A bullet comes to mind. It's not so much the weight, but the force with which it is delivered which does the damage. However, even a bullet isn't fatal unless it strikes a vital organ. Let's see the DOT crash test data for drones and test dummies!
There's news coverage of every incident involving any drone. It's the latest in mass hysteria and fearmongering by the sensationalizing yellow journalists and media types. "Breaking news! Drone spotted flying in the park with no one around! If it had fallen from the sky, squirrels could have been killed! News at 11!"
The parade incident was also in Seattle, and she was knocked unconscious by the impact: Woman Hit by Falling Drone at Seattle Pride Parade - DRONELIFE
There's news coverage of every incident involving any drone. It's the latest in mass hysteria and fearmongering by the sensationalizing yellow journalists and media types. "Breaking news! Drone spotted flying in the park with no one around! If it had fallen from the sky, squirrels could have been killed! News at 11!"
The case in Seattle was the drone hitting a building and falling down. The baby case was an Inspire that crashed to earth near a baby carriage and the baby suffered a 1/4-in cut from debris.
If it is, then I am guilty.
If it is, then I am guilty.
I think "reckless" is determined by the pilot's/operator's skill level, experience, and knowledge and whether those are in alignment with where he or she has chosen to fly.
If you are a new pilot with a few flights around your yard and a full battery in the neighborhood park as your experience - it is reckless to go film your child's field sport from above. If you have a lot of experience, can quickly regain orientation, are familiar with your equipment's limitations, etc., then go for it from a safe perspective/angle.
If you aren't knowledgeable about radio signals and your drones limitations, it is reckless to fly around the Big Wheel not realizing you will lose signal on the other side, causing RTH to initiate, which in turn makes you bang into the ride then fall through a resin table.
If you fly above traffic, either against or with the flow (as opposed to crossing over traffic) in a manner that makes you a distraction to the drivers below, that is reckless.
But, No, not every flight above a crowd, building, or cars is dangerous or reckless.
These drones are amazingly reliable and safe for 99.9% of the users. It is a small percentage of the users who are not reliable or safe yet.
Our opinions aren't relevant. It's the determination of the FAA that matters, taking into account all the circumstances, when it comes to being charged with reckless flying. It is a legal term of art. The Webster's definition is not relevant. Try Black's Law Dictionary for a better understanding of the term reckless in a legal sense. In answer to your question, though, the correct answer is, "It depends..."
+1 ! Well said!If it is, then I am guilty.
I think "reckless" is determined by the pilot's/operator's skill level, experience, and knowledge and whether those are in alignment with where he or she has chosen to fly.
If you are a new pilot with a few flights around your yard and a full battery in the neighborhood park as your experience - it is reckless to go film your child's field sport from above. If you have a lot of experience, can quickly regain orientation, are familiar with your equipment's limitations, etc., then go for it from a safe perspective/angle.
If you aren't knowledgeable about radio signals and your drones limitations, it is reckless to fly around the Big Wheel not realizing you will lose signal on the other side, causing RTH to initiate, which in turn makes you bang into the ride then fall through a resin table.
If you fly above traffic, either against or with the flow (as opposed to crossing over traffic) in a manner that makes you a distraction to the drivers below, that is reckless.
But, No, not every flight above a crowd, building, or cars is dangerous or reckless.
These drones are amazingly reliable and safe for 99.9% of the users. It is a small percentage of the users who are not reliable or safe yet.
You are assuming the pilot was "on the scene." He/she could have been up to 7 miles away, with a P3P transmitter mod. I am not in any way condoning what took place, but unless such a pilot happens to be on site, in plain sight, the odds of finding him/her will depend on the contents of the micro SD card. If it was a brand new, unused micro SD card, and the takeoff was not recorded, and the video recording only started at the scene, the pilot ended up with 720p coverage on the tablet, and will never be found, unless the pilot wanted to be found by putting their phone number on the drone. "You can see the drone, but you cannot see the pilot," as the DOT spokeshole stated in the press conference announcing the drone registration task force creation.
I wonder if he will now also charged with a "hate crime" too! Rumor has it he may also have been a gay basher! "Drone used in a hate crime assault against gays!" Where is that article? It will certainly make the evening news, even if there isn't a grain of truth in it!
Well, when you learn that the P3P pilot in the Great Wheel crash was trying to fly through the spokes of the moving Great Wheel, I have little sympathy for him! It's hard enough to do that at the miniature golf course, while putting through the rotating windmill blades!
In his defense, the restaurant below, where it punched a hole in a flimsy plastic table top, was completely closed for the winter, so no restaurant patrons were ever endangered. Would have made a great YouTube video, if he'd been able to pull it off, without crashing! 
