Flew at a Public Park, got stopped

[AerialPhantom]

Hey guys, I've been a long time lurker no this forum and finally decided I am capable to fly a phantom to enjoy and record some beautiful aerial views. Flew my first flight today at a public park, got many people's attention all positive asking me where I got one, how high it can fly, and it being awesome and cool. Until, a park security came over while I was bringing her down telling me I can't fly without a aviation permit due to invasion of privacy and endangering kids.

To my knowledge public parks are just that, public, and me doing most of my flying out in the lake was not endangering anyone. I politely asked him to show me a pamphlet for the park's rules and policies stating the rc quadcopter (he kept using the word drone) is not permitted and I would gladly stop and advise my fellow rc friends as well. He failed to deliver of course, and stated that it is not formal and not written, but rules are always changing. I advise him I was flying in the lakes and kids are everywhere no matter where I'm flying (there was literally 3 kids at this huge park), at least I'm not flying around congested neighborhoods and peoples' backyards so I don't see where there was an invasion of privacy. He said I can speak with his supervisor to which I replied, "Yes please, I would love to learn about the rules so as to not overstep my boundaries", but he failed to give me that number as well. He asked if he could take a photo of it with the remote and asked for my number, which I was more than pleased to do and again I added, "I'm here to help and this is recreational, so definitely show me the park's guidelines and restrictions so I know to educate myself and my fellow rc friends." He said it's no issue, no problem..and just walked away.

Sorry for the long first post, I just wanted to defend our grounds and rights as recreational flyers that are abiding by the law and I'm well aware to not fly in no-fly zones (airports or governmental buildings) and national parks, but seeing that no one there had a problem except this park security really picked at my skin. What do you guys think? Did I do the right thing?

 

[Jeff48920]

There are no FAA rules specificially governing the use of UAVs per se----yet, they are coming and they will be highly restrictive.
However, federal no fly zones have been established for airports, certain buildings etc.
National Parks are off limits.
National forests are not yet restricted.
Specific state, and local rules may apply.
Check the rules for the jurisdiction you are in for formal rules.

However all of us need to be aware that generalized laws may be used to regulate the use of UAVs, including those laws meant to protect the public from "dangerous" activities. (Yes I know, that a 2.5 kg UAV falling on someone's head can be dangerous, but so can a well hit baseball that gets away and strikes a baby in the head in a public park).

The bottom line is that unless you are flying over your own property, the question of endangerment will be left to a jury in the event a law enforcement officer wishes to press the line.

 

[SilentAV8R]

Many cities and counties ban all RC from parks except in authorized locations. Most all parks in SandDiego, Orange, and LA counties are like this. But you did right to ask for the actual rule. Without that the security person has nothing to back them up.

 

[AerialPhantom]

Thanks for the info Jeff48920. SilentAV8R, that was the thing, I checked the park rules before flying and there were no rules regarding bans on RCs or restrictions on any sort of radio controlled vehicles, it was all just his fluff trying to be big boy security patrol. In Texas, the law states in Chapter 423 to the Texas State Code, it is perfectly legal to fly and take images using unmanned aerial vehicle on public property, and people on public property.

 

[IflyinWY]

Thanks for the info Jeff48920. SilentAV8R, that was the thing, I checked the park rules before flying and there were no rules regarding bans on RCs or restrictions on any sort of radio controlled vehicles, it was all just his fluff trying to be big boy security patrol. In Texas, the law states in Chapter 423 to the Texas State Code, it is perfectly legal to fly and take images using unmanned aerial vehicle on public property, and people on public property.

Print it out and on the other side of the paper print out the regulation that says it's a federal offence to mess with a pilot. They could go to prison for 20 years.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/32

Hey AerialPhantom, WELCOME TO THE PARTY

 

[tcope]

Some incorrect information. There _are_ laws on the books on flying UAVs. It states that you cannot fly in a reckless manner as to cause damage or harm to someone. As mentioned, there is also restricted airspace which included airports and some government facilities. There is no rule again flying over other property... even is they "ban" UAVs. Rangers, law enforcement and property owners can make it illegal to take off, land and operate a UAV from their land, which is what the National Parks have done. Unfortunately, any park could make this same rule. You can then argue against it but they may be an uphill battle. MY take... a UAV is no more dangerous then a Frisbee, baseball or football. IN that a UAV _could_ cause harm is not the litmus test. Anything _can_ cause harm.

 

[Hangover]

Sounds like you finally gave him something to do instead of chase bums out of a park is all. I wouldnt stress over it at all. sounded like you handled the situation really well. We all will get heat from some one. like most of us when you explain whats going on, show them the FPV if you can they will see you cant watch them skinny dip in the pool with out making it very apparent. then I would expect it to be shot out of the sky.

 

[AerialPhantom]

IflyinWY haha, thanks for that information and thank you for the welcome, I will definitely the resource you provided if ever the need arises. tcope, I'm not sure what you're referring to is incorrect information? As for your take, the guy wasn't too bright to begin with so I highly doubt he would've understood those comparisons.

 

[IflyinWY]

IflyinWY haha, thanks for that information and thank you for the welcome, I will definitely the resource you provided if ever the need arises. tcope, I'm not sure what you're referring to is incorrect information? As for your take, the guy wasn't too bright to begin with so I highly doubt he would've understood those comparisons.

Hopefully you will run into someone who can read and comprehend.
I have the regulation on 1 side, with highlights and underlines to make the important stuff stand out.
On the other side it says, in really big letters, all caps (which I won't do here):

"The short version of the regulation.
Blank with me or my aircraft and you are committing a felony.
Law enforcement is not exempt from the regulation.
I guarantee you will be prosecuted."


_________________________________________________

The topic is being tossed from a park.
If you really feel the need to focus on my post, start your own thread.
Please don't hijack the OP's thread.

 

[AerialPhantom]

I will have those papers in my bag at all times. I do my due diligence to be respectful of others and of other's properties, but mine should be respected as well. When I delve into a hobby, I look at all resources regarding legality issues so as to not cause trouble from myself or to others. I'm glad I found this forum with helpful members to assist me in this awesome hobby.

 

[IflyinWY]

I will have those papers in my bag at all times. I do my due diligence to be respectful of others and of other's properties, but mine should be respected as well. When I delve into a hobby, I look at all resources regarding legality issues so as to not cause trouble from myself or to others. I'm glad I found this forum with helpful members to assist me in this awesome hobby.

Sounds like you've already done lots of homework. Enjoy the show.

 

[Suwaneeguy]

In most cases, when directly asked for the precise law, cops won't answer the question because there is no such law.
Or they just want to try their hand at playing the bully and persist that you bow down to them.
I would now be going to the park manager's office and asking the person in charge exactly what the law says.
In Los Angeles county you can operate ANY RC equipment within a city park.
If they can't come up with an exact and precise law banning, hey, go for it and enjoy yourself.
When the officers show up, kindly direct them to the manager's office, calling that person by name, and saying you've already
checked it out and there are no rules.

 

[PaganLinuxGeek]

I will have those papers in my bag at all times. I do my due diligence to be respectful of others and of other's properties, but mine should be respected as well. When I delve into a hobby, I look at all resources regarding legality issues so as to not cause trouble from myself or to others. I'm glad I found this forum with helpful members to assist me in this awesome hobby.

Can you provide a link to those papers please? New phantom owner and I would prefer to have these papers ONHAND when I fly. Thanks in advance!

 

[zdauexs]

Make yourself aware of specific ordinances where ever you fly. In Fort Worth there is a specific ordinance regarding the flying of RC/Kites in parks with high voltage power lines....

§ 24-12 KITES, MODEL AIRPLANES.
It shall be unlawful for any person to fly a kite or propel or guide a model airplane in any park or recreation area traversed by high voltage transmission lines.
(1964 Code, § 27-19(3)) (Ord. 5637, § 1; Ord. 6360, § 1, passed 8-31-1970; Ord. 6681, § 1, passed 6-5-1972; Ord. 6920, § 10, passed 10-1-1973; Ord. 6945, § 1, passed 1-14-1974; Ord. 7338, § 1, passed 4-26-1976; Ord. 8225, § 1, passed 12-3-1980; Ord. 8255, § 1, passed 1-20-1981)

 

[Hasan Ahmad]

The less invasive the government the better but sometimes common sense needs to be used and there are rules that need to be set. Don't go flying to a height where normal aircraft are flying, dont fly near a hospital which caters to emergency hospital helicopter flights, dont fly near airport. I would support a detector where if the gps sends data to the quadcopter that there is a plane or a helicopter flying, that the quadcopter makes a descent to a lower level especially if it is in a location where there are no height restrictions but planes rarely do fly.what should NOT be restricted is distance. I dont mind restriction on height in areas with high aerial traffic but i would be angry if there was a distance restriction.

 

[SilentAV8R]

In Los Angeles county you can operate ANY RC equipment within a city park.

Not sure if that is what you meant to say, but here is the LA City Parks code:

SEC. 63.44. REGULATIONS AFFECTING PARK AND RECREATION AREAS. (Added by Ord. No. 153,027, Eff. 11/16/79.)

8. No person shall land, release, take off or fly any balloon, except children toy balloons not inflated with any flammable material, helicopter, parakite, hang glider, aircraft or powered models thereof, except in areas specifically set aside therefor.

Here is the LA County COde:

17.04.630 Model airplanes and boats.

A person shall not operate model airplanes, boats or crafts except in areas designated for such use, and subject to all rules and regulations contained in such written permission.

(Ord. 10309 Art. 3 § 45, 1971.)

 

[mikespe]

I am new to Quads and RC in general...I am still waiting for my Phantom 1.1.1 to arrive this week. However I am a teacher and know that there are laws for filming children even in a public place (not saying anyone here id that). You would need a written photo release from the parent or guardian before you can film them. However, adults in a public place can be filmed without a photo release (I believe)...

Obviously you were filming over the lake as you said so this security guy didn't have a leg to stand on. However if he sees you filming kids he could call the authorities and accuse you of being a pedifile...

 

[tcope]

tcope, I'm not sure what you're referring to is incorrect information?

"There are no FAA rules specificially governing the use of UAVs per se..."

 

[N017RW]

I am new to Quads and RC in general...I am still waiting for my Phantom 1.1.1 to arrive this week. However I am a teacher and know that there are laws for filming children even in a public place (not saying anyone here id that). You would need a written photo release from the parent or guardian before you can film them. However, adults in a public place can be filmed without a photo release (I believe)...

Obviously you were filming over the lake as you said so this security guy didn't have a leg to stand on. However if he sees you filming kids he could call the authorities and accuse you of being a pedifile...

In the U.S. it has been established by the courts that you have no reasonable expectation of privacy in 'public' places.
Of course their are exceptions but those are obvious to many.

Don't know where [in the world] you are but generally speaking releases in the U.S. are for when the images are to be for sale, distribution, publishing, etc (i.e. commercial use).

 

[Jeff48920]

"There are no FAA rules specificially governing the use of UAVs per se..."

Tcope.
Gotta disagree. Since there are no rules promulgated by FAA specifically relating to consumer UAVs yet, the agency has merely interpreted older rules as having applicability to consumer UAVs. They are currently promulgating specific rules but as of now there are no consumer UAV rules that I am aware of.
FAA rules that apply to all aircraft have been applied to consumer UAVs BUT the definition of aircraft does not specifically include consumer UAVs.
Still, once an FAA cop shows up you are pretty well guilty until proven innocent.