Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photograp

[terrylowe]

This copied and pasted from our local online paper today:

A House bill filed by state Rep. Ken Morgan, R-Morgantown, called the "Drone Prohibition Act," would make it unlawful for anyone to capture an image using a drone unless it's tied to a university, law enforcement, military, government emergency agencies, Federal Aviation Administration, satellite mapping, utility mapping or licensed real estate brokers.

"With the popularity of the devices, they could be misused," Morgan said. "We need some regulations in place."

Morgan said Monday that drones can interfere with airplanes. He said they shouldn't be flying across people's pools and definitely not around dormitory windows, which could lead to images being posted on social media without permission of the subjects. Morgan's bill allows an exception if a property owner gives consent.

"I thought about this sometime back; we have followed some of the issues in other states," Morgan said. "It would be better to nip the problem in the bud."


Not sure what to say here. Mississippi has the poorest education structure, the highest teen birth rate, the highest neonatal death rate, the highest rate of sexually transmitted diseases, yet this legislator wants to prevent the "drone problem".

 

[SteveMann]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

Have the existing privacy laws been repealed?

 

[terrylowe]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

Have the existing privacy laws been repealed?

No.

 

[sdtrojan]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

This copied and pasted from our local online paper today:

"I thought about this sometime back; we have followed some of the issues in other states," Morgan said. "It would be better to nip the problem in the bud."

Not sure what to say here. Mississippi has the poorest education structure, the highest teen birth rate, the highest neonatal death rate, the highest rate of sexually transmitted diseases, yet this legislator wants to prevent the "drone problem".

Did anyone else hear Don Knott's voice from his role as Barnie Fife when they read that line?

I guess they are going to have to outlaw birds. Those things can take down an airplane too...and other airplanes while we are at it because more of them have brought down airplanes than drones have. Heck, lets ban telephoto lenses used by photographers and ladders too, because the combination of those are sure to lead to our moral demise. And lets not forget Google Maps too...

Has there been a single bonafide case where a quadcopter or any RC aircraft for that matter has collided with an airborne aircraft?

 

[Chuck67]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

Has there been a single bonafide case where a quadcopter or any RC aircraft for that matter has collided with an airborne aircraft?

What an absolutely stupid statement. I don't like what they are proposing but they (Mississippi) are being pro active instead of reactive. I can pretty much guarantee if a quad copter brings down a commercial plane they will be outlawed immediately countrywide

 

[TeamYankee]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

I wonder if some "agency" has conducted impact tests between a "Quad copter" and a jet engine, like they do for birds... I'd pay to see that one!

 

[terrylowe]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

It would still be legal to capture an image using a camera, but not if it was taken using a "drone". Blows my mind. Illegal to capture an image. That would stop all hobby planes that are using video, all quad copters, etc. The full proposed bill his here.

Thanks Dirkclod for finding it.

http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2015/html/HB/0300-0399/HB0347IN.htm

 

[sdtrojan]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

Has there been a single bonafide case where a quadcopter or any RC aircraft for that matter has collided with an airborne aircraft?

What an absolutely stupid statement. I don't like what they are proposing but they (Mississippi) are being pro active instead of reactive. I can pretty much guarantee if a quad copter brings down a commercial plane they will be outlawed immediately countrywide

Welcome to the forum, Chuck67. Before I started calling some else's posts "stupid" I would ask myself "Does this person's question make a point?"

I highly doubt they would be banned nation wide...flying is an inherently dangerous act that people choose to perform. It's not natural to humans, and is wrought with danger including potential loss of life. Nobody is held at gunpoint and told "You have to go fly."

Now, before everyone on the board who happens to also be a pilot jumps on my case, hear me out please. I am a retired USAF officer, and I spent 24 years serving our country. 12 of those years I spent as an Explosive Ordnance Disposal technician (bomb squad). Every day I went to work I knew I could be called out on a mission that could end my life. I chose the career, I could have left it at any time. I did it because I enjoyed the mission. When the risks began to outweigh the reward, I left the career field. Pilots fly (and I am sure there are exponentially more recreational pilots than there are commercial pilots) because they enjoy the experience. Nobody is forcing them to do it. They accept the inherent risk associated with piloting an aircraft for the reward they get, whether intrinsic or monetary. If they felt so unsafe in the sky, they would have to make the decision themselves whether the risk was worth their reward. That risk can come in the form of faulty parts or maintenance performed poorly on the aircraft, airborne dangers such as other aircraft, birds, r/c aircraft, etc. I tend to think that the risk is not as great as the reward right now, therefore everything stays status quo.

The point of my question is this, Chuck67. I spent a lot of money on my rig and the last thing I want to see happen to it is for it to get sucked into the intake of a jet, or meet any demise at all. The last thing I am going to do is put my quad up in an area where I am going to increase pilot's danger. There is a reason 400' is our guideline, because manned A/C have to stay at 1,000'+ in urban/populated areas and 500'+ over other than congested areas. (short of an emergency or when on take/off or approach). Is 100' enough to separate the types of aircraft? Not sure, but I comply and if something should happen than I guess the NTSB will help me figure that out.

Welcome to the board Chuck67, from the stupid retired USAF officer with 2 masters degrees.

 

[Chuck67]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

Has there been a single bonafide case where a quadcopter or any RC aircraft for that matter has collided with an airborne aircraft?

What an absolutely stupid statement. I don't like what they are proposing but they (Mississippi) are being pro active instead of reactive. I can pretty much guarantee if a quad copter brings down a commercial plane they will be outlawed immediately countrywide

Welcome to the forum, Chuck67. Before I started calling some else's posts "stupid" I would ask myself "Does this person's question make a point?"

I highly doubt they would be banned nation wide...flying is an inherently dangerous act that people choose to perform. It's not natural to humans, and is wrought with danger including potential loss of life. Nobody is held at gunpoint and told "You have to go fly."

Now, before everyone on the board who happens to also be a pilot jumps on my case, hear me out please. I am a retired USAF officer, and I spent 24 years serving our country. 12 of those years I spent as an Explosive Ordnance Disposal technician (bomb squad). Every day I went to work I knew I could be called out on a mission that could end my life. I chose the career, I could have left it at any time. I did it because I enjoyed the mission. When the risks began to outweigh the reward, I left the career field. Pilots fly (and I am sure there are exponentially more recreational pilots than there are commercial pilots) because they enjoy the experience. Nobody is forcing them to do it. They accept the inherent risk associated with piloting an aircraft for the reward they get, whether intrinsic or monetary. If they felt so unsafe in the sky, they would have to make the decision themselves whether the risk was worth their reward. That risk can come in the form of faulty parts or maintenance performed poorly on the aircraft, airborne dangers such as other aircraft, birds, r/c aircraft, etc. I tend to think that the risk is not as great as the reward right now, therefore everything stays status quo.

The point of my question is this, Chuck67. I spent a lot of money on my rig and the last thing I want to see happen to it is for it to get sucked into the intake of a jet, or meet any demise at all. The last thing I am going to do is put my quad up in an area where I am going to increase pilot's danger. There is a reason 400' is our guideline, because manned A/C have to stay at 1,000'+ in urban/populated areas and 500'+ over other than congested areas. (short of an emergency or when on take/off or approach). Is 100' enough to separate the types of aircraft? Not sure, but I comply and if something should happen than I guess the NTSB will help me figure that out.

Welcome to the board Chuck67, from the stupid retired USAF officer with 2 masters degrees.

SdTrojan,

My intention was not to cause ruffled feathers or to be mean. I did not call you stupid I stated 'what a stupid statement'

I like you spend a buttload of money for my quad and I do not want to see it on the ground in pieces with someone being hurt and/or something else damaged. I understand all the rules pertaining to quads. I do not understand the need to make these things go farther, higher, etc than they can out of the box. IMHO that is just asking for trouble.

Just a few weeks ago an Air Canada jet was landing at LAX and spotted a drone above 3000 feet and called it in. It is those people who are going to ruin it for the rest of us. I truly believe with as much bad press as these (quads) are getting if one brings down a commercial plane, private plane, police helicopter, etc it will be all over for ALL of us. It is nice to see municipalities, counties, and states being pro active ( albeit they do need more education before they jump to conclusions) as we all know how things go when municipalities, counties, and states become reactive.

Please remember I did not call you stupid

 

[sdtrojan]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

It's basically the same thing, Chuck, but I'll let it slide. It's like telling your wife an outfit makes her look fat. You didn't tell her she was fat, just that the outfit makes her look fat. But the message received it "you are fat."

Free pass granted, but try to be a little more careful with the negative words about people's ideas. Say "I disagree." Much easier to swallow.

 

[ianwood]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

What a great focus for legislative efforts. Waaaay more important than say... education.

 

[terrylowe]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

What a great focus for legislative efforts. Waaaay more important than say... education.

+1

 

[Prylar Bek]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

Well then, I guess this proves the point that not all the crazies live in California!

 

[sdtrojan]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

Well then, I guess this proves the point that not all the crazies live in California!

We just come back here for mating season...

 

[Meta4]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

Looks like state Rep. Ken Morgan, R-Morgantown is trying to make Mississippi number one for pig ignorance.
The level of his thinking is obvious with comments like "With the popularity of the devices, they could be misused".
Quick - we better regulate anything else that's popular!
And the risk that drones might fly around dormitory windows, which could lead to images being posted on social media without permission of the people captured in the images is just too great.
How many (non-imaginary) cases of that have there been? How big is the problem? So big that existing privacy laws are not enough?
We've managed with a camera hidden in every mobile phone but just imagine how bad it would be if cameras could fly.

Someone should take this narrow-minded rep flying and inspire his imagination with something real and wonderful.
His proposed law is about the nonsense he imagines - not about anything factual.

 

[Meta4]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

Just a few weeks ago an Air Canada jet was landing at LAX and spotted a drone above 3000 feet and called it in. It is those people who are going to ruin it for the rest of us.

Perhaps an AirCanada crew reported a drone above 3000 feet at LA but I'm unable to find any mention of it after lots of Googling.
The closest I got in the FAA database of reported drone incidents was this...
November 13 Phoenix Air Canada Rouge Flight 1837, an Airbus 319 arriving from Toronto, reports a “disk-like” drone passing within 20 to 40 feet of the aircraft while at 3,000 feet, 10 miles northwest of Phoenix.

A disk-like drone. Those **** martians are going to ruin things for the rest of us. Not every newsworthy drone near miss is a phantom of hobby multirotor. High altitude reports like this are particularly suspicious.
Once upon a time they called in reports of UFOs. Now it's drones.
Here's a classic example .. http://www.mywebmemo.com/out/?i=225953
Close encounter at 6000 metres!!! I'm going out on a limb here and saying it probably wasn't a DJI product.

 

[terrylowe]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

Someone should take this narrow-minded rep flying and inspire his imagination with something real and wonderful.
His proposed law is about the nonsense he imagines - not about anything factual.

I sent an email to him early this morning offering to go flying and taking video of his property. Haven't heard back. It was actually a friendly email too!

 

[terrylowe]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

We just come back here for mating season...

Smart! Remember that Mississippi leads the nation in per capita STD's.

 

[BigW25]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

This write up of it blows my mind

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news ... /22021615/

Statements like the quote below are exactly what cause the less informed populous to freak out.

Drones, which have been used by the United States in attacks abroad against terrorists, are sold by major retailers, including Walmart and Best Buy.

 

[sdtrojan]

Re: Mississippi Legislature wants to stop hobby aerial photo

This write up of it blows my mind

http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news ... /22021615/

Statements like the quote below are exactly what cause the less informed populous to freak out.

Drones, which have been used by the United States in attacks abroad against terrorists, are sold by major retailers, including Walmart and Best Buy.

Even more interesting is how this guys also wants to allow all of those he deems worthy to fly drones carte blanch when the FAA has not even come close to doing the same thing. And no offense to RE agents, but how did they get lumped in with that group?