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

181–190 of 202 posts

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

#181

Post by charcircuit »

ceejayoz wrote: post #178
charcircuit wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even without AI there have been many advances such as video cameras or dna which can be used as evidence to help solve crimes. This idea that "the nazis had laws so it is bad for us to also have laws" is not going to work on people anymore.

Yes, and doing that still takes time. Murder trials take years and significant human time. Even parking tickets require several people to show up in a physical location to address if you contest them. So, you either do the proper, constitutionally required procedure - which takes time - or you take the Nazi approach of... significant shortcuts. And even there, it remains quite labor intensive. And now, oops… lettuce…

If the system is overloaded to the point a border trial takes years then there needs to be more investment into the resources needed to speed up the process. Making things slow and inefficient is not an inherent thing that needs to be preserved. This is why original comment suggested scaling up enforcement due to deal with the increased load of essentially clearing out the queue of current things that need to be taken care of as opposed to spreading it out over time.

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

#182

Post by ceejayoz »

charcircuit wrote: post #181
ceejayoz wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and doing that still takes time. Murder trials take years and significant human time. Even parking tickets require several people to show up in a physical location to address if you contest them. So, you either do the proper, constitutionally required procedure - which takes time - or you take the Nazi approach of... significant shortcuts. And even there, it remains quite labor intensive. And now, oops… lettuce…

If the system is overloaded to the point a border trial takes years then there needs to be more investment into the resources needed to speed up the process. Making things slow and inefficient is not an inherent thing that needs to be preserved. This is why original comment suggested scaling up enforcement due to deal with the increased load of essentially clearing out the queue of current things that need to be take…

> Making things slow and inefficient is not an inherent thing that needs to be preserved.

The opposite, really. Making it slow and inefficient is how we try to prevent life-changing mistakes like "oops we deported a citizen and now they're dead in Tijuana".

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

#183

Post by charcircuit »

ceejayoz wrote: post #182
charcircuit wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the system is overloaded to the point a border trial takes years then there needs to be more investment into the resources needed to speed up the process. Making things slow and inefficient is not an inherent thing that needs to be preserved. This is why original comment suggested scaling up enforcement due to deal with the increased load of essentially clearing out the queue of current things that need to be take…

> Making things slow and inefficient is not an inherent thing that needs to be preserved. The opposite, really. Making it slow and inefficient is how we try to prevent life-changing mistakes like "oops we deported a citizen and now they're dead in Tijuana".

I would actually expect the opposite. The slower and more inefficient a system is, the higher probability a life changing mistake happens. The more frequent something happens the better a system gets at handling that thing.

Take for example restoring a site from backups. If you never have exercised disaster recovery before you may make some mistake or realize that something that should be backed up isn't. But if you practice disaster recovery quarterly you are much more likely to discover these issues.

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

#184

Post by fc417fc802 »

sudonem wrote: post #166
fc417fc802 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First they can shoot down your drone. So treat them as disposable. > Second they can ban you from ever flying one again. Thankfully I can purchase them at Costco last I checked. Good luck with that. (TBF don't actually do that as it will 100% be traced to you. The general principle still applies though.) The correct answer here is to relentlessly use drones to film them in such a way that it isn't obvious who is do…

As a general point of information: The FAA very clearly has jurisdiction to “all navigable airspace” which is broadly defined as “all airspace immediately above ground level”. Which is to say, there’s no minimum height threshold under which you could fly a drone (outdoors) where the FAA doesn’t have full legal jurisdiction. You can say you feel it’s overreach, but it’s well established that the courts do not agree. H…

> You can say you feel it’s overreach, but it’s well established that the courts do not agree.

I don't get the impression that's the case. Historically the aircraft in question were large and expensive and very often traveling between states at high altitude. The FAA wasn't harassing for example hang gliders staying within 1000 feet of the ground.

So not only was the federal government generally not interfering with individuals going about local activities, the few exceptions were people unlikely to want to take it to court.

Now a federal agency somehow thinks they can (for example) regulate delivery vehicles operating locally? That's obviously completely absurd. They'd have zero standing to regulate pizza delivery drivers so why are pizza delivery drones any different?

Not that I have much hope of a sensible resolution. The FCC similarly magically receives the power to regulate local activities regardless of the constitution and that one has always been invasive and yet the courts have allowed it.

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

#185

Post by nandomrumber »

nixosbestos wrote: post #24
badlucklottery wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can still film ICE / CBP from the ground. "How do you tell the difference between a protestor with a camera and a protestor with a grenade?" Do you see how the assumption of extreme (and very unlikely) danger is bad excuse for violating people's rights?

Look at the first sentence of their bio. It would be rude of me to offer my opinion on their mental state, is all I'm going to say.

I don’t understand.

Are you saying the electricity I use hasn’t increased at a rate 2.6 times faster than general inflation.

Or are you saying that, for example, my low-energy-per-wash washing machine is maintainable despite having a welded drum? Or that my phone does have a user replaceable battery.

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

#186

Post by nandomrumber »

quantified wrote: post #14
nandomrumber wrote: post #3

[flagged]

Well, by that logic, drones must not fly at all. Unless you say that a grenade over your own head must also be disallowed.

Isn’t it already prohibited to fly a drone over my head, unless it’s in the sub 250 gram category.

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

#187

Post by quantified »

nandomrumber wrote: post #186
quantified wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, by that logic, drones must not fly at all. Unless you say that a grenade over your own head must also be disallowed.

Isn’t it already prohibited to fly a drone over my head, unless it’s in the sub 250 gram category.

I doubt it, how does anyone know where your head is? Anyway, sounds like no new law is needed.

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

#188

Post by LorenPechtel »

sudonem wrote: post #166
fc417fc802 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First they can shoot down your drone. So treat them as disposable. > Second they can ban you from ever flying one again. Thankfully I can purchase them at Costco last I checked. Good luck with that. (TBF don't actually do that as it will 100% be traced to you. The general principle still applies though.) The correct answer here is to relentlessly use drones to film them in such a way that it isn't obvious who is do…

As a general point of information: The FAA very clearly has jurisdiction to “all navigable airspace” which is broadly defined as “all airspace immediately above ground level”. Which is to say, there’s no minimum height threshold under which you could fly a drone (outdoors) where the FAA doesn’t have full legal jurisdiction. You can say you feel it’s overreach, but it’s well established that the courts do not agree. H…

But planes don't normally fly very low except when taking off and landing. Below 500' AGL and away from airports is normally not the realm of airplanes. Go above 500' AGL and you have a whole host of FAA compliance issues because now you are in plane space.

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

#189

Post by LorenPechtel »

reactordev wrote: post #140
light_hue_1 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot fly drones over 400ft above the ground (with some very narrow exceptions). So this isn't narrow, it's extremely broad. You can't read such rules in a vacuum without knowing their context.

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

Drone altitude restrictions are AGL, not ASL.

I go out on top of the highest local mountain and send a drone up to 12,300' and the FAA won't care. I do the same thing over my house, they would very rightly be quite upset. (But I think it's BLM would care about the drone over the mountain--it's wilderness terrain, no powered vehicles of any type except for emergency use.)

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

#190

Post by novaleaf »

youknownothing wrote: post #27

IANAL but mens rea is a serious consideration here. A prosecutor would have to prove that you have knowingly and wilfully committed the crime in order to be convicted, so unmarked cars are in practice out of scope. I think the main implication is that you won't be able to use any drone recordings for legal action against ICE unless you can prove that you recorded from further than 3,000 feet (one hell of a camera) or…

> A prosecutor would have to prove that you have knowingly and wilfully committed the crime in order to be convicted

IANAL also, but counterpoint: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6611240-three-felonies-a...

Post reply on HN