FAA Registration Rules Announced NOW

[aka1ceman]

also sounds like the SEMA Action Network in DC. they are protecting the rights for collector car owners. fyi.

You mean the smog emission regulations that hinder owning a beautiful classic muscle car?

 

[davis]

I came across this video on the net. It's very much on topic and doesn't get expressly political (as this outlet is prone do). It mentions similar FCC and other issues, but is 99% on topic to the FAA registration discussion. I think it explains one side of the situation very clearly. Worth a watch. Those who disagree... don't get caught up in the minutia (or the outlet's political stance on other issues or even the inflammatory headline) and you may get a better feel for where the other side is coming from.

good video.
this is why the AMA is fighting for you (members) in DC. if someone "isnt at the table, they are on the menu", as they say.

 

[davis]

You mean the smog emission regulations that hinder owning a beautiful classic muscle car?

yeah, EPA, off road use, replica car registration, collector car insurance, year of manufacture license plates, vintage car parts collecting and most important, the aftermarket manufacturing industry.

 

[joe21]

AMA has long used a similar registration system with our members, which we pointed out during the task force deliberations and in private conversations with the FAA. As you are aware, AMA's safety program instructs all members to place his or her AMA number or name and address on or within their model aircraft, effectively accomplishing the safety and accountability objectives of the interim rule.

The way I understand it, I can pay my money and be an AMA member today. No class, no certification, nothing. Just pay and join. I understand where the AMA is coming from (benefit to members) but why would the FAA agree to using the AMA as an intermediary? Where is the benefit to anyone but AMA? Regardless of your opinion on the intent, the push to use AMA as a registration intermediary comes across as self-serving and a way to increase membership revenue.

While we continue to believe that registration makes sense at some threshold and for flyers operating outside of a community-based organization or flying for commercial purposes, we also strongly believe our members are not the problem and should not have to bear the burden of additional regulations.

For anyone who still believes the AMA didn't recommend registration, this should clear things up. While I understand that any such organization exists to promote the interests of its membership, their approach is very short-sighted. They are clearly trying to divide the community with an "us versus them" approach. Their members are not the problem? Using that logic, those who ARE the problem instantly become safe and responsible upon paying a $75 membership fee?

Someone mentioned the AMA sounding like the NRA. Big difference. The NRA certainly represents it membership, but advocates for all legal owners. The AMA is not only specifying their members, but calling for regulation on all non-members because their membership is somehow safer and "better" by virtue of membership.

Say what you will about the AMA, but this approach is absurd and will only work against all owners - members or not.

 

[ianwood]

Let's see, I think I can buy an assault rifle, and not register it, but now I have to register my drone. Oh well, I'm a magician, and I have to register my rabbits with the USDA. I guess drones and rabbits are more dangerous then assault rifles.

Two wrongs don't make it right.

 

[joe21]

Two wrongs don't make it right.

But three lefts do.

 

[RKBA]

Two wrongs don't make it right.

Now who's engaging in "political" commentary?

 

[Navigator181]

Let's see, I think I can buy an assault rifle, and not register it, but now I have to register my drone. Oh well, I'm a magician, and I have to register my rabbits with the USDA. I guess drones and rabbits are more dangerous then assault rifles.

Pretty sure what you refer to as an "assault rifle", is an inanimate object and has absolutely nothing to do with any of this conversation.

 

[aka1ceman]

Pretty sure what you refer to as an "assault rifle", is an inanimate object and has absolutely nothing to do with any of this conversation.

And a drone is an inanimate object as well. It will sit on your table forever until you power it up. Due to both inanimate objects now having to do with registration, it has everything to do with this conversation.

 

[LuvMyTJ]

While we encourage debating the topics, but excessive use of religion, weapons & politics are not something that makes for good conversation on a quadcopter forum. If you take note in the guidelines it is addressed. Here are the two rules I am referring to...

• 13. Discussions about politics, weaponry and religion are permitted only in association with the topic of this forum or in the “off-topic” section and will be closed or removed if they become disruptive.
  
• 14. We take the "be nice" rule VERY seriously! We do not tolerate discourtesy or disrespect.

 

[aka1ceman]

......and i think it waz Meta said recently if it was to be brought up, keep it brief. Hard to find it now after 1100 posts?



(Edit...not that's an excuse but wizardpa (the quoted text)who came into this discussion late and didn't see moderatorsome note on this)

 

[aka1ceman]

I promise you do not want this unconstitutional non-law put into place, unless you want to see you fellow drone operators in the mainstream media after tragedy strikes.

........ even when they are innocent.

 

[aka1ceman]

They'll all be innocent because not obeying an unconstitutional executive agency rule that is not passed by law making representatives of the people, by a federal agency in violation of our Constitution is not illegal.

Even though you are right...The gamble is not ending up with a self-serving judge to rule your case, trying to make a statement on drones. I've seen it in many other situations.

 

[GadgetGuy]

The way I understand it, I can pay my money and be an AMA member today. No class, no certification, nothing. Just pay and join. I understand where the AMA is coming from (benefit to members) but why would the FAA agree to using the AMA as an intermediary? Where is the benefit to anyone but AMA? Regardless of your opinion on the intent, the push to use AMA as a registration intermediary comes across as self-serving and a way to increase membership revenue.



For anyone who still believes the AMA didn't recommend registration, this should clear things up. While I understand that any such organization exists to promote the interests of its membership, their approach is very short-sighted. They are clearly trying to divide the community with an "us versus them" approach. Their members are not the problem? Using that logic, those who ARE the problem instantly become safe and responsible upon paying a $75 membership fee?

Someone mentioned the AMA sounding like the NRA. Big difference. The NRA certainly represents it membership, but advocates for all legal owners. The AMA is not only specifying their members, but calling for regulation on all non-members because their membership is somehow safer and "better" by virtue of membership.

Say what you will about the AMA, but this approach is absurd and will only work against all owners - members or not.

+1

 

[dirkclod]

Am curios WingedRyno...what quad you fly ?

 

[dirkclod]

I bet you are.

LOL
.
.
.
.

 

[Jeff48920]

Am curios WingedRyno...what quad you fly ?

Obvious isn't it.

Waterproof Quadcopter - QuadH2o RTF Kit

Only quad capable of safely hauling one or more lines, baited with lures or bait fish, through the water without fear of water damage.

 

[dirkclod]

Obvious isn't it.

Waterproof Quadcopter - QuadH2o RTF Kit

Only quad capable of safely hauling one or more lines, baited with lures or bait fish, through the water without fear of water damage.

 

[Classic60]

Looks like the FAA registration data will be made public.

FAA Finally Admits Names And Home Addresses In Drone Registry Will Be Publicly Available

 

[dirkclod]