My god some people just like to scare people to death...
People... in Washington you can fly over state parks... and if you want to start up out side it and fly over, it is fine as well.
No Drones in state Park?
- Thread starter Gadgetking
- Start date
My god some people just like to scare people to death...
People... in Washington you can fly over state parks... and if you want to start up out side it and fly over, it is fine as well.
Here you go again... wow! "poor and costly advice". Here... come join my flying club!! we need the funds.
Really? let's do a little cost/benefit analysis here.... explain to us how this could be so costly? Are we talking 10 dollars? 100 dollars? 1000 dollars? gasp! 10,000 dollars?
How many people in the history of drone usage have been charged this assessment that I'm sure you'll pull out of a hole?
Divide this number that you come up with by the total number of flight taken daily in America that are not up your very high personal standards... because we all know you are better than all of them, because you are in an AMA 'sanctioned' club... wow. Is that like the Lions club or something? What's it cost... like 50 bucks to join? is there an intensive 30 year background check?
Let's really do a deep dive here on this "potentially costly advice".... I'd like to see the numbers.
"citation".... again... I have to ask.... did you speed this week? this month? If you say 'no'... you are a liar. And if you speed.... what are the risks associated with that?
You should stop your ranting before you prove yourself a complete loss!
Yes... its absolutely legal to fly over a stadium! Its not very smart, but 100% legal!
Military bases are, and have always been, illegal to fly ANYTHING civilian over.
Yes, its obviously VERY legal to fly over any National Park. Just not FROM or TO it. READ the law!
You need to educate yourself on what constitutes "Censorship". You were not ever forced to buy anything from DJI. DJI was always very clear that no-fly zones were part of the P3 and Inspires programming. So YOU made the decision to buy that "restriction".
You aren't arguing.. your rambling along with no content. Anyone that flies anywhere does so at the risk of doing some form of damage somewhere. Every one of us better have a plan in place to financially manage that potential damage. What did it "cost" Pirker? In the end... who cares!! When you know, and fight for, your rights... you always win.
The flying club I belong to doesn't charge a yearly fee. A Washington State Park Pass at $30 a year is the only requirement. I've never mentioned it by name, never encouraged anyone to join, but since you've mentioned it, here: GeyserFlyers.Org
The cost I'm talking about is the price of defending yourself in court. Lawyers.
Sorry, I should have spelled that out for the short bus rider.
Bryce, I'm flattered you've taken a shining to me and are following me from thread to thread!
Cool Beans! A Groupie!
Last edited:
It's not always legal. If there is an event going on and the stadium holds 30,000 people, the FAA can place a temp restriction around that stadium. However, since you know flying over a crowd is illegal, I'm assuming you mean when it's not in use. The temp flight restriction applies an hour before the game until an hour after. It's a 3 mile radius.
Last edited:
This ongoing legal tennis match demonstrates the need for joined up thinking. For the USA a federal set of regulations, restrictions, and guidelines would settle the confusion.
In the UK we don't have the fractured thinking of the states as our counties have no right to pass laws. (Local bylaws can clarify particular interpretations, but cannot trump the national regs). The CAA has laid the law down for us and passed the law keeping over to the law keepers- the police.
Personally I don't like the way this discussion is going. Healthy and polite disagreement is one thing; a verbal shootout at the OK corral can only lead to point scoring and less forum members. (IMHO of course)
In the UK we don't have the fractured thinking of the states as our counties have no right to pass laws. (Local bylaws can clarify particular interpretations, but cannot trump the national regs). The CAA has laid the law down for us and passed the law keeping over to the law keepers- the police.
Personally I don't like the way this discussion is going. Healthy and polite disagreement is one thing; a verbal shootout at the OK corral can only lead to point scoring and less forum members. (IMHO of course)
Last edited:
You are absolutely correct. The shootout happens when the few that have no idea try to dictate that which they have no knowledge of.
Time to stop the verbal assult going on here. Like many things in life, there are things you can do, but should you is the real question. I hate to compare this to guns but the comparisons are many.
I can walk around with a rifle in many public places but I wouldn't do that unless I needed to travers that area, I wouldnt do it just because I could, there would be no reason to. Same thing in drone flying... sometimes while it may be legal to do, why take the risk such as a packed stadium flight? Is it worth it just to say you did it? If it is for commercial uses there are channels to do that, so the question remains... why do it?
So lets all agree to disagree on this and stop the squabbling.
I can walk around with a rifle in many public places but I wouldn't do that unless I needed to travers that area, I wouldnt do it just because I could, there would be no reason to. Same thing in drone flying... sometimes while it may be legal to do, why take the risk such as a packed stadium flight? Is it worth it just to say you did it? If it is for commercial uses there are channels to do that, so the question remains... why do it?
So lets all agree to disagree on this and stop the squabbling.
Rights not exercised are Rights lost. Popular opinion be damned.
Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk Pro
Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk Pro
Thank you for contacting Washington State Parks regarding the use of UAV/Drones.
Each Washington State Park must have a policy in place and designate an area of use.
At this time, only Flaming Geyser State Park has a policy in place.
I posed your question to Robert Ingram, Chief of Law Enforcement.
Here is his official response:
Flying remote controlled aircraft in a non-designated area of the park is a violation of WAC 352-32-130(4)—an $87 non-traffic infraction WAC 352-32-130: Aircraft..
Each Washington State Park must have a policy in place and designate an area of use.
At this time, only Flaming Geyser State Park has a policy in place.
I posed your question to Robert Ingram, Chief of Law Enforcement.
Here is his official response:
Flying remote controlled aircraft in a non-designated area of the park is a violation of WAC 352-32-130(4)—an $87 non-traffic infraction WAC 352-32-130: Aircraft..
So every park must have a designated area for flying. (Therefore no flying else where - irrespective of where you take off). What have you all been arguing about!
Arguing over misinformation like this (posted above):
"People... in Washington you can fly over state parks... and if you want to start up out side it and fly over, it is fine as well."
why do you care so much.... so sad.... people will fly where they will.... You aren't doing your 'cause' much good here.
Some won't fly "where they will" if they are educated about the laws and if they care about the future of the hobby.
As for me Bryce, I'm just flattered that in the last 90 seconds you have sought out 3 of my posts on three different threads just to make snarky responses. In essence your responses amount to nothing more than you waving your arms and saying "Hey, pay some attention to ME!"
Again, I'm flattered by your attentions, but, I don't think we have a future, you aren't my type..
ianwood
Taco Wrangler
Let's all keep it cool. Respect each other's opinions and keep it constructive or don't comment. Capiche?
Time to educate ourselves gentlemen and ladies. Since states and communities have started to issue their own "no fly" legislation I, as a lawyer, believed that such legislation was not enforceable in that it conflicted with the FAA's responsibility to regulate all airspace and was therefore preempted by FAA. I held my tongue until I could do additional research.
I recently found this article which sums things up. So understand that if you are willing to take violations of state "no fly" zones to court, the federal courts will likely agree that the state law is unenforceable. Yes you will need a lawyer.
By the way, state nuisance, privacy and endangerment laws can still likely be used against you without preemption helping your cause although a good lawyer may even be able to twist that around into arguing that the state cannot apply its normal tort laws in an FAA controlled area of law. (If you are interested in this I can tell you about how it works in the area of the railroads.)
Here is the article and it is a **** well written one.
http://www.americanbar.org/content/...L_V26N3_WINTER13_Silversmith.authcheckdam.pdf
I recently found this article which sums things up. So understand that if you are willing to take violations of state "no fly" zones to court, the federal courts will likely agree that the state law is unenforceable. Yes you will need a lawyer.
By the way, state nuisance, privacy and endangerment laws can still likely be used against you without preemption helping your cause although a good lawyer may even be able to twist that around into arguing that the state cannot apply its normal tort laws in an FAA controlled area of law. (If you are interested in this I can tell you about how it works in the area of the railroads.)
Here is the article and it is a **** well written one.
http://www.americanbar.org/content/...L_V26N3_WINTER13_Silversmith.authcheckdam.pdf
Last edited:
Thanks Jeff. I shall read through this when my brain is working - even though I'm on the other side of the pond.
