Comment by LanMark on February 12, 2013 at 12:19am

I think the MPAA should be all over this.. hopefully

Comment by LanMark on February 12, 2013 at 1:05am

Oregon has a anti drone bill Senate Bil 71 that they are trying to push through that basically bans all FPV and all sorts of other UAV.. making it the same as drunk driving if you get caught with one.

What is up with lawmakers!!  we have laws in place that prevent privacy violations!  all of these proposed bills and passed sole purpose is privacy, which is already laws in place!

Comment by James masterman on February 12, 2013 at 4:58am

I really don't understand US lawmakers - are people that worried about having their picture taken when there are so many more serious issues with guns? Not to mention worrying about unemployment. On the plus side, these laws present opportunities for us in other countries to develop our own civilian UAV industry. Here in Australia people seem to be far more accepting of the technology.

It's still a shame - many people outside America look up to your entrepreneurial zeal and these kinds of laws will just stifle it, at least as far as UAVs go.

Wiki Ninja Comment by Gary McCray on February 12, 2013 at 11:50am

Did I miss something, I read the literature linked in the article and while it presents some concerns it doesn't seem to actually state any specifics about laws or controls other than to indicate that it might formulate some.

It also presents some level of understanding that legitimate uses are important.

And it references photo based restrictions in accordance with existing law and rights to privacy.

I do think that this is an opportunity for us to have a positive input into the formulation of reasonable regulations rather than being surprised when Draconian ones result.

At this point at least in this process it seems a reasonable dialogue might be possible and that positive interaction could provide a more reasonable final outcome.

Comment by Paul Braun on February 12, 2013 at 11:50am

I sent an email.  As a Wisconsin resident, it may not hold much weight but it's worth a try.  Thanks for raising the issue.

Comment by Peter Sunder on February 13, 2013 at 12:29am

I really don't understand US lawmakers - are people that worried about having their picture taken when there are so many more serious issues with guns? Not to mention worrying about unemployment. On the plus side, these laws present opportunities for us in other countries to develop our own civilian UAV industry. Here in Australia people seem to be far more accepting of the technology.

And for that matter, I really don’t understand Australian citizens allowing themselves to be disarmed by a “wise” and “all-knowing” government.  Despite that fact, a discussion of firearms is not germane to the post, please leave irrelevant opinions out of the discussion.

If you really want to know what might be making people nervous, look no further than the extrajudicial assassination of US citizens with UAVs and several recent law enforcement requests to arm domestic drones.  If that doesn’t frighten the bejesus out of you then I suggest a brief review of history.

Comment by Darrell Burkey on February 13, 2013 at 12:51am

Quote from the link:

“As this technology advances and becomes more widely used, it is imperative that we have clear standards in place for their safe and reasonable use and operation in order to protect the public. I believe that there are legitimate reasons for concern about privacy, civil liberties and public safety,” Padilla said.

Sounds reasonable to me. It might actually be an opportunity to classify our activities as non-commercial or 'personal use' and distinct from ' evil monster drones'. I doubt anyone here would be against safety and privacy concerns when using UAVs.

Comment by James masterman on February 13, 2013 at 12:57am

@ Peter. Fair enough, although I don't think anyone would consider our current govt to be wise and all knowing :)

 

It just seems that more and more of your states are trying to ban something they don't really understand and that could bring so much good.

Comment by Shannon Morrisey on February 13, 2013 at 4:14am

@Darrell

If you think California legislation for UAVs is going to be in any way 'reasonable,' then you may not be familiar - in California we have an ongoing contest among all politicians to see who can score the most laws each term - doesn't mater what kind of law, or if it serves any intelligible purpose - just as long as they keep passing them, they will get reelected.   

Exhibit #1 - chilling how many hilarious & senseless laws this one senator has managed pushed through in 6 years:

http://sd20.senate.ca.gov/legislation

Comment by Darrell Burkey on February 13, 2013 at 5:59am

I'm from California but it's been a while since I lived there. I think the state has much bigger issues to worry about than UAVs as you would know. I hear that good old Jerry Brown is Governor again. I had to laugh about that as he was Gov when I lived in Sacramento late 70's. I wonder if he still dates Linda? :-)

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page