Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The FAA’s flight restriction for drones is an attempt to criminalize filming ICE

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 202 posts

Re: The FAA’s flight restriction for drones is an attempt to criminalize filming ICE

#151

Post by defrost »

amelius wrote: post #138
defrost wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a car follows your car, is that illegal? If a drone follows your car, is that illegal?

If someone systematically follows your car (drone or not), don't you think that should be illegal?

It's seemingly creepy, yes.

It might warrant a restraining order, sure.

Outside of judge's opinion that it constitutes stalking or threatening behavior, what exactly is the crime here?

Perhaps it's a neighbour who keeps the same hours and works in the same city block, etc.

Perhaps it's a PI hired to follow you because .. is that a crime?

Re: The FAA’s flight restriction for drones is an attempt to criminalize filming ICE

#152

Post by rlpb »

Aurornis wrote: post #17

Flying a drone within 1/2 mile of ICE vehicles, which may be unmarked, is illegal? You can be flying a drone and if an unmarked ICE vehicle drives close enough, without warning, you have now broken serious FAA laws? This isn’t the kind of restriction that gets passed when the people making the rules care about being fair or consistent. It’s a power grab.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea#Levels_of_mens_rea_wi... is relevant here. There are exceptions - I don't know the specifics especially in relation to US law - but the starting point is that unknowingly causing the situation to exist doesn't make you guilty automatically. You have to intend it.

Re: The FAA’s flight restriction for drones is an attempt to criminalize filming ICE

#153

Post by kotaKat »

hrimfaxi wrote: post #148
reactordev wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ummmm… I fly drones at 8,000ft for arial mountain shots… drones are surprisingly capable given good wind conditions.

That would be against the law in the US. https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_flyers

Not if you stay within 400 feet AGL of the mountain terrain. You can be over 400 feet MSL (mean-sea-level) but still be within 400 feet above-ground-level from where the drone's sitting in the sky.

Re: The FAA’s flight restriction for drones is an attempt to criminalize filming ICE

#154

Post by jmye »

TiredOfLife wrote: post #129

It's funny how everyone on HN is against filming people in public places except when they don't like said people and suddenly filming is OK.

Would be wonderful if we could leave the blatantly transparent, false equivalencies on Facebook and Twitter where they’re more becoming of the general user base, and maybe try to be slightly more thoughtful, eh?

Re: The FAA’s flight restriction for drones is an attempt to criminalize filming ICE

#155

Post by contubernio »

TiredOfLife wrote: post #129

It's funny how everyone on HN is against filming people in public places except when they don't like said people and suddenly filming is OK.

Secrecy is anathema to government accountability. It is not the same to film private persons as it is to film government agents.

Re: The FAA’s flight restriction for drones is an attempt to criminalize filming ICE

#156

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF »

kotaKat wrote: post #153
hrimfaxi wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be against the law in the US. https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_flyers

Not if you stay within 400 feet AGL of the mountain terrain. You can be over 400 feet MSL (mean-sea-level) but still be within 400 feet above-ground-level from where the drone's sitting in the sky.

If I'm still following the plot, this means protesters just need to get their mountains to follow ICE activity (but remain 3000 feet away, laterally) for lawful recording.

Re: The FAA’s flight restriction for drones is an attempt to criminalize filming ICE

#158

Post by daveguy »

amluto wrote: post #142
smallmancontrov wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the point isn't just to stop legal action against ICE, it's also to go after anyone who posts drone footage that goes viral. Party of free speech, btw.

It would be very strange for the government to sue someone for redistributing videos on the basis that they had been taken from an illegally flown drone.

Well, it's a good thing we aren't living under a very strange, corrupt, and incompetent government.

(/s if it wasn't obvious, and anyone who needed that should try changing the channel every once in a while)

Post reply on HN