3 ms·

If these two activities are incompatible, it's going to be because drone pilots refuse to be bound by regulations that pilots observe. We live in an open socie

If these two activities are incompatible, it's going to be because drone pilots refuse to be bound by regulations that pilots observe. We live in an open society. If we need to choose between these two activities, we can have a referendum or plebiscite. The general public can decide. Some people will vote in favour of a small, entitled minority who want to play with a dangerous toy without responsibility. Others will vote in favour of the continuation of general air transportation, which we have had for about 100 years. We'll see how that goes.

bigiain 11y ago
While I get your point of view, I'm not entirely happy with it's assumptions. 1) The "regulations pilots observe" by default give them absolute priority over _all_ airspace without limitation, even though the vast majority of "general air transportation" does not require that. Why is the airspace at 500 feet above my local park "reserved" for "general air transportation"? Sure, maybe once a decade or so a police or news helicopter ventures into that space, but only because they're coming from the assumption that nobody else has any right to be there. I question that assumption. 2) "The general public can decide" has a similar problem. "The general public" couldn't care less whether _my_ choice of potentially dangerous hobby is deemed illegal or not. How many of "the general public" voted in favour of, say, knitters being allowed to carry "potentially dangerous knitting needles" on commercial flights? Are grandmothers a "small entitled minority"? Claiming that public votes for things small groups of people want to be allowed to continue doing are the "right and democratic way" to decide regulations is shortsighted and demonstrates ignorance of the way people are. I don't claim there are _zero_ risks associated with "drones", but I'd like the discussion and regulation to be a lot more driven by the actual risks and their relative likelyhood and seriousness compared to many other perfectly acceptable things. There are lots of things that people are regularly injured or killed by: http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm Let's just keep "drones" in perspective, and not kneejerk react to "new things".
- sokoloff 11y ago
  To be precise, it's not pilots claiming the airspace. There's a Federal law that grants the FAA oversight over all the navigable airspace in the US. 49 U.S. Code § 40103 - Sovereignty and use of airspace The FAA is doing exactly what that law directs and compels them to do. Don't like the law? There's a process to change the laws. I'm a pilot, and I'm not happy about the proposal to register all drones, but I certainly understand the FAA response to the large increase in drone popularity and increased conflicts between drones and aircraft.

bigiain 11y ago

While I get your point of view, I'm not entirely happy with it's assumptions. 1) The "regulations pilots observe" by default give them absolute priority over _all_ airspace without limitation, even though the vast majority of "general air transportation" does not require that. Why is the airspace at 500 feet above my local park "reserved" for "general air transportation"? Sure, maybe once a decade or so a police or news helicopter ventures into that space, but only because they're coming from the assumption that nobody else has any right to be there. I question that assumption. 2) "The general public can decide" has a similar problem. "The general public" couldn't care less whether _my_ choice of potentially dangerous hobby is deemed illegal or not. How many of "the general public" voted in favour of, say, knitters being allowed to carry "potentially dangerous knitting needles" on commercial flights? Are grandmothers a "small entitled minority"? Claiming that public votes for things small groups of people want to be allowed to continue doing are the "right and democratic way" to decide regulations is shortsighted and demonstrates ignorance of the way people are. I don't claim there are _zero_ risks associated with "drones", but I'd like the discussion and regulation to be a lot more driven by the actual risks and their relative likelyhood and seriousness compared to many other perfectly acceptable things. There are lots of things that people are regularly injured or killed by: http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm http://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm Let's just keep "drones" in perspective, and not kneejerk react to "new things".

sokoloff 11y ago
To be precise, it's not pilots claiming the airspace. There's a Federal law that grants the FAA oversight over all the navigable airspace in the US. 49 U.S. Code § 40103 - Sovereignty and use of airspace The FAA is doing exactly what that law directs and compels them to do. Don't like the law? There's a process to change the laws. I'm a pilot, and I'm not happy about the proposal to register all drones, but I certainly understand the FAA response to the large increase in drone popularity and increased conflicts between drones and aircraft.