5 ms·

It's a good idea, but making it a felony is not. Is everything going to be a felony these days? Why? It attaches serious long term consequences, because a FELO

by zlynx 8y ago

It's a good idea, but making it a felony is not. Is everything going to be a felony these days? Why? It attaches serious long term consequences, because a FELONY is widely regarded as a crime of direct, major harm against a person. Flying a drone that actually causes a collision, sure, maybe that's a felony. Just getting caught in the area, because the pilot is curious and maybe never even /heard/ of this law? No, that's not a felony, in my opinion.

brian-armstrong 8y ago
If you aren’t up to date on the applicable laws, you have no business flying the drone. Considering that drones have prevented planes from flying over with fire suppressant, this very much does meet the standard of causing harm.
- GuiA 8y ago
  Flying a drone legally should require a license, much like operating a ham radio does. This would ensure that all drone operators have basic knowledge of what is expected of them (such as “don’t fly a drone over a wildfire”), and make it straightforward to fine/prosecute operators who are flying without a license. If the majority of operators are responsible, educated, and respect the rules, it could even help relax some of the rules around drone operation in the long run.
mattsfrey 8y ago
A college kid that has a fake id to buy booze with is guilty of a felony. Just because something is a felony rarely means it will be prosecuted as such. I'm sure in any case that doesn't result in actual harm the charges would be heavily reduced or dropped. Making it a misdemeanor almost by virtue makes it pretty much a joke, and it's actually a very serious issue.
- kolpa 8y ago
  https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/felony.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/felony.asp "a misdemeanor is a lesser offense, punishable by imprisonment for up to a year." Is a year in prison a "joke"? A legal theory that says "I trust the authorities to ignore the law when I think they should" is a terrible theory.
- tehwebguy 8y ago
  On the contrary, making it a highly-punishable but rarely-punished crime opens the doors to massive and dangerous police & prosecution discretion.
  - st26 8y ago
    Or, you know, you could just not make fake ID's.
arkades 8y ago
I’m inclined to agree about our over-zealousness to punish, except... It’s already a felony to impede emergency rescue efforts. And rightfully so: it places lives directly at risk. It’s intuitively illegal, and intuitively grave. “Curiousity” wouldn’t be an excuse for getting in the way of normal firefighters with an RC car, would it? Why is impeding emergency services any less serious because it happened via drone?
- koolba 8y ago
  > Why is impeding emergency services any less serious because it happened via drone? I’d argue it’s more serious as there’s less skin in the game for the perpetrator.
  - jonhendry18 8y ago
    And it's harder for the emergency services to counter. The only option may be to ground aircraft. It's not like someone parking in front of a fire hydrant. In that case the fire fighters may just break your windows and run the hose through your car.
- kolpa 8y ago
  If I hear an explosion and I intentionally walk outside to investigate, unintentionally blocking the path of an emergency vehicle, have I committed a felony?
  - arkades 8y ago
    Is that an honest question, or do you mean to draw a parallel between “accidentally getting in the path of an emergency responder” and “intentionally going out of your way to stick yourself in the middle of an emergency situation”?
    - arwineap 8y ago
      Flying a drone above a wildfire doesn't automatically prove intent
oh_sigh 8y ago
Ignorance of laws is no excuse, especially when it is laws relating to a expensive hobby activity that you have. Would you support drunk driving laws that let drunk drivers who don't injure anybody off with a small ticket equivalent to a parking ticket, and only those who injure someone get their license revoked, jail time, etc?
- mbrameld 8y ago
  The only people allowed to use ignorance of the law as a positive defense for breaking it are the ones hired to enforce it, ironically.
- lovich 8y ago
  On the other hand though, there is no one alive who knows all of the laws in the US. It is infeasible to be aware of everything and we likely break laws everyday without knowing it. Would you support a system where the state can find a reason to arrest you whenever they feel like, and arbitrarily enforce it against people they don't like?
  - jonhendry18 8y ago
    I don't need to know the laws about distilling alcohol and whatnot, because I don't distill alcohol. Knowing all the laws would be difficult. Knowing all the laws about your hobby, that apply where you engage in it should be simple.
- nitwit005 8y ago
  It's generally a bad idea to suddenly slap a severe penalty on something previously legal, unless you plan to spend the effort to educate everyone about it. Tossing a bunch of people in jail that simply never learned of the law being changed doesn't benefit anyone. There was huge efforts to education people about drunk driving, and we've ramped up the penalties over time.
- matheusmoreira 8y ago
  People who got caught driving while intoxicated probably shouldn't be allowed to drive again. Sending him to actual jail, though? Why? He was being imprudent but injured no one and caused no damages. There's no crime without victims. I don't believe this "no one can claim ignorance of the law" argument either. It's not like the government goes out of its way to teach people the rules or their rationale. The government shouldn't be able to simply invent some random rule and start arresting people.

by zlynx 8y ago

brian-armstrong 8y ago

If you aren’t up to date on the applicable laws, you have no business flying the drone. Considering that drones have prevented planes from flying over with fire suppressant, this very much does meet the standard of causing harm.

GuiA 8y ago
Flying a drone legally should require a license, much like operating a ham radio does. This would ensure that all drone operators have basic knowledge of what is expected of them (such as “don’t fly a drone over a wildfire”), and make it straightforward to fine/prosecute operators who are flying without a license. If the majority of operators are responsible, educated, and respect the rules, it could even help relax some of the rules around drone operation in the long run.

mattsfrey 8y ago

A college kid that has a fake id to buy booze with is guilty of a felony. Just because something is a felony rarely means it will be prosecuted as such. I'm sure in any case that doesn't result in actual harm the charges would be heavily reduced or dropped. Making it a misdemeanor almost by virtue makes it pretty much a joke, and it's actually a very serious issue.

kolpa 8y ago
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/felony.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/felony.asp "a misdemeanor is a lesser offense, punishable by imprisonment for up to a year." Is a year in prison a "joke"? A legal theory that says "I trust the authorities to ignore the law when I think they should" is a terrible theory.
tehwebguy 8y ago
On the contrary, making it a highly-punishable but rarely-punished crime opens the doors to massive and dangerous police & prosecution discretion.
- st26 8y ago
  Or, you know, you could just not make fake ID's.

arkades 8y ago

I’m inclined to agree about our over-zealousness to punish, except... It’s already a felony to impede emergency rescue efforts. And rightfully so: it places lives directly at risk. It’s intuitively illegal, and intuitively grave. “Curiousity” wouldn’t be an excuse for getting in the way of normal firefighters with an RC car, would it? Why is impeding emergency services any less serious because it happened via drone?

koolba 8y ago
> Why is impeding emergency services any less serious because it happened via drone? I’d argue it’s more serious as there’s less skin in the game for the perpetrator.
- jonhendry18 8y ago
  And it's harder for the emergency services to counter. The only option may be to ground aircraft. It's not like someone parking in front of a fire hydrant. In that case the fire fighters may just break your windows and run the hose through your car.
kolpa 8y ago
If I hear an explosion and I intentionally walk outside to investigate, unintentionally blocking the path of an emergency vehicle, have I committed a felony?
- arkades 8y ago
  Is that an honest question, or do you mean to draw a parallel between “accidentally getting in the path of an emergency responder” and “intentionally going out of your way to stick yourself in the middle of an emergency situation”?
  - arwineap 8y ago
    Flying a drone above a wildfire doesn't automatically prove intent

oh_sigh 8y ago

Ignorance of laws is no excuse, especially when it is laws relating to a expensive hobby activity that you have. Would you support drunk driving laws that let drunk drivers who don't injure anybody off with a small ticket equivalent to a parking ticket, and only those who injure someone get their license revoked, jail time, etc?

mbrameld 8y ago
The only people allowed to use ignorance of the law as a positive defense for breaking it are the ones hired to enforce it, ironically.
lovich 8y ago
On the other hand though, there is no one alive who knows all of the laws in the US. It is infeasible to be aware of everything and we likely break laws everyday without knowing it. Would you support a system where the state can find a reason to arrest you whenever they feel like, and arbitrarily enforce it against people they don't like?
- jonhendry18 8y ago
  I don't need to know the laws about distilling alcohol and whatnot, because I don't distill alcohol. Knowing all the laws would be difficult. Knowing all the laws about your hobby, that apply where you engage in it should be simple.
nitwit005 8y ago
It's generally a bad idea to suddenly slap a severe penalty on something previously legal, unless you plan to spend the effort to educate everyone about it. Tossing a bunch of people in jail that simply never learned of the law being changed doesn't benefit anyone. There was huge efforts to education people about drunk driving, and we've ramped up the penalties over time.
matheusmoreira 8y ago
People who got caught driving while intoxicated probably shouldn't be allowed to drive again. Sending him to actual jail, though? Why? He was being imprudent but injured no one and caused no damages. There's no crime without victims. I don't believe this "no one can claim ignorance of the law" argument either. It's not like the government goes out of its way to teach people the rules or their rationale. The government shouldn't be able to simply invent some random rule and start arresting people.