Drone ban, Stone Harbor, NJ
- Thread starter LUIS MARTINEZ
- Start date
Yea, ban the private sector
but it's ok for the "Unmanned aircraft flown on behalf of the borough are exempt ...."?
but it's ok for the "Unmanned aircraft flown on behalf of the borough are exempt ...."?The sUAS community needs someone with deep pockets or a coalition of UAS interests (are you listening DJI?) to hire attorneys dedicated to hone in and file legal challenges in every backwater USA town wanting to become the local mini FAA. If only the plethora of drone organizations would unite and put parochial interests aside...Yea, ban the private sector
I was so proud of the AZ Legislature (something I rarely say) when back in 2016 they included this paragraph as part of a comprehensive drone bill:
"C. Except as authorized by law, a city, town or county may not enact or adopt any ordinance, policy or rule that relates to the ownership or operation of an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system or otherwise engage in the regulation of the ownership or operation of an unmanned aircraft or an unmanned aircraft system. Any ordinance, policy or rule that violates this subsection, whether enacted or adopted by the city, town or county before or after August 6, 2016, is void. (emphasis added)"
The law was prompted by a municipality banning hobby drone use and requiring commercial operators to pay a permit "fee" to operate, register with police, etc. which no doubt would have prompted others to follow. It was humorous, in AZ anyone can strap on a six-shooter and walk about town, legally, but to fly a drone one would need a permit (?) in this town.
PhantomFandom
Active Member
The officials in Stone Harbor are pure idiots with nothing better to do. That goes for any other city or municipality that attempts to govern airspace. The original proposed ordinance was ludicrous in that it tried to ban all drone activity, except of course for themselves. The new proposed ordinance steps back and lists specific items that are prohibited. The problem is that those things are already illegal by other laws and ordinances:
I think I may need to ride down to Stone Harbor and fly around a bit
- Being careless or reckless can be a crime whether you are using a drone or not. We don't need a provision specifically for drones.
- You can't harass, stalk, or victimize people in general. Again it doesn't matter if you are doing it with a drone, a camera, a phone, or in person.
- Drones are prohibited to carry weapons. They leave it wide open though as to what a weapon is. If you drop a water balloon from a drone, is that a weapon?
I think I may need to ride down to Stone Harbor and fly around a bit
PhantomFandom
Active Member
Yes indeed. It's not just backwater one-horse towns. NYC prohibits use of any UAV within city limits. It is of course completely illegal. They have instructed citizens in NYC to call 911 if they see a drone! Who wants to take them on though? I can't afford to fly there just to make a point. The cops will confiscate my drone, arrest me, and issue a citation. NYC obviously has deep pockets and expensive lawyers so they could bankrupt a normal person in trying to defend themselves. If someone was able to take on NYC in a very high profile case, it certainly would start to set the precedent for any other city that decided to do the same.
"If someone was able to take on NYC in a very high profile case, it certainly would start to set the precedent for any other city that decided to do the same. " Like DJI? 
Aren't there more reckless car drivers than drone pilots??
How about cell phone users taking video of people just for fun, where's the privacy in that?
How about cell phone users taking video of people just for fun, where's the privacy in that?
R.Perry
Well-Known Member
Earnest Ward
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2018
- Messages
- 138
- Reaction score
- 83
Municipalities with a desire to usurp authority have been emboldened by North Carolina's unchallenged mandate requiring state certification of all sUAS operators wishing to operate commercially within their borders. AOPA refuses to take up the cause on behalf of their sUAS members (although they are prepared to address just this kind of issue on behalf of their GA members.) And it doesn't make sense to expect a Chinese manufacturer whose focus is on global sales to spend money on a "local" issue.
It's up to the FAA to decide if they will retain sole authority over the entire NAS, or relinquish control of the first 400' AGL to state and local authorities.
It's up to the FAA to decide if they will retain sole authority over the entire NAS, or relinquish control of the first 400' AGL to state and local authorities.
So can you fly recreational / hoobiest and not be registered in NC? Or what if I'm passing through NC and want to take a few flying video shots?
I think DJI retained the only attorney to actively defend sUAS operators in the U.S. Since that moment in time that attorney has demonstrated little concern for the plight of those he used to defend. I would not look to DJI for any help unless there was (big) money for them to gain from the effort. Lest we forget, they are the ones that brought us NFZ’s and have been heavily lobbying for additional controls and restrictions.
Phaedrus
Well-Known Member
And it simply amazes me how many people so willingly accept DJI's aggressive geofencing. I wonder how many would be happy if despite being licensed, insured, and registered, a car company required them to acquire an unlock code from them before they took their car out on the road? Or after getting cleared for take off in your Cessna you had to contact Cessna for them to unlock your plane so you could fly it. But there are people who actually defend DJI's actions.
NC doesn't have a state registration but they do require a NC DOT Aviation Commercial Operators Permit to do commercial work in NC.
R.Perry
Well-Known Member
I think what has happened with goefencing is that many countries have very strict laws regarding drone operations, so DJI just made goefencing for everyone world wide, that way they don't need to worry about individual country, state, county, and city rules.
Those states, counties, or cities that create these rules need to be challenged by the people it is affecting and also file a complaint with the FAA. Sitting on a forum and complaining about it isn't going to anything to improve the issue.
There is an old saying, "you can't fight city hall", but that isn't true, you can if it is done properly.
Many years ago (late 70s) I was dusting a field, when I returned to my chemical truck a young cop was waiting for me, told me I couldn't continue to dust the field. I asked why, believe it or not he said, "because I told you." I said fine and he went on his way. I only needed one more load to finish, so I filled the tanks and off I went.
Bottom line, he had no authority to tell me I couldn't do my job, after finishing my job I flew back to our field that was about sixty miles away, never heard a word another word about dusting that field.
Phaedrus
Well-Known Member
I agree fully about the local governments being stopped. The FAA is the first, last, and only law when it comes to airspace. But oddly many who feel the local laws are out of hand are just fine with a Chinese company controlling when and how they can fly.
Oh, and crop dusters are crazy people!! ?
Oh, and crop dusters are crazy people!! ?
I never met anyone happy with DJI NFZ, nor anyone "fine" with it...
Phaedrus
Well-Known Member
Fair enough. On FB I have seen people actually defending their NFZs. Boggles my mind.
Mine too, however, they got us by the short hairs and I for one, am not going to replace my fleet overnight with Yuneec. And there isn't much we can do about it.
Phaedrus
Well-Known Member
True enough. I went Yuneec because it covers my needs. I only fly for my own work and do mostly photographic documentation of work sites of mine. I do environmental/hazardous materials consulting as my main gig. We work for mostly government clients.
New Posts
-
Sharing My Music and Sound Effects - Over 2000 Tracks- Latest: Eric Matyas
-
-
-
Members online
No members online now.