Government forces shooting at civilian drones

dgd3 · Dec 3, 2016

Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots

MapMaker53 · Dec 3, 2016

IMO, if it's a no-fly zone, it SHOULD be shot down. Good moving target practice for the police.

AnchorageAk · Dec 3, 2016

Drone pilots having no regard for the law. That is not the kind of PR we need.

Richard R · Dec 3, 2016

One of th first things you learn about handling guns is to always be aware of what is behind your target of where you bullet might go. Shooting into the air is dangerous and any cop that would do so except in the most dire circumstances (which I would no consider this to be) should be reprimanded and disciplined, may need some retraining to.

DCB · Dec 3, 2016

Even if it's a no fly zone the rules of shooting weapons still apply. Those drones have cameras attached. There is no imminent threat of life to those offficers so firing their weapons up into the air to take down a small drone with a camera is absurd and they should be reprimanded. I understand if it's a no fly zone, no they shouldn't fly there. I'm just speaking about anyone, especially law enforcement carelessly firing into the air at a camera. No threat. All those rounds landed somewhere. Might have been in the middle of no where or could have landed on a person or child and killed them. What would be done to the officer at that point? Don't think he can say he "feared for his life and safety" as a defense for trying to shoot carelessly into the sky. I don't think these drones being as light as they are could kill a person by falling on them. Maybe hurt or scratch someone sure if they intentionally kamkazied into them but the drone was just flying. What's the defense they would give for shooting? I was afraid they were taking a picture or video of me????

Richard R · Dec 3, 2016

My point exactly!

AnchorageAk · Dec 3, 2016

I agree with most of you to a point. But, why is there a no fly zone? It is normally to protect the air craft flying in that area. That point seems to be over looked. Also, if these drone operators where not risking a mid air collision, the police might not be shooting at them. Just my .05. .02 cents doesn't go very far now days.

dgd3 · Dec 3, 2016

I don't know the politics or history behind this. But people shooting at drones needs to be recorded and reported. Doesn't matter if the shooters have a uniform on or not.

Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots

DCB · Dec 3, 2016

I'm not talking about the pipeline issue at all. And AnchorageAK I agree with you for sure. If it's a no fly zone these pilots are in the wrong. As you said not good PR for pilots. If they want to enforce no fly zones then they should come up with a civil way to enforce it. Enforcement of no fly zones should not come from shooting them down risking a lot of other civilians lives.

AnchorageAk · Dec 3, 2016

Why is it that the people complaining about peoples safety, po po shooting in the air, don't mention the risk of a mid air that can kill people. Could they, maybe, have an issue with law enforcement? But if you truly care about safety, shouldn't they be addressing both sides of the issue? Well that's all the .05's I got, and will say no more.

dgd3 · Dec 3, 2016

AnchorageAK
if I understand you correctly then I have to ask What risk of mid air?

Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots

AnchorageAk · Dec 4, 2016

Your saying there is not a risk of a drone hitting a airplane or helicopter, or malfunctioning and hitting people? Seems to me like you are promoting the possibly of that happening. But, you think I am one of the sheep. Show me where I am wrong? I could easily put a few labels on you, but I would prefer we have a friendly conversation. Make your point and lets move on. I think I have made my point, last time I reply.

dgd3 · Dec 4, 2016

AnchorageAK
Thanks for the clarification. I'd misunderstood what you meant.
I also removed my sheep reference because you're right, it was not friendly.

Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots

Buk · Dec 5, 2016

such a long story. Drone threatens police helicopter, occupants felt lives were endangered. Police shoot down drone using non-lethal methods. Drone follows people on the ground, charges of stalking made. More drones are donated to drone operators, more drones "shot" down. FAA files TFR to protect authorities on the ground and in the air. Oops TFR prevents 1st amendment rights of news agencies using manned or unmanned aircraft. Oops as of yesterday, FAA issues ONE waiver to a drone operating photographer.

The drone issues are a minor part of a bigger or if you choose same size, but different issue of the abuse of imminent domain, preservation of natural resources and a pipeline that will ultimately transport a product contributing to global warming. The arrests, law suits and after effects will go on for years. Our discussion barely touches the depth of this issue.

A few miles from my house, in the middle of a corn field, guards sit watch 24 hours a day over a section of pipe. Yet I only know 1/1000th of the story. Too hard to judge without knowing all the facts.

Cactus Wren · Dec 5, 2016

Buk said:
The drone issues are a minor part of a bigger or if you choose same size, but different issue of the abuse of imminent domain, preservation of natural resources and a pipeline that will ultimately transport a product contributing to global warming. The arrests, law suits and after effects will go on for years. Our discussion barely touches the depth of this issue.

A few miles from my house, in the middle of a corn field, guards sit watch 24 hours a day over a section of pipe. Yet I only know 1/1000th of the story. Too hard to judge without knowing all the facts.

Fortunately, the persistence and sacrifice of drone videographers and water protecters in ND paid off big time - the pipeline will have to be rerouted.
I just love it when smug oil barons (in this case, the CEO of Energy Transfer Partners) lose to citizen push-back.

Cactus Wren · Dec 5, 2016

DCB said:
I'm not talking about the pipeline issue at all. And AnchorageAK I agree with you for sure. If it's a no fly zone these pilots are in the wrong. As you said not good PR for pilots.

Sorry to disagree with you on this one, but many of us believe the drone pilots were in the right, and this will be nothing but good PR for drone operators everywhere - now that people can see with their own eyes how these can be useful tools in showing the truth.

The very nature of the protest at Standing Rock, and the human rights violations perpetrated by the police against unarmed, non-violent water protecters necessitates a free press - the no fly zones in these pro-oil situations are ALWAYS for the sake of creating a media black-out of exactly what's going on. It has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with keeping their actions from being revealed to the public. Thanks to the drone pilots, this became a public relations catastrophe for an overbearing oil company and the police that put private profit interests ahead of Constitutional rights.

I applaud the drone pilots in THIS situation for putting eyes on this and making the world see what was going on. If you simply want an expensive flying camera, then enjoy your purchase in the increasingly scarce places you can fly these days. But these quadcopters are also invaluable tools in shining a light on government corruption or wrongdoing (in this case, police brutality). If the government is in the wrong, as they were here, is it any wonder they'd want to impose a no-fly zone?

Paul Wynter · Dec 5, 2016

[QUOTE="Cactus Wren, post: 1007424, member: 7276 EXTRACT "now that people can see with their own eyes" how these can be useful tools in showing the truth.[/QUOTE]

Paint the drone's underside to camouflage it against the sky above, as did WW2 spitfire pilots do when carrying out daring photo recces over enemy territory, and if the threat is from above, as well, do the same to the top side. The drone is very small target at operating altitude, I don't think anyone would bother with anything clever to kill it, other than a sight-fired direct weapon. Auto-land it well away from its t/o site to a third operator. and of course, don't loiter, recover the data card as jammers may screw it around!

Cookie$Dough · Dec 5, 2016

*** the police. Keep those birds in the sky!

Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots

N017RW · Dec 5, 2016

Cactus Wren said:
Sorry to disagree with you on this one, but many of us believe the drone pilots were in the right, and this will be nothing but good PR for drone operators everywhere - now that people can see with their own eyes how these can be useful tools in showing the truth.

The very nature of the protest at Standing Rock, and the human rights violations perpetrated by the police against unarmed, non-violent water protecters necessitates a free press - the no fly zones in these pro-oil situations are ALWAYS for the sake of creating a media black-out of exactly what's going on. It has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with keeping their actions from being revealed to the public. Thanks to the drone pilots, this became a public relations catastrophe for an overbearing oil company and the police that put private profit interests ahead of Constitutional rights.

I applaud the drone pilots in THIS situation for putting eyes on this and making the world see what was going on. If you simply want an expensive flying camera, then enjoy your purchase in the increasingly scarce places you can fly these days. But these quadcopters are also invaluable tools in shining a light on government corruption or wrongdoing (in this case, police brutality). If the government is in the wrong, as they were here, is it any wonder they'd want to impose a no-fly zone?

With just about every cell phone containing a camera, GoPros and the likes, along with real-time social media broadcasts a drone is hardly necessary for telling the truth.

Cactus Wren · Dec 5, 2016

N017RW said:
With just about every cell phone containing a camera, GoPros and the likes, along with real-time social media broadcasts a drone is hardly necessary for telling the truth.

Let me give you a word: "Perspective".

A cell phone held up against a barrage of water canon, tear gas and rubber bullets probably won't reveal anything useful, other than herky-jerky chaos and yelling, and may well be destroyed.
A quadcopter can reveal everything exactly as it is happening from a much safer, secure spot.

Seeing that water canon from ground view blasting at people is intense, but it doesn't yield the full view of how inhumane the act was compared to an eye-in-the-sky.
Having ALL views is what is needed to show the world what was going on, and record evidence of human rights violations for future legal actions.