3D Robotics


I agree! From The Verge:

In today's Senate drone hearing, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) got personal, describing a rally held outside her home earlier this year. "I went to the window to peek out, and there was a drone right there looking in. Obviously the drone's pilot was surprised, because the drone wheeled around and crashed," she told the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. "What kind of camera was on the drone? What kind of microphone? Could an enterprising person have attached a firearm to it?"

The hearing mostly concerned with the FAA's roadmap for regulating civilian drone use, spurred on by Amazon's recent announcement of a drone delivery program. But Senator Feinstein used her time to specifically speak out specifically against the prospect of private citizens equipping drones with deadly force, potentially opening the door for a new legislative avenue regulating the unmanned crafts. "We should not allow armed drones in the United States, period," the Senator told the committee. "It should be a crime for a private individual to arm a drone."

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

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

Join diydrones


  • I would have to agree with Senator Feinstein as well. I believe it is already a crime due to the fact that it would be turning an otherwise semi-automatic weapon into an automatic weapon by attaching an actuator to the trigger.  Imagine how easy it would be to kill someone.

    Also, Sen. Feinstein is NOT saying "Ban Drones", she is saying the act of arming drones with deadly weapons should be banned.  Leave the arming of drones to the military.  What she is asking for is a completely sane request.

  • One of the problems with making this a law is that the very person you would like to stop will pay no attention to it at all.

    Kind of like gun control in California, the ones with the serious weapons are the criminals. - Great!

    Ms Feinstein was central in getting Gun control legislation passed in San Francisco and in California.

    Totally eliminated my favorite gun shop the San Francisco Gun Exchange.

    In fact, I doubt that armed drones not controlled by the police or the government were always a complete non-starter and I am pretty sure both California and Federal law already covers that under the dangerous weapons act.

    FTR I am not in favor of either the police or the government having armed drones either, way to much power and way too much temptation to abuse it (probably for the good of the country and for protection from terrorists).

    Fear is always the means by which the Tyrant succeeds.

  • Individuals *should* be armed, to protect themselves and their families. While I like the idea of putting a .22 on a large multi-copter and playing with it on my (rural) property, and while I hate the idea of any more anti-gun laws, I fully suspect this to be one more restriction imposed upon we, the people, fairly soon.
  • Can't believe that old hag is still around.  She must be 2000 years old by now. 

    As a side note, it's stupid for private individuals to support banning specifically themselves from owning the kind of technology that could be used to overthrow a government.  It's just the fact of how Americans think, but it's stupid.

  • But then you can't do things like launch fireworks from your fixed wings. Or shoot balloons with a quadcopter like that guy did. If it's a controlled environment you should be able to do what you want.

  • WOW it always amazes me that any tech sites can be so full of ignorant people, but whenever a thread about laws for UAVs pop up they carw out of the wood work. really look at how the comments boil down to "it's just common sense that killing someone is wrong so we don't need to make laws saying murder is illegal."  

    news flash people there is no such thing as "common sense" you may see it as wrong but there are others that won't and if there aren't laws against doing it you can't stop them.

    you can this is redundant but they're still things that need to be talked about.

  • exactly Stefan, this is pure and simple Ineptocracy at it's finest and polical pandering by that idiot

  • If I'm not totally mistaken, it IS already illegal in the US to attach any kind of device that launches any kind of projectile to an aircraft under FAA regulation or launch projectiles even by hand from an aircraft under FAA regulations.

    I remember watching a TV interview with the crew of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society ships and their helo pilot was explaining why they don't just drop or shoot their butaric acid at the whalers' ships from their helo.

    So, when/if civilian UAVs fall under FAA regulations, that should cover it.

  • If she owned stock in 3dRobotics like she does for the infamous bullet train in California, she wouldn't be wasting time pandering her 2A agenda in a meeting about the FAA, she is an idiot


  • Perhaps the time has come to ask the guys to change the name "Armed" in Mission Planner !!! it is scaring some people :-)

This reply was deleted.