fit to have a look via their drone -- and they broke no laws in doing so.

The security are paid by Marshall Farms to protect the business and they would be neglecting their duty if they did nothing.

True. The problem is what they did is call upon the state police to investigate a group of people who had done nothing to warrant any such aggressive official action. So the SHARK people had every right to resist and to stand their ground -- and I give them much credit for doing so. It is people like they who keep the armed authorities on the right side of the boundary line.

I know I am a UK resident and you can say I should mind my own business but I am only observing.

You have every right to observe and your comments are most appreciated. Please be advised that I, for one, am a bit of an anglophile who likes and admires much about the mother country and its people.

God Save The Queen (and Downton Abbey)!

 

[dangerd]

The driver could have given up his drivers license to probably end the whole thing quickly. But remember he IS NOT REQUIRED TO IDENTIFY HIMSELF UNLESS DETAINED OR ARESTED FOR A SUSPECTED CRIME.

He should have asked first thing if he was being pulled over for a motor vehicle offense. If the officer said no he could have asked the officer if he was being detained or arested for a suspected crime and it the officer awnsered NO he could have told the officer to have a nice day and drove away.

I like the way the police tell him after 50 minutes that he is being pulled over for a traffic offense!

The guy should drag the cops into court and sue for unlawful detainment and ask the judge for punitive damages, as in the end they had no reason to pull him over in the first place.

Also if the police gave his information to the private companies security that is also a viloation of his rights.

Most people will just show ID and be done with it, in my case I probably would - that said I understand why he did not,
BECAUSE WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION.

This video really has not much to do with drones though.

 

[LuvMyTJ]

UPDATE: saw this today...

From: troopers.sm.h.internal.affairs [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 11:20 AM Subject: RE: Disgraceful Good Morning,

Thank you for your e-mail regarding the YouTube video published January 8, 2016. We have received numerous e-mails regarding the video and are looking into the matter to ensure that our Trooper handled the matter professionally and appropriately.

New York State Police Professional Standards Bureau
1220 Washington Avenue Albany, New York

 

[MikeK]

I understand why they didn't want to give up their names knowing they were investigating a puppy mill, but I'm always compliant with Police and show them respect, they normally reciprocate if you aren't doing anything wrong.

I would be inclined to cooperate with police, too -- provided they have a good reason for stopping and questioning me. But if the police are acting on behalf of a third party, i.e. some private security company, I would demand they either arrest me or leave me alone.

All that SHARK fellow had to say to be rid of those cops in a hurry is, "I have plenty of time and I can afford a good lawyer!" That would have been the end of it. His greatest advantage is there were three of them there -- three apparently respectable citizens. He wasn't alone and vulnerable to having a web of lies woven around him.

Based on what I've seen in this video those are bad cops to be stopped by. They are stupid and they apparently are accustomed to bullying people. I give those SHARK folks credit for standing up to them. I hope they do retain a good lawyer (on contingency, if necessary) and get this to a court outside the jurisdiction of Wayne County. They very well could reap a handsome punitive damage award for their animal rights organization. Any jury would be sympathetic with that.

 

[MikeK]

The driver could have given up his drivers license to probably end the whole thing quickly. But remember he IS NOT REQUIRED TO IDENTIFY HIMSELF UNLESS DETAINED OR ARESTED FOR A SUSPECTED CRIME.

He should have asked first thing if he was being pulled over for a motor vehicle offense. If the officer said no he could have asked the officer if he was being detained or arested for a suspected crime and it the officer awnsered NO he could have told the officer to have a nice day and drove away.

I like the way the police tell him after 50 minutes that he is being pulled over for a traffic offense!

The guy should drag the cops into court and sue for unlawful detainment and ask the judge for punitive damages, as in the end they had no reason to pull him over in the first place.

Also if the police gave his information to the private companies security that is also a viloation of his rights.

Most people will just show ID and be done with it, in my case I probably would - that said I understand why he did not,
BECAUSE WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION.

This video really has not much to do with drones though.

Actually, it has everything to do with drones when we consider how the heat is being turned up on those of us who do not have our pick of wide open spaces to fly in and are forced to contend with people calling the police on us for no good reason -- which happens quite a bit.

It's one thing if you're flying where you shouldn't. But it's quite another thing when you're not doing anything wrong but some cop decides to make up rules of his own because someone has sicced him on you and he doesn't know right from wrong about what you're doing. And there are plenty of cops like that -- as you've seen in this video.

 

[MikeK]

UPDATE: saw this today...

From: troopers.sm.h.internal.affairs [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 11:20 AM Subject: RE: Disgraceful Good Morning,

Thank you for your e-mail regarding the YouTube video published January 8, 2016. We have received numerous e-mails regarding the video and are looking into the matter to ensure that our Trooper handled the matter professionally and appropriately.

New York State Police Professional Standards Bureau
1220 Washington Avenue Albany, New York

Thanks!

 

[MikeK]

I saw this video before running into this thread and if I were the driver, I would've just shown him my driver's license and that's it. I would've not wasted 1 plus hour going back and forth with them.

In other words you are instinctively submissive to armed authority. The problem with that is authority has no innate sense of boundary, which is why there is a Fourth Amendment to our Constitution. The effect of what these SHARK people did is all of those cops have learned to be less careless about asserting themselves on everyone they encounter. Hopefully the SHARK people don't let this incident end quietly.

Things like this need to happen now and then to keep the boundary line from fading away.

Police and police dogs should be respected, treated well, trained well, and kept firmly in line.

 

[MikeK]

I'm still of the thought, that it was a simple request to provide the officers ID. Had they done that and informed the police of their actions, it would have been over a lot sooner.

This video shows how far drone flying "has" to go.

The video shows them hiding simple, silly info as if their lives depended on it.

I think the police did what they had to do.

Actually the police did what they had absolutely no right to do, which is to act on behalf of a third party -- the PRIVATE security staff of the breeding farm. Aside from that those cops had no right or reason to inconvenience and interrogate those people.

Too bad you can't see and understand that.

 

[Rogerc]

There is a guy in Sacramento who had his drone confisicated by the police for flying it. It was a legal fly and they grossly over stepped their authority from the articles that I have read. Unless we stand up for our rights they will be quickly erroded. The man in Sacramento is suing the agencies that took his property without legal cause.
I respect the law and officers, it is a very tough job, but there are some places that power is abused and our rights violated.
It is not disrespectful to standup for your rights if you do it in a calm and polite manner.
Roger

 

[ServiceCall]

Too bad you can't see and understand that.

I see and understand what I want. He "asked" for an opinion and I gave mine to him. Leave me out of your discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk