Deer Trail Mayor Franks Fields displays proper drone-hunting technique. (Amanda Kost, 7NEWS)
Not sure if this says more about public perceptions of drones or about Colorado, but FWIW:
Deer Trail's town board will vote Aug. 6 on an ordinance that would create drone-hunting licenses and offer $100 bounties for unmanned aerial vehicles.
"We do not want drones in town," said Phillip Steel, the resident who drafted the ordinance. "They fly in town, they get shot down."
Even though it's against the law to destroy federal property, Steel's proposed ordinance outlines weapons, ammunition, rules of engagement, techniques and bounties for drone hunting.
Drone-hunting licenses would be issued without a background investigation and on an anonymous basis. Applicants would have to be at least 21 years old and be able to "read and understand English."
(Thanks, Eric)
Comments
Gary, I'll see your Blunderbuss and raise you this:
Deer Stalker to day added this to the list of approved Drone Hunting Weapons:
I know your intentions were not that, really the issue is the title of the blog post and the article. It should say "Mayor of small inconsequential town (in regards to drones) in Colorado has lapse in judgement"
It doesn't help that Chris Anderson actually did lump all of the residents into one group when he said,
That is just a case of an irresponsible generalization. To me, this mayor's mindset goes against the majority of the population's view on aerospace that its a shame it is getting national attention. It also gives media outlets another angle to bash drones, or better stated UAVs. In reality this story ties more in line with the NSA recording discussions and big brother society than it does the use of domestic UAV systems.
My guess is that there is dissent even among the good people of Deer Trail.
I can't imagine that being a laughing stock is everybodies idea of a good time.
It would be one thing if the US had a strong corporate presence in the UAV marketplace. They would lobby for a solution. But as it is, most of what we fly originates offshore, primarily in China, and that gives no real Washington voice to our hobbies and pursuits. We do have people lobbying and working hard to promote understanding --and they're doing a pretty good job, but it's not enough. We all need to be level headed ambassadors for our UAVs and try to sway people away from tit for tat arguments in favor of explaining the reasons that everyone might benefit from drones, not just those of us who own and fly them. People are a lot more likely to respond positively if they can see something in an issue that benefits them. To criticize and ridicule those who oppose our goals is only going to inflame their distaste and that's not going to be helpful.
I saw a post here that said everyone who saw the poster's drone was focused on privacy and safety and no one said 'wow, that's cool.' I've had the opposite experience. The people I've met when they've shown interest in my multirotors have been pretty positive, but I try to be friendly and accommodating of their curiosity. I have made short aerial videos for complete strangers at beaches or in parks and forest lands, transferring the footage to their cellphones or sending to their email address. It sends them home with a video of them waving and enjoying themselves, provided by a drone. It's a matter of catching more flies with honey than vinegar. My opinion only, but it seems to me that we should all try to avoid pointless debates that only reinforce the negative opinions people might be starting with, and instead use our time to try and find reasons why the general public should support drones.
The desperate media will stop at nothing to get a story, even if it means using drones for their own purpose.. Dogs
@Artem, this is totally of topic but I feel compelled to do one last comment. Why do you think we now have mandatory military service for all males in Norway? It is what we learned after WWII and the only way a small country like Norway realistically can have an adequate military force without spending HUGE amounts of money on it. But I still does not see how this relates to why we should feel the need to own and carry weapons privately.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 8 Next