ianwood
Taco Wrangler
The guidelines may be a stopgap until the new regulations take effect. But don't make the mistake in thinking the FAA can't and won't pursue what it considers to be dangerous flying.
What would you do
- Thread starter Jasontkennedy
- Start date
The guidelines may be a stopgap until the new regulations take effect. But don't make the mistake in thinking the FAA can't and won't pursue what it considers to be dangerous flying.
Based on actions to date from the brain-trust at the FAA, my P3 will probably be long since turned to dust by the time actual regulations are published.
Agreed... to a point.
My feeling (based on the legal analysis I have read) it that the FAA is on thin ice with regulations for model/hobby aircraft such as this. I fully believe this had been the biggest impediment to making legitimate regulations. As a result, I seriously doubt the FAA will have any direct involvement if they can avoid it. If the violation is serious enough, there are enough federal/state/local laws to cover the behavior that the FAA doesn't need to get involved. It is in their best interest to stay out of it and let the locals handle it.
Not saying the won't get involved, but doing so opens a can of worms they would rather keep closed until the lawmaking is sorted out.
All IMO. Of course - it we all fly safe and don't do dumb things we will not need to find out.
Is there a chance he could sue you for endangering him by flying so low over the crowd?
Could he claim self defence ( I know it's silly but the law isn't always sensible)?
Could he claim self defence ( I know it's silly but the law isn't always sensible)?
You cannot sue someone for endangerment. That would be a criminal proceeding - the police would need to arrest you and the DA would have to decide to bring a case. You can file a complaint, but the government would bring the action.
What you can sue for is damages. That is a civil case. You can't sue because someone "tried" to damage your property. You can sue for because they actually damaged your property. You must sue for an amount. In a case like this (small claims) you must be able to document that amount. A repair bill would do. If the item was totaled, the receipt for the original or the replacement would do. In a situation like this, you cannot sue for "punitive" damages or "pain and suffering" or any of those other fun terms you see on TV. This type of thing is closer to "Judge Judy" or "People's Court."
You would go in and (assuming the other party showed up) each party would tell their story to the judge (or arbitrator). Thee judge would render a decision. Then comes the fun part... if you "win" an award, you have to hope the other guy pays. If not, you have to spend additional money to try and enforce that judgment.
It's not supposed to be easy or fun. If it was, there would be more frivolous suits clogging up the court. If you have a strong case and want to prove a point... go for it. Unless you are a complete idiot, justice will prevail about 90% of the time.
That's a separate issue from deliberate destruction of private property. Whether or not he can produce anything saying the flight was illegal, he took the law into his own hands and through his actions not only deliberately damaged private property, but also deliberately endangered the well being of others. The damaged quadcopter could've as easily hit a person, cutting them with a propeller as crashing harmlessly.
If you were flying close enough to people that someone could hit your bird with a snowball, you might have some 'splainin to do! Better just suck it up and fly smarter next time, or go to the guy's house and choke the crap out of him!
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2016
- Messages
- 146
- Reaction score
- 8
- Age
- 54
I would say you where flying to close to groups of people check out 1st before taking any legal action
I have not read this thread and this may have been stated already, but -
If you're gonna fly anywhere near the general public (not over them necessarily, but near them), you must expect some idiot to throw something at your aircraft. Because that's what they do. Know it. Look for it. Expect it. Make sure you're flying out of range.
If you're gonna fly anywhere near the general public (not over them necessarily, but near them), you must expect some idiot to throw something at your aircraft. Because that's what they do. Know it. Look for it. Expect it. Make sure you're flying out of range.
Good point!
I don't believe the violation would affect the validity of the claim but if the rock-thrower is aware of the regulation he will use it to discourage a complaint being filed. So feel him out before going forward.
But the bottom line is the worst that could happen to you is a fine, which should be minor in comparison to the cost of your drone.
Wow. So many people don't understand the difference between a guideline and a law. And even when you registered and agreed to follow the guidelines, you didn't swear an oath that you would follow them until the end of time. I think if someone accused you of disregarding a guideline that you had agreed to follow, you could simply say "Yeah - I gave it some more thought and changed my mind". As far as I know - agreeing to follow the guidelines is a condition for obtaining a registration - not an ongoing condition for staying registered!
Some of you began chastising him for filming people without their consent and flying over an event without permission BEFORE even stopping to ask him if he had consent and permission.
And the advice I really don't understand is the advice about considering if he was breaking a guideline before pursuing compensation for his vandalized property! They are 2 completely separate and unrelated issues!
But worst of all were the comments that he should expect this and the implications that he deserved what he got because he was flying close to people!
I agree that he was probably flying a little too low and close to the people when he cut across the crowd - but in general, he wasn't flying recklessly and from what I saw, he did try to stay on the outskirts of the crowd for the majority of the video. He certainly wasn't goofing around and dive bombing people. But one person pointing this out on the thread was more than enough - was there really any value added to the thread from all the other posts saying nothing but "you broke the guideline" or "that was dangerous"
The OP could have been at the event picking pockets or beating people up and there is still no justification for vandalizing his personal property! He has a right to pursue compensation and to request vandalism charges be brought against the guy who threw the ice!
If the local cops decide they want to turn around and charge him with something because of how he was flying the drone - well, that's a separate issue and since nobody was hurt - there's a good chance that he'd get nothing more than a warning since, as someone else pointed out - there's no set fine for ignoring the guideline.
I also suspect that small claims court will be a frustrating endeavor and only you can decide whether it's worth going down that road - but at this point, if I were you, I'd give him 48 hours to pay up or have him charged with vandalism. If he tries to deny that it was him - let us know how he manages to explain why he let you take photos of his ID.... lol
Anyhow - good luck! Keep us in the loop and let us know how things work out! I personally hope you don't let this guy get away with it completely. At a minimum, have him charged. If the COP doesn't want to charge him - maybe you could consider a citizens arrest?
Some of you began chastising him for filming people without their consent and flying over an event without permission BEFORE even stopping to ask him if he had consent and permission.
And the advice I really don't understand is the advice about considering if he was breaking a guideline before pursuing compensation for his vandalized property! They are 2 completely separate and unrelated issues!
But worst of all were the comments that he should expect this and the implications that he deserved what he got because he was flying close to people!
I agree that he was probably flying a little too low and close to the people when he cut across the crowd - but in general, he wasn't flying recklessly and from what I saw, he did try to stay on the outskirts of the crowd for the majority of the video. He certainly wasn't goofing around and dive bombing people. But one person pointing this out on the thread was more than enough - was there really any value added to the thread from all the other posts saying nothing but "you broke the guideline" or "that was dangerous"
The OP could have been at the event picking pockets or beating people up and there is still no justification for vandalizing his personal property! He has a right to pursue compensation and to request vandalism charges be brought against the guy who threw the ice!
If the local cops decide they want to turn around and charge him with something because of how he was flying the drone - well, that's a separate issue and since nobody was hurt - there's a good chance that he'd get nothing more than a warning since, as someone else pointed out - there's no set fine for ignoring the guideline.
I also suspect that small claims court will be a frustrating endeavor and only you can decide whether it's worth going down that road - but at this point, if I were you, I'd give him 48 hours to pay up or have him charged with vandalism. If he tries to deny that it was him - let us know how he manages to explain why he let you take photos of his ID.... lol
Anyhow - good luck! Keep us in the loop and let us know how things work out! I personally hope you don't let this guy get away with it completely. At a minimum, have him charged. If the COP doesn't want to charge him - maybe you could consider a citizens arrest?
ianwood
Taco Wrangler
Actually, there are many people here who understand perfectly well that the FAA's guidelines are far more enforceable as regulations then you might understand. Precedent has already been set to consider a drone as an aircraft should the FAA need to clamp down on those who think their guidelines are not for them. The FAA takes this very seriously and I would recommend you do too.
Similar threads
