Topic turned into argument please delete

[dirkclod]

LOL

 

[750r]

5-0
Don't get worked up over some people here some are just hypocrites with nothing but negative feedback . Pay no attention to them
Welcome to the forum

 

[henick]

Please read 6.03 (a) for the definition of intent

There is a principle of law called mens rae. (Maybe your point?)

If there is no intent to conduct surveillance there is no crime.

That said, some cop trying to interpret their version of the law without fully understanding is where the problem lies. Inconsistent responses from law enforcement personnel. I've met many police here in Canada that surprisingly don't even know traffic law. They scattershot whatever charges they can find so they get them in under the 6 month summary offense conviction time limit.

I tell you if there was no data indicating surveillance on my drone that cop that bothers me better hope I don't locate some obscure law protecting the operator of an aircraft to stick under his hat.

2 can play the scattershot game albeit only annoying to him I'm sure.

Sad that a few idiots are likely going to ruin it for everyone else.

 

[dirkclod]

If I had a dollar for every time I have read

Sad that a few idiots are likely going to ruin it for everyone else.

I would be rich

 

[5-0Copter]

There is a principle of law called mens rae. (Maybe your point?)

If there is no intent to conduct surveillance there is no crime.

That said, some cop trying to interpret their version of the law without fully understanding is where the problem lies. Inconsistent responses from law enforcement personnel. I've met many police here in Canada that surprisingly don't even know traffic law. They scattershot whatever charges they can find so they get them in under the 6 month summary offense conviction time limit.

I tell you if there was no data indicating surveillance on my drone that cop that bothers me better hope I don't locate some obscure law protecting the operator of an aircraft to stick under his hat.

2 can play the scattershot game albeit only annoying to him I'm sure.

Sad that a few idiots are likely going to ruin it for everyone else.

Exactly my point. What I was attempting to portray to the individual (who thought he knew what the law said) is that there has to be the intent to conduct surveillance. Taking Aerial photos/video of a neighborhood with out intent of conducting surveillance is NOT a crime.

Most people only read a certain section or subsection of law. They don't bother looking at the definitions of key terms written in that law that are explained in other sections of the penal code.