Sure - that's what it looked like you meant, but you also wrote that you agreed that the model aircraft community needed that protection from new laws, so it appeared that you agreed with those lobbyists, such as the AMA, on this issue. To put it another way, I was trying to understand whether you support the separation of regulation for recreation versus non-recreation, or whether you are arguing that it should have been done differently.
sar104 you always entice me into these conversations and I can't help myself LOL.
Well I "understand" why/how it happened but at the same time I think Congress was very short sighted and didn't spend the time to research newly emerging technology and how it would affect the R/C Aircraft world. Their 2012 ruling was right when "model aircraft automation" was being implemented and this totally changed the whole industry and QUICKLY. They jumped just a pinch too soon and by doing so really added mud to the water.
Honestly, (and this will not garner me any new friends on this forum LOL) I think we need TWO sets of regulations but not how they are structured now. I think we need a set for those who are flying small, low flying, unGPS aided aircraft in knowingly safe areas (flying fields, parks, etc) and then those who fly something else. I don't think the people flying scale warbirds, stunt planes, etc on the weekend at the flying field are anything to worry about. If it can fly for thousands of yards on it's own then it can fly into an area that isn't safe.
I don't think a hobbyist flying 1 mile from an active runway should have any less regulations than a commercial operator in the same area and in fact I almost feel like it should be the other way around. But that's just my 2 cents.