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

FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

aerotime.aero

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 245 posts

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#231

Post by UncleEntity »

kernal wrote: post #154
UncleEntity wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the problem, from what I've been hearing most of the actual criminals they've been "catching" are turned over by local and state law enforcement agencies with the rest are either in the process of criminal proceedings (that pesky "innocent until proven guilty" thing) or are involved in the immigration process as dictated by law. They are literally pulling people out of judicial hearings, where the people are t…

No, blue state sanctuary cities do not turn over illegal alien criminals to ICE. They release them back into the community even though they have a ICE notice on them. ICE is then forced to track down these criminals themselves while being tracked and harassed by crazy far left agitators that do everything in their power to protect these criminals.

You know, for all my flaws I've always tried my hardest to be on the right side of history.

One can both believe that immigration policy is broken and also that the current way it's being enforced is immoral and unlawful. I took the same oath to the constitution when I joined the military as they did when they went into federal service and can see when when things are going off the rails.

My eulogy should be: "U.S. Paratrooper, Decorated Combat Veteran, Crazy Far Left Agitator"

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#232

Post by derektank »

free_bip wrote: post #200
derektank wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They made that ruling while Biden was president. It seems hard to call that an example of rubber stamping for an administration that did not exist yet. John Roberts and other conservative members of the court do have an ideological commitment to the Unitary Executive Theory of the presidency (foolishly, in my view) but this has the potential to benefit both Democratic and Republican presidents.

What benefit does it allow for, other than the ability to turn the country into a dictatorship in a matter of hours with a single phone call? For anyone unaware, one of the main criticisms of that ruling is that the president commanding the military is always considered an official act, and this ruling means the president enjoys "absolute immunity for official acts within an exclusive presidential authority that Cong…

The benefit is that the president is not subject to retaliatory lawsuits (similar to what the Trump administration is now doing against e.g. James Comey, et al), the threat of which might prevent them from performing their duties effectively while in office.

I’m sympathetic to your concerns, agree that it was a poor ruling, and frankly think we need a constitutional amendment to address the excessive power the presidency has, but the justices aren’t making these rulings without having a real, justifiable rationale behind them and they aren’t making these rulings because they’re in the tank for Donald Trump (Justice Alito excepted)

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#234

Post by cmurf »

skhameneh wrote: post #226
cmurf wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When 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.

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. 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 w…

>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

>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.

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#235

Post by frumplestlatz »

jacquesm wrote: post #44
frumplestlatz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Oh, it is very clear, just not to you.

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.

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#236

Post by frumplestlatz »

lostmsu wrote: post #21
frumplestlatz wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

If he "clearly" wasn't merely filming, what alse did he seem to be doing?

Attempting to “de-arrest” someone.

See also https://nypost.com/2026/01/28/us-news/alex-pretti-appears-to...

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#237

Post by lostmsu »

frumplestlatz wrote: post #236
lostmsu wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he "clearly" wasn't merely filming, what alse did he seem to be doing?

Attempting to “de-arrest” someone. See also https://nypost.com/2026/01/28/us-news/alex-pretti-appears-to...

> more than a week before he was fatally shot

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#238

Post by frumplestlatz »

lostmsu wrote: post #237
frumplestlatz wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attempting to “de-arrest” someone. See also https://nypost.com/2026/01/28/us-news/alex-pretti-appears-to...

> more than a week before he was fatally shot

His attempt to “de-arrest” someone occurred immediately before he was fatally shot. That stands on its own as the proximate cause of the outcome. The video from a week earlier merely establishes a consistent pattern of behavior.

He was not peacefully protesting. Repeatedly showing up to protests, engaging in violence, and doing so while carrying a loaded firearm fundamentally undermines that claim. Carrying a weapon imposes an elevated duty of restraint: when you are armed, you have an inherent responsibility to avoid escalating conflict, precisely because your presence introduces a far greater risk of serious injury or death -- including to yourself.

Literally fighting with federal agents is the opposite of restraint and satisfies the elements of criminal conduct irrespective of political motive. Anyone lionizing him is engaging in vapid propaganda. He was not a peaceful protester, he was not a responsible gun owner, and he consistently engaged in criminal behavior that ultimately led to his death.

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#239

Post by lostmsu »

frumplestlatz wrote: post #238
lostmsu wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> more than a week before he was fatally shot

His attempt to “de-arrest” someone occurred immediately before he was fatally shot. That stands on its own as the proximate cause of the outcome. The video from a week earlier merely establishes a consistent pattern of behavior. He was not peacefully protesting. Repeatedly showing up to protests, engaging in violence, and doing so while carrying a loaded firearm fundamentally undermines that claim. Carrying a weapon…

Where do you see de-arrest? The article only says he wedged himself between an officer and another protester, which I'd say is normal in any protest.

Re: FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations

#240

Post by frumplestlatz »

lostmsu wrote: post #239
frumplestlatz wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His attempt to “de-arrest” someone occurred immediately before he was fatally shot. That stands on its own as the proximate cause of the outcome. The video from a week earlier merely establishes a consistent pattern of behavior. He was not peacefully protesting. Repeatedly showing up to protests, engaging in violence, and doing so while carrying a loaded firearm fundamentally undermines that claim. Carrying a weapon…

Where do you see de-arrest? The article only says he wedged himself between an officer and another protester, which I'd say is normal in any protest.

> he wedged himself between an officer and another protester, which I'd say is normal in any protest.

No, it’s not normal, that was a federal crime, and you absolutely cannot physically interfere with the police just because it’s a protest.

Post reply on HN