Proposed Law in Hawaii

[fizzviic]

A friend and professional photographer on Maui sent me this. It is chilling in it's implications for us should it pass.

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session20 ... 8_SD1_.htm

 

[Ots]

A friend and professional photographer on Maui sent me this. It is chilling in it's implications for us should it pass.

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session20 ... 8_SD1_.htm

What's "chilling" about it? We all have privacy rights and this is supportive of protecting those rights. I really dig doing my FPV but if I'm doing it to gather information about what others' are doing then shame on me!

I wonder if perhaps you may have misinterpreted its meaning? It's just outlining the circumstances under which law enforcement agencies may use unmanned aircraft. I don't have a problem with that.

Or have I missed your point somehow?

 

[Ots]

Oh. I just read the date of the OP. Lol!

 

[Big Ben]

What's "chilling" about it? We all have privacy rights and this is supportive of protecting those rights. I really dig doing my FPV but if I'm doing it to gather information about what others' are doing then shame on me!

I wonder if perhaps you may have misinterpreted its meaning? It's just outlining the circumstances under which law enforcement agencies may use unmanned aircraft. I don't have a problem with that.

It's not as innocent as you think.

§803-B Use of unmanned aircrafts prohibited. Except as provided under this part, it shall be unlawful for any law enforcement agency, state or local public agency, person, or entity to use an unmanned aircraft to gather information, including but not limited to images, photographs, or recordings.

 

[OI Photography]

It's not as innocent as you think.

§803-B Use of unmanned aircrafts prohibited. Except as provided under this part, it shall be unlawful for any law enforcement agency, state or local public agency, person, or entity to use an unmanned aircraft to gather information, including but not limited to images, photographs, or recordings.

I think that's supposed to be read as:

state or local public agency, or, state or local person, or, state or local entity

Hard to tell for sure

 

[LuvMyTJ]

A friend and professional photographer on Maui sent me this. It is chilling in it's implications for us should it pass.

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session20 ... 8_SD1_.htm

What's "chilling" about it? We all have privacy rights and this is supportive of protecting those rights. I really dig doing my FPV but if I'm doing it to gather information about what others' are doing then shame on me!

I wonder if perhaps you may have misinterpreted its meaning? It's just outlining the circumstances under which law enforcement agencies may use unmanned aircraft. I don't have a problem with that.

Or have I missed your point somehow?

By the looks of it, these rules apply to everyone and if you live there you would not be able to use your camera while flying... does that sound OK to you?

 

[Big Ben]

I think that's supposed to be read as:

state or local public agency, or, state or local person, or, state or local entity

Hard to tell for sure

Not really.

Description:

Prohibits the use of unmanned aircrafts, except by law enforcement agencies, to gather information and establishes certain conditions for law enforcement agencies to use an unmanned aircraft to obtain information. Requires all law enforcement agencies using unmanned aircrafts and the courts to report on their activities relating to unmanned aircrafts.

 

[havasuphoto]

Since the "airspace" over a city/town/state, belongs to the Federal Government...and there's this thing called the 10th Amendment in the Constitution, which basically says; "powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the States, are reserved to the States or the people."
And, what that mean is this; the Federal Government had been granted the rights to Airspace....and it has to give the States the right to regulate aircraft within that airspace.

I see any State/City/Town, attempting to pass anti-drone legislation as being in Violation of the 10th amendment of the Constitution. They can't control what flies in the National Airspace System.....the end.
It also violates the Interstate Commerce Clause....again, it's a Federal thing, not a State thing.

Too bad the ACLU probably hates the mere thought of Drones. They have great Attorney's that love to pound the you know what out of these types of laws. But-being that it has to do with Drones, I'm thinking they're probably going to take a "red card" on this, and sit it out.

 

[fizzviic]

A friend and professional photographer on Maui sent me this. It is chilling in it's implications for us should it pass.

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session20 ... 8_SD1_.htm

What's "chilling" about it? We all have privacy rights and this is supportive of protecting those rights. I really dig doing my FPV but if I'm doing it to gather information about what others' are doing then shame on me!

I wonder if perhaps you may have misinterpreted its meaning? It's just outlining the circumstances under which law enforcement agencies may use unmanned aircraft. I don't have a problem with that.

Or have I missed your point somehow?

I do indeed think you missed the point. If you took the time to read the proposed legislation, it bans the use of 'drones' FOR ALL PURPOSES, except for law enforcement agency. That mean if passed, ALL private use, for any reason would be banned.

You might consider reading the proposed law this time instead of just jumping in with a gratuitous comment.

 

[OI Photography]

A friend and professional photographer on Maui sent me this. It is chilling in it's implications for us should it pass.

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session20 ... 8_SD1_.htm

What's "chilling" about it? We all have privacy rights and this is supportive of protecting those rights. I really dig doing my FPV but if I'm doing it to gather information about what others' are doing then shame on me!

I wonder if perhaps you may have misinterpreted its meaning? It's just outlining the circumstances under which law enforcement agencies may use unmanned aircraft. I don't have a problem with that.

Or have I missed your point somehow?

I do indeed think you missed the point. If you took the time to read the proposed legislation, it bans the use of 'drones' FOR ALL PURPOSES, except for law enforcement agency. That mean if passed, ALL private use, for any reason would be banned.

You might consider reading the proposed law this time instead of just jumping in with a gratuitous comment.

I think you need to read it again. It's specifically referring to use by state agencies...which is all the states have the power to regulate in this matter.

"In recognizing the progressive opportunities that unmanned aircrafts provide, the legislature also recognizes its duty to protect Hawaii residents from threats to their constitutional right to privacy. The legislature further finds that in 2013 nine other states passed legislation regulating government deployment of unmanned aircraft technology.

The purpose of this Act is to ensure that unmanned aircraft technology is used strictly to assist or benefit Hawaii residents and not used in a manner that will impede their right to privacy."

The exclusions listed are to specify situations in which law enforcement agencies MAY use them.

 

[LuvMyTJ]

<snip>Too bad the ACLU probably hates the mere thought of Drones. They have great Attorney's that love to pound the you know what out of these types of laws. But-being that it has to do with Drones, I'm thinking they're probably going to take a "red card" on this, and sit it out.</snip>

The ACLU is involved here...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekYL9fPbKlQ[/youtube]

 

[OI Photography]

Two more states pushing for the same (restrictions on local govt use of drones): http://news.yahoo.com/anti-drone-laws-s ... 44385.html

 

[Ots]

Well, I did read the whole thing, and more from reading articles available on-line.

The context of this proposed legislation is about spying and gathering info on people - invasion of privacy, basically. It has nothing to do with sport flying or enjoying your Phantom.

 

[flyshasta]

Oh, it's going to be so cool to "fly for hours and days at a time!" I can't wait!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LuvMyTJ]

Oh, it's going to be so cool to "fly for hours and days at a time!" I can't wait!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I LOL'ed when he said that too. :lol:

 

[GMANNZ]

This seems no different than the rules I have to follow when I tap your phones ... Ok to do, no keeping of data, destroy the evidence yadda yadda yadda ..... pretty standard operating procedure for lots of areas

 

[Buster2]

Maybe, just maybe a compromise could be achieved by filing a flight plan electronically (only if flying over public or populated areas) and making the video or pictures available to an oversight entity only to demonstrate or verify good intent.

I could see having a permit to fly over populated areas to prevent injury. Everyone knows it only takes one idiot to ruin it for everyone!

I also see a need to have some kind of regulation since the technology can easily be misused!

I'm not for more laws and strict regulation, but look how easy the FPV drone can video and take pictures of otherwise inaccessible views that would normally have the expectation of privacy!

Very tough controversial issue!

 

[thongbong]

Here's a video straight from the mouth of the senator who's trying to get the bill passed. Hope he is not successful or there will be plenty of Ebay Phantoms coming out of Hawaii.

"This bill is intended to provide a tool for law enforcement and for data gathering, primarily for law enforcement. It's not intended to be a drone in every garage," Sen. Clayton Hee said.

I'm not sure what the big deal about privacy is, I walk around the house naked with shades up all the time

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/2474 ... Id=9851813

 

[OI Photography]

Here's a video straight from the mouth of the senator who's trying to get the bill passed. Hope he is not successful or there will be plenty of Ebay Phantoms coming out of Hawaii.

"This bill is intended to provide a tool for law enforcement and for data gathering, primarily for law enforcement. It's not intended to be a drone in every garage," Sen. Clayton Hee said.

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/2474 ... Id=9851813

Fortunately the political ambitions of a state senator do not trump the federal jurisdiction. Even though HI isn't part of the 48 contiguous states, it's airspace is still regulated by the FAA just like all others.

 

[thongbong]

Here's a video straight from the mouth of the senator who's trying to get the bill passed. Hope he is not successful or there will be plenty of Ebay Phantoms coming out of Hawaii.

"This bill is intended to provide a tool for law enforcement and for data gathering, primarily for law enforcement. It's not intended to be a drone in every garage," Sen. Clayton Hee said.

http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/2474 ... Id=9851813

Fortunately the political ambitions of a state senator do not trump the federal jurisdiction. Even though HI isn't part of the 48 contiguous states, it's airspace is still regulated by the FAA just like all others.

+1 I also definitely see the FAA regulating commercial and private UAS, they will be contending with a very large market by 2015. Where there's money, there's a way.