Notably absent from the "Statements of support for DOT's approach to UAS registration" [1] is the AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) Congress (and Obama) asked

Notably absent from the "Statements of support for DOT's approach to UAS registration" [1] is the AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) Congress (and Obama) asked the FAA to write rules integrating UAS into the national airspace by September 2015, back in February 2012. [2] By all accounts, the section 333 exception policy does not meet that request... and now they expect to develop a full-blown registration process ready before the end of December? Please, don't make me laugh. They couldn't even answer at the press conference what the benefit of registration will be, arguing that it would be used to track down owners of drones flaunting the rules, but seemingly having forgotten that they already can't identify airborne drones properly. I think Motherboard says it best. "It's clear that the agency, which oversees the Federal Aviation Administration, wants to crack down on the unsafe use of drones, and it's looking like it's going to try to bypass as much of the traditional rulemaking process as is possible... The short answer is, the FAA will probably cut corners and perhaps 'reinterpret' existing manned aircraft regulations" [3] [1] https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/statements-of-support-uas-registration https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/statements-of-s... [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/faa-regulation-of-drones-will-challenge-our-privacy-expectations/2012/04/19/gIQA9IH8TT_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/faa-regulation-of-dr... [3] http://motherboard.vice.com/en_ca/read/8-questions-raised-by-the-faas-decision-to-register-every-drone-in-the-us http://motherboard.vice.com/en_ca/read/8-questions-raised-by...