You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones


  • Section 4.

    Private pilots will get life if caught with camera in a plane or for flying over private property 

  • The bill is only 2 pages and would make it a crime for a kid to fly a kite. It would even be a crime to pick up a camera and throw it. Seriously. I'm suspicious that this was created for some political purpose and not because the author ever thought it had a chance of being voted on.

    In any event, I'm placing a small rebel flag atop my quad and renaming it The Otlaw.

  • Bill Paul makes a good point..

    SECTION 2. (1) A person may not possess or control a drone unless permitted to do so

    by the federal government or by the Oregon Department of Aviation under section 7 of this

    2013 Act.

    The federal government hasnt made it illegal Yet.  I'd also say this is bad because they assume a right has to be granted by government first.



    SECTION 3. (1) A person who operates a drone in the airspace of Oregon without permission

    from the Oregon Department of Aviation, or from the person with the right to possession

    of the land below the airspace, is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor.

    (2) It is not a defense to a charge of violating this section that the land below the airspace

    was not marked with a no-trespassing sign or similar notice.

    Dont fly over somebody's land uninvited doesnt seem unreasonable, except it's ok for the State to fly wherever and violate whoever they want.  That sounds like search and seizure whenever they want.

  • so cell phones with cameras, balloons,kites, could get you a class A Misdemeanor........I would hate to be a kid in or-gone

    Brazil is looking better every day

  • A state with virtually no gun control outlaws drones.

    Solution buy guns instead, I'm sure you can find a good use for them.

  • There is some 4th amendment case history on this but in my reading it seems this is related more about what public police agencies can do with observation from the air, and less about what private citizens (both commercial and hobbyists) can observe form the air. So for Oregon to propose (or any other fed/state/local gov't) this is new territory, and I think the end game is the US Supreme Court.

    The question is really about the expectation of privacy from the air and is there such a thing as aerial curtilage. 

  • It's illegal to pump your own gas in Oregon sooooo this makes sense.

  • Should the legislators not be worrying about creating more jobs rather than punitive and silly rules like this?

  • If you blank out the word "drone" and words related to flying in the document it almost sounds like they're talking about some sort of weapon. 

  • Funny because the scan eagle program is run out of Oregon by Boeing.

    If the police use it here in Seattle so can I :-)
This reply was deleted.