3 ms·

No they aren't just thrown, they are also hit, usually in unexpected directions. They hit people, they break windows, yet we don't ban them. https://www.youtub

No they aren't just thrown, they are also hit, usually in unexpected directions. They hit people, they break windows, yet we don't ban them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMmYIpmL48w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMmYIpmL48w

Jtsummers 11y ago
> No they aren't just thrown, they are also hit, usually in unexpected directions. They hit people, they break windows, yet we don't ban them. The post you responded to suggested restrictions [0]. Not bans. I said hit, along with thrown. Amusingly your video starts with a football being thrown. And most of these videos (haven't watched them all) are at sporting events or fields. The first ones are people standing on the sidelines of a football field not paying attention to the ball being thrown. It sucks they got hit, but that's not a spot to stand in and assume you'll be safe when the game or practice is going on. Most of the others seem to be spectators at games. They're in an area where they know this is a risk. That's the difference compared to drones flying over crowds. If the crowds don't realize it's overhead or expect it to be overhead that they can't even prepare for it to fall on them. EDIT: [0] However, it's my understanding that most of these incidents involving drones fall under the same rules/laws that already exist for model aircraft. I haven't researched this, just trusting my model airplane operating friends. So restrictions are probably already in place that should (if enforced or operators are responsible) reduce the risk to all involved. The problem is that, unlike model airplane operators, many of these new wave of operators are coming into on their own without the benefit of mentorship from the broader community to guide them. EDIT: https://www.faa.gov/uas/model_aircraft/ https://www.faa.gov/uas/model_aircraft/ Rules are already in place. That it's a copter or popularly viewed as a drone and not a model aircraft doesn't really change things. Hobbyists shouldn't be operating these around crowds. It's reckless.
- simoncion 11y ago
  It's a damn shame that folks who are selling RC or autonomous *copters aren't also pushing hard for the drone purchasers to invest in an AMA [0] membership and become acquainted with the local model aircraft club. When I was growing up, the hobby shops in town wouldn't sell you a plane, copter, or kit for the same without verifying that you were an AMA member. [1] They understood that planes and copters can be quite dangerous in untrained hands. [0] http://www.modelaircraft.org/ http://www.modelaircraft.org/ [1] Not because they were required to, mind, but because it was a sound idea.
melling 11y ago
I guess if I go to a drone race, I should expect that I might get hit by one. If I'm standing at a parade, for example, I don't expect to get hit with a baseball or a drone. This is probably why we need "unnecessary" laws. People like yourself think you're entitled to put others at risk. Common sense isn't sufficient.
- simoncion 11y ago
  So, after someone standing at a parade gets injured by a thrown or dropped baseball, do we need "unnecessary" laws to protect bystanders from carelessly released baseballs? Why or why not?
- greggman 11y ago
  I never said I'm entitled to put others at risk. I'm just suggesting the same laws that say I'm liable if I hit someone in the head with a ball or break their property should be enough for the drone case. And, while apparently this case was a hit and run that's not special for drones. People crash their cars into things all the time and run even though they're supposed to have both a driver's license and car registration. People also throw balls (or rocks), break windows, and don't fess up. Doesn't seem like new laws are needed

Jtsummers 11y ago

> No they aren't just thrown, they are also hit, usually in unexpected directions. They hit people, they break windows, yet we don't ban them. The post you responded to suggested restrictions [0]. Not bans. I said hit, along with thrown. Amusingly your video starts with a football being thrown. And most of these videos (haven't watched them all) are at sporting events or fields. The first ones are people standing on the sidelines of a football field not paying attention to the ball being thrown. It sucks they got hit, but that's not a spot to stand in and assume you'll be safe when the game or practice is going on. Most of the others seem to be spectators at games. They're in an area where they know this is a risk. That's the difference compared to drones flying over crowds. If the crowds don't realize it's overhead or expect it to be overhead that they can't even prepare for it to fall on them. EDIT: [0] However, it's my understanding that most of these incidents involving drones fall under the same rules/laws that already exist for model aircraft. I haven't researched this, just trusting my model airplane operating friends. So restrictions are probably already in place that should (if enforced or operators are responsible) reduce the risk to all involved. The problem is that, unlike model airplane operators, many of these new wave of operators are coming into on their own without the benefit of mentorship from the broader community to guide them. EDIT: https://www.faa.gov/uas/model_aircraft/ https://www.faa.gov/uas/model_aircraft/ Rules are already in place. That it's a copter or popularly viewed as a drone and not a model aircraft doesn't really change things. Hobbyists shouldn't be operating these around crowds. It's reckless.

simoncion 11y ago
It's a damn shame that folks who are selling RC or autonomous *copters aren't also pushing hard for the drone purchasers to invest in an AMA [0] membership and become acquainted with the local model aircraft club. When I was growing up, the hobby shops in town wouldn't sell you a plane, copter, or kit for the same without verifying that you were an AMA member. [1] They understood that planes and copters can be quite dangerous in untrained hands. [0] http://www.modelaircraft.org/ http://www.modelaircraft.org/ [1] Not because they were required to, mind, but because it was a sound idea.

melling 11y ago

I guess if I go to a drone race, I should expect that I might get hit by one. If I'm standing at a parade, for example, I don't expect to get hit with a baseball or a drone. This is probably why we need "unnecessary" laws. People like yourself think you're entitled to put others at risk. Common sense isn't sufficient.

simoncion 11y ago
So, after someone standing at a parade gets injured by a thrown or dropped baseball, do we need "unnecessary" laws to protect bystanders from carelessly released baseballs? Why or why not?
greggman 11y ago
I never said I'm entitled to put others at risk. I'm just suggesting the same laws that say I'm liable if I hit someone in the head with a ball or break their property should be enough for the drone case. And, while apparently this case was a hit and run that's not special for drones. People crash their cars into things all the time and run even though they're supposed to have both a driver's license and car registration. People also throw balls (or rocks), break windows, and don't fess up. Doesn't seem like new laws are needed