14 ms·
FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations
- xvxvx 8mo agoNot shady at all. Can’t have the public see what’s going on.
- actionfromafar 8mo agoYou don't understand. You must always respect authority. Trump is the highest authority in the land, put there by God.
- koiueo 8mo agoI no longer know if it's sarcasm
- garciasn 8mo agoIt depends on what team you’re rooting for in the sports game that has become politics in the US.
- actionfromafar 8mo agoThis has been the case for a long time. What's new and weird with this "sports" game is that the side with the umpire in their pocket has suddenly decided the game is bloodsport.
- jacquesm 8mo agoOh from their point of view it always was. You can't explain the last decades in any other way. It's been brewing over time and as long as the blood spilled was mostly foreign blood on foreign soil it was all fine. Now the masks are dropping and suddenly it is plain to everybody what was plain to outsiders looking in for a long time.
- vineyardmike 8mo agoIf you’re a minority in America then it’s been a blood sport for a while. It’s only recently that the majority demographics are now at risk.
- dragonwriter 8mo agoWhile the danger has increased recently, the targeting of minority groups in America has always included targeting those outside of the group perceived as defending the group (including simply by opposing the discriminatort targeting.) And often the biggest reactions against the targeting of minorities are not triggered by acts against the minorities directly but by the acts against majority-demographic activists working on their behalf.
- yoyohello13 8mo agoPeople believing the president of the United States has been ordained by God, and can therefore do no wrong, should be extremely concerning to EVERYONE, no matter what team your rooting for.
- 3eb7988a1663 8mo agoMark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them. Barry Goldwater He had a few more pertinent quotes on the issue, but he recognized the very problem he was courting. You cannot have a debate with God.
- prmph 8mo agoCorrection: you cannot have a debate with people who have set up their politics as a God. In the scriptures God is depicted as someone who sometimes is willing to have a debate, and reason with people, of course not to learn anything, but to explain why things are (or must be) the way they are. In some instances, God is even depicted as willing to listen to man and do things he otherwise would not have done, so long that they don't deviate from his fundamental purpose.
- joquarky 8mo agoGod hates being anthropomorphized.
- terminalshort 8mo agoThe preachers lost control of the Republican party in 2016. And if me from 10 years ago could hear me from today saying that I wish they were still in control, he would have a stroke, but I do.
- actionfromafar 8mo agoThat's because this is a pretty mainstream opinion now. I'd say... a quarter to a third of the population holds such beliefs. If you ever shook your head at theocratic regimes such as Iran, well maybe look a little closer to home. "But... the people in charge of Iran are hypocrites, they do nasty stuff at home behind closed doors." Again, may I point to Mom: "we have mullas at home".
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- yoyohello13 8mo agoThis is the real danger of religion. When you train people from birth to turn off their brains and submit to authority without question, this is what happens.
- salawat 8mo agoNot quite. Religion, when taught properly, can serve as an innoculant against corrupt states, as it ingrains a kernel of understanding that man, and all his works are flawed, falling short of the perfection only attainable by the divine. There is always something higher worth maintaining loyalty toward. Like most things though, practicing that doesn't make you super popular with "leaders of worship" who wield their position in a human institutions as a tool to their own ends.
- yoyohello13 8mo agoI agree wholeheartedly. Religion, practiced as designed, is extremely positive in my experience. I think the issue is that religion is and has been abused throughout history. I’m really not sure how to deal with this issue though. It seems the Abrahamic religion are quite vulnerable to this kind of abuse, likely because a core part of the doctrine is submission to authority. I’ve never seen a Buddhist led genocide for instance, and I think a big part of that is the emphasis on looking inward for answers instead of outward.
- shawn_w 8mo agoI don't know if it ever was labeled a genocide, but Sri Lanka has a long history of Buddhist lead attacks against Tamils and other minorities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence
- yoyohello13 8mo agoFair enough. Seems like the common thread is religion + government = atrocities
- bicx 8mo agoI’m sure they said the same about Obama…. Right?
- margalabargala 8mo agoEach time that Obama expanded a domestic policing organization that then went to American cities and executed citizens, the same thing was said about him, yes. All zero times.
- frumplestlatz 8mo ago[flagged]
- CamperBob2 8mo agoNot nearly well-funded enough. You get $50000 for joining ICE, you get ten bullets in the back for filming them.
- frumplestlatz 8mo ago[flagged]
- Sharlin 8mo agoThe administration has already given its verdict, and that's all the "investigation" you're going to get.
- ghouse 8mo agoIf you can't make heads or tails of the videos, then how is it clear to you he wasn't merely filming?
- frumplestlatz 8mo ago[flagged]
- jacquesm 8mo agoOh, it is very clear, just not to you.
- frumplestlatz 8mo agohttps://nypost.com/2026/01/28/us-news/alex-pretti-appears-to-spit-at-ice-kick-out-tail-light-in-previous-minneapolis-confrontation-before-he-was-shot-by-border-patrol/ https://nypost.com/2026/01/28/us-news/alex-pretti-appears-to... It is very clear to me. If you can’t see this for what it is, that’s not on me.
- dayofthedaleks 8mo agoBubble of protection is 3000 feet laterally and 1000 feet vertically. From the article: “Unlike traditional Temporary Flight Restrictions, the NOTAM does not provide geographic coordinates, activation times, or public notification when the restriction is in effect near a specific location. Instead, the restricted airspace moves with DHS assets, meaning the no-fly zone can appear wherever ICE or other DHS units operate.” “In practical terms, a drone operator flying legally in a public area could unknowingly enter restricted airspace if an ICE convoy passes within the protected radius.”
- dragonwriter 8mo agoSo the unannounced movements of the secret police in their unmarked vehicles also create a bubble around them where usually-legal activity is illegal?
- jacquesm 8mo agoThat's the goal, it just isn't spelled out.
- speed_spread 8mo agoAnd reciprocally, where usually illegal activity (beating up people and kidnapping them) is legal.
- oawiejrlij 8mo agoYou mean, shooting them ten times in the back?
- speed_spread 8mo agoOh yeah, that also.
- unangst 8mo agoSee no crimes. Hear no truth. Speak no facts.
- Espressosaurus 8mo agoThis is a useful measure to point the law as a weapon against drone operators who may be recording what’s going on by accident or on purpose. Any drone made in the last few years is going to be emitting its ID, which likely has been registered with the pilot’s name and contact information. They can then after the fact come down on that person without having to get facial recognition, grab cellphone beacons, or other similar steps.
- jacquesm 8mo agoIt's trivial to build your own drone without a DroneID.
- oawiejrlij 8mo agoFor some people
- gtowey 8mo agoAnd you will be labeled a terrorist for doing so, regardless of intent.
- jacquesm 8mo agoI don't mind being labeled a terrorist. Fortunately I'm not in the USA. But you couldn't pay me to go there. One man's terrorist...
- themafia 8mo ago> I don't mind being labeled a terrorist. You should. It's not meant for your vanity and it represents and extreme overreach by the government. It doesn't make you "cool." > But you couldn't pay me to go there. Of course we could. Aside from that this mentality always shocks me. There are more civilians in the US than government agents. What were you expecting when you got here? It's madness.. > One man's terrorist... Is another mans freedom fighter. Sure, fine, if you want a civil war. Perhaps a more civilized approach is called for? Unless you particularly enjoy digging graves for your friends.
- CamperBob2 8mo agoMy understanding is that DJI drones no longer enforce no-fly zones. Supposedly they still warn you when entering a restricted zone, but hard geofencing functionality is no longer in effect. Anyone know if that's true?
- arthurcolle 8mo agoI highly doubt this Edit: owner of matrice m100 and a few other DJI drones
- jacquesm 8mo agoMatrice is a nice bit of kit. Building that kind of functionality from scratch with the same weight and range is very difficult.
- arthurcolle 8mo agoI was unable to ever get it to fly reliably without GPS. It was probably stupid to drop $7K on drone GPUs and all kind of gadgetry (6 battery bay for rapid charging, etc), but it was just really really hard to pilot around in Maryland (Montgomery County). I would constantly have it throw up warnings and alerts, even only hovering a few feet above the ground for small scale testing. I would have to disable the GPS to do small scale testing, and then with GPS enabled, it would straight up not allow me to pilot it. When I moved to Miami, brought it down there, but I managed to find an apartment right smack-dab in the MIA no-fly zone as well. The smaller drone was allowed to fly though, so I eventually got a small Mini 2 IIRC, which was a lot easier to pilot, but I was just so disappointed in not being able to use the larger scaled up version. I wanted to do realtime facial recognition (not at scale, just to show that commercial drones can be turned into research demonstrators) on the onboard GPU (apparently just a NVDA Jetson from 2017 era) The irony is the M100 is genuinely great hardware - the payload capacity, the SDK access, the flight time with extra batteries. But DJI's geofencing treats the entire DC metro like a no-go zone, which makes sense from their liability perspective but means the thing is basically a $7K shelf ornament unless you want to deal with LAANC authorizations for every single flight.
- theoreticalmal 8mo agoI don’t fully understand why drone operators follow these laws. Or any “no-fly” rules in general. Around an airport, it seems like common sense to not fly. Can’t someone just…buy/build a drone and fly is surreptitiously?
- Sevii 8mo agoPotential criminal charges are enough to deter most people.
- killingtime74 8mo agoWhat if you're already flying when they enter your vicinity. It's pretty easy to do in a city. Also they may not announce themselves until you're already violating or even after when they charge you
- salawat 8mo agoDo not attribute to fascists/tin pot governments any concern over law/rulemaking with judicious consideration for minimizing blast radius or logistical/legal concerns for the populace. At this point, they are hardcore speed running the delegitinazation of the U.S. state in just about every practical sense.
- gcanyon 8mo agoI think that's the point.
- mindslight 8mo agoOne more line of bullshit they can shamelessly trot out after they summarily execute someone. "The suspect approached the members of our protected class with a gun and a phone. Our brave and heroic gravy seals had a reasonable belief that the phone was being used to control a drone that had been following them all day, obstructing federal law enforcement from being able to operate in secret. The subject didn't obey the lawful order to shoot himself with his own gun, so our brave agents were forced to shoot him ten times in the back and send his family a bill for the bullets. We fully stand behind their actions helping keep us all safe from the woke" (who am I kidding, even my fake statement is too coherent for this clown car of fascists)
- buildbot 8mo agoDoesn’t anything under 250g basically slip under the radar (not literally radar). Seems like most drones they care about might end up not being trackable anyway.
- djoldman 8mo ago> ALL UNMANNED ACFT ARE PROHIBITED FROM FLYING WITHIN A STAND-OFF DISTANCE OF 3000FT ... LATERALLY AND 1000FT ABOVE ... > TO: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD), DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (DOE), AND DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS) FACILITIES AND MOBILE ASSETS, INCLUDING VESSELS AND GROUND VEHICLE CONVOYS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED ESCORTS, SUCH AS UNITED STATES COAST GUARD (USCG) OPERATED VESSELS Much more restrictive than just ICE operations. See also: https://udds-faa.opendata.arcgis.com/search https://udds-faa.opendata.arcgis.com/search
- TheRealPomax 8mo agoAre you saying the FAA has a permanent and up to date list of ICE operations? Because if so, that's a public list and something that some might be very interested in for knowing when and where ICE is operating. And if they don't, there is no basis for enforcement, so we're done.
- actionfromafar 8mo agoIt's just an extra chilling effect. Or yet another reason to shoot you and your terrist drone.
- amluto 8mo agoHow is an operator supposed to recognize these “MOBILE ASSETS”? For the case of ICE, ICE is reputed to try fairly hard to make it challenging to recognize their mobile assets. But the NOTAM says nothing about ICE per se, and there are lots of things that seem like they would qualify. On multiple occasions, I suspect that I have personally transported “DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY … MOBILE ASSETS”, and any drone flying nearby would have seen this as … a rental car with a couple people in it. All the DOE assets would have been in the trunk or maybe the back seat. Definitely assets and definitely mobile, but I suppose a court would need to determine whether they were MOBILE ASSETS or whether they were sufficiently associated with the DOE. (Also, had this been in effect and if a drone had been a part of the project, which would not have been unreasonable [0], it would have been really annoying if I was carrying a portable do-not-fly zone and needed to get permission from the agency to take some photos of the equipment I was carrying.) [0] To be fair, part of this project was in a location where operating a drone would have been inappropriate for reasons that have nothing to do with the FAA or national security.
- foxglacier 8mo agoI wonder if these vessels, convoys, etc. are going to jam drones or use some other anti-drone weapon and this NOTAM allows that by saying "we can intercept or destroy it if it comes too close". That way they don't have to identify how much of a threat each individual drone is.
- ultrarunner 8mo agoThat's when the fiber optic lines will become necessary
- roughly 8mo agoLoudly broadcasting electronic signals out of something you’re trying to keep hidden seems like a tactical error, but these cats aren’t the best trained, are they?
- terminalshort 8mo agoThey aren't trying to keep hidden. They are trying to avoid their murders from being filmed by drones with cameras. Jamming is perfectly compatible with this goal.
- foxglacier 8mo agoIt's convoys of vehicles, not individual people or even individual vehicles. They're not a secret and not committing drive-by shootings.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- dmitrygr 8mo ago> But how will i know where such zones are ?! Pilot here. This is not unprecedented. The same kind of thing applies to all major sporting events. They have no-fly zones but FAA provides NO official source for getting the info of when such events occur and why. It is left to the pilots to find out all major sporting events and stadiums around and when they have events, under serious penalties. It forces pilots to care about sportsball.
- ls612 8mo ago[flagged]
- squigz 8mo agoAren't NOTAMs published for those with specific information about the TFR, including location and time window?
- dmitrygr 8mo agoNO. They just say “any event”
- squigz 8mo agoWhat about SEAMS, mentioned here? https://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/where_can_i_fly/airspace_restrictions/sports_stadiums https://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/where_can_i_fly/airs...
- dmitrygr 8mo agoiirc, it is not considered official data, so if it makes a mistake and you violate a TFR, YOU are on the hook.
- squigz 8mo agoReading up on this more, it seems to be based on stadium/venue capacity, which means any possible TFRs are at a limited number of areas for very specific series, for which there is data available [1] The TFR in TFA appears to be much more ambiguous than this. I'm not sure they're really comparable. https://adds-faa.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/faa::stadiums/about https://adds-faa.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/faa::stadiums/...
- ottah 8mo agoThis is literally been the entire purpose of all drone regulations. Hobby aircraft have never been a legitimate public safety issue, but they are an issue for the state's ability to hide. There is and will always be a public interest in recording activity happening in public places, but a majority of drone laws essentially make it impossible to legally record public events from a private drone.
- PlatoIsADisease 8mo agoWhen I was a child I was a libertarian. I was screaming about how these regulations were going to be enforced at gunpoint, how this was just a way for the establishment to make money, etc... I'm not a libertarian anymore, but I can tell you, I was a genius fortune teller. My assets performed really well ignoring economic orthodoxy about supposed 2% inflation.
- hedora 8mo agoSo, is the FAA going to provide something like IceBlock so that it's possible to obey the new regulations?
- tantalor 8mo agoThis is overreach. Congress didn't give them this power. See Loper-Bright https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loper_Bright_Enterprises_v._Raimondo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loper_Bright_Enterprises_v._Ra...
- skhameneh 8mo agoIt's been overreach since the start of FAA claims on low altitude space. From what I understand their jurisdiction didn't begin until 500 feet into the air. Not only is it overreach, it's encouraging impediments on what has been largely considered private property.
- cmurf 8mo agoWhen are you suggesting this overreach began? FAA has asserted jurisdiction below 500' for a long time: balloons and kites since 1963, ultralights since 1982. FAA certainly asserts regulatory authority over aircraft below 500', everything does takeoffs and landings of some sort, but ground operations are also subject to regulation.
- skhameneh 8mo agoHistorically, the FAA had zero interest/jurisdiction in most hobbyist aircraft below 500 feet, they would not even bother entertaining such as it was not relevant to their opperations. Helicopters, planes, and quadcopters could be flown freely under general guidance, with no actual enforcing regulations. These were largely not seen as something the FAA had jurisdiction over, nor did the FAA express any interest. It was widely accepted that fields away from an airport and at low altitude were outside of controlled airspace. Then come affordable drones and suddenly the FAA attempts to exert full regulation over the space. To answer your question, roughly 2012 is when this started.
- cmurf 8mo ago>Historically, the FAA had zero interest/jurisdiction in most hobbyist aircraft below 500 feet, they would not even bother entertaining such as it was not relevant to their opperations. This is not correct. See 14 CFR 101, 103, and 105. There's a long history of the FAA concerning itself with hobbyists flying model aircraft, moored, and unmanned balloon, rockets, kites, parachutes, and ultralights. I mentioned this, you glossed over it. Their histories predate 2012. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14 >Helicopters, planes, and quadcopters could be flown freely under general guidance, with no actual enforcing regulations. Helicopters and airplanes have been regulated under 14 CFR 91 for a very long time, and were regulated by the CAA (the Civil Aeronautical Authority, precursor to FAA), and their operations are certainly regulated below 500'. And it is definitely enforced. If you're referring to the years long regulatory lag for drones/sUAS before the The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 which also gave us 49 USC 44809 "Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft" - ummm, well all I can say is welcome to aviation. It's been significantly regulated the whole time, and just because some folks were not aware of this fact, doesn't mean it wasn't. Maybe check out The Great Waldo Pepper with Robert Redford though. That begins in a genuinely unregulated era.
- Bender 8mo agoSo be a polite and compliant drone operator and when you find yourself in the middle of an operation because there was not an actual TFR, park the drone on the edge of a building roof where the camera can still operate thus the drone is silent, saving power and compliant. Being parked on the edge of a roof with props powered off is not flying. @FAA can you tell I am still annoyed by your poorly thought out highly spoofable clear text RemoteID implementation and lack of integration to ADS-B... Also, NOTAM != TFR unless all drone operators are using foreflight to consolidate all surrounding NOTAMS which hint, they are not.
- hackable_sand 8mo agoRemember that words have no meaning You can still fly drones in and around ICE agents, bases, etc. and literally their words cannot stop the drone.
- JohnTHaller 8mo agoImpossible to comply with other than to stop using drones and filming, which is the goal of this. Gotta prevent more recordings of executions.
- LowLevelKernel 8mo agoWhat is optic cables are used?
- angry_octet 8mo agoAI enabled drone navigation is going to be supercharged by this overreach. Autonomous and not reliant on communications, able to deal with GPS denial.
- rolph 8mo ago"drones" dont have to fly, they can move on wheels, or if your slick you have rotors that double as wheels. i dont think the concern is drone weaponry, but the photography, and intelligence that may be derived. i expect to see an attempt to work against any cameras that may cover activities
- black_13 8mo ago[dead]
- pjmlp 8mo agoLittle by little, eventually it won't be different from many other regimes.