Local City banning hobby drones to their own backyard.
- Thread starter ecolumbia999
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ban
N017RW
Premium Pilot
It does not mean it in that way. The AMA put out information to let people think this meant much more then it did... I'm sure to grow it's membership. What the section _really_ means is that Congress is not taking, already established, rights away from local areas. For example, the AMA might have an RC racing event. They are allowed to set rules that state that a person cannot fly higher than 100' or faster than 40mph. Things like that. Congress is basically saying, they are free to do things like this. However, US Code also clearly states that airspace can only be regulated by the FAA. What the AMA would be doing is not creating regulations... such as what the city would be doing.
That part of Section 336 is horribly written.
According to that news report, it's already passed. I do mention that no one has provided a link to the bill or law so it's even unknown what it really states. Don't think cities have not passed laws _exactly_ like this... they have. Many cities and townships have.
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2017
- Messages
- 507
- Reaction score
- 161
- Age
- 50
Not really, as long as its not a nfz I'm good. Besides, I live in Alabama. I'm not going to nj anytime soon.
People have been paying that price throughout history. Independence from England, 13th Amendment, etc.
If I was in a location that did this I can _guarantee_ you that I'd find an attorney that would help be file suit against the law.
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2017
- Messages
- 507
- Reaction score
- 161
- Age
- 50
Again, I was talking about the bill in the senate giving states the power to govern hobby aviation. Why would they need a bill to do something that they can already do? If the state can't do it how can a city do it?
N017RW
Premium Pilot
N017RW
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2016
- Messages
- 23
- Reaction score
- 8
- Age
- 73
errrm, no it doesn't. It means exactly what it says 'community based'. Whilst it may include the AMA it also leaves a great big grey areas for local regulations such as not taking off/operating from parks, city owned/managed land etc etc etc.
You may have a right to the airspace above you but if you don't have the right to access that air space your 'rights' to use it mean nothing.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2017
- Messages
- 507
- Reaction score
- 161
- Age
- 50
And just what do you know about American law? Airspace starts where the grass ends. I'm sorry but I promise you what they are doing is illegal. They might can decide that you cant launch from city property but you most certainly can not be told that you can't enter public airspace from private property. They also can not tax you because you fly in said airspace. You have the right to use that airspace and the faa is the ONLY organization that can govern airspace PERIOD!
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2016
- Messages
- 56
- Reaction score
- 9
- Age
- 52
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
Let me say up-front that I like flying drones and I am against government intrusion. At the risk of being stoned, things have changed. Before drones, model aviation was not an issue because, by their very nature, model airplanes had to be flown (for the most part) from model airplane sites, usually provided by local governments. There was not a safety or nuisance problem to anyone who didn't wish to be a spectator. No one can argue that drones have changed those fundamental facts.
In the grand scheme of all things government, regulation and controls are a good thing that protect public safety and nuisance considerations. Local governments feel that they should be given the right to control the immediate airspace above their jurisdictions now because, except for kites at the local park and model airplane flying sites that they even provided, it was not necessary before.
The FAA wanted to control all model activities, including drones. Long before the legislation that restricted them, the FAA was planning on having all model aircraft be registered with N-numbers, pilot certification requirements, speed, type of motors, etc. The legislation stopped them from regulating "recreational" model activities. So the FAA designated what "commercial" sUAS activity was and regulated all activity in that category the exact way they intended to regulate ALL sUAS activity.
The safety aspects of "commercial" flying activities were originally intended to provide increase safety assurances to those paying someone to fly them from point A to point B. Do you really think those same "safety" considerations apply to individuals flying a drone to take a picture they will use in their non-aviation related business? Of course not. It is government over reach at its worse.
The FAA will form an 'axis of evil' for all recreational flyers through a Feinstein type bill to allow local communities to regulate their airspace below 400' so long as it does not conflict with the FAA rules; "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
Coming to a town near you...sooner or latter I am afraid, starting, as usual, on the socialist East and West Coast.
Let me say up-front that I like flying drones and I am against government intrusion. At the risk of being stoned, things have changed. Before drones, model aviation was not an issue because, by their very nature, model airplanes had to be flown (for the most part) from model airplane sites, usually provided by local governments. There was not a safety or nuisance problem to anyone who didn't wish to be a spectator. No one can argue that drones have changed those fundamental facts.
In the grand scheme of all things government, regulation and controls are a good thing that protect public safety and nuisance considerations. Local governments feel that they should be given the right to control the immediate airspace above their jurisdictions now because, except for kites at the local park and model airplane flying sites that they even provided, it was not necessary before.
The FAA wanted to control all model activities, including drones. Long before the legislation that restricted them, the FAA was planning on having all model aircraft be registered with N-numbers, pilot certification requirements, speed, type of motors, etc. The legislation stopped them from regulating "recreational" model activities. So the FAA designated what "commercial" sUAS activity was and regulated all activity in that category the exact way they intended to regulate ALL sUAS activity.
The safety aspects of "commercial" flying activities were originally intended to provide increase safety assurances to those paying someone to fly them from point A to point B. Do you really think those same "safety" considerations apply to individuals flying a drone to take a picture they will use in their non-aviation related business? Of course not. It is government over reach at its worse.
The FAA will form an 'axis of evil' for all recreational flyers through a Feinstein type bill to allow local communities to regulate their airspace below 400' so long as it does not conflict with the FAA rules; "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".
Coming to a town near you...sooner or latter I am afraid, starting, as usual, on the socialist East and West Coast.
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2017
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 48
- Age
- 42
I like how many time the world "trumps" had been used in this treads it's almost like every one subconsciously it's putting a new meaning and feeling to old age madness and enloquece but I refuse to use it with grandma even when she don't know where she is ....
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2017
- Messages
- 507
- Reaction score
- 161
- Age
- 50
Thats exactly what I was saying. They might want to govern the airspace over their city but at present they can not. Feinstein's bill would make that a possibility but as it stands right now they can not. Most bills do not pass as I'm sure this one will not.
- Joined
- May 25, 2016
- Messages
- 241
- Reaction score
- 94
- Age
- 59
Unless YOU and I mean everyone reading this thread takes the time to write their Senator this bill MAY have a chance to pass. I took the time the other day to email EVERY senator in the US to let them know that I oppose this bill and that it will kill the drone business. (They don't care about your hobby, but will respond to killing businesses)
So don't be lazy, start writing.
About the bill and it's text:
Drone Federalism Act of 2017 (Senate Bill 1272) - Drone Law Attorney Services - Rupprecht Law, PA
Find your Senator:
Elected Officials | USAGov
Get to work before you can't fly anywhere!
So don't be lazy, start writing.
About the bill and it's text:
Drone Federalism Act of 2017 (Senate Bill 1272) - Drone Law Attorney Services - Rupprecht Law, PA
Find your Senator:
Elected Officials | USAGov
Get to work before you can't fly anywhere!
Similar threads
