Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States

Senate Passes Bill That Lets the Government Destroy Private Drones (engadget.com) 143

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
On Thursday, the Senate passed the FAA Reauthorization Act, which, among other things, renews funding for the Federal Aviation Administration and introduces new rules for airports and aircraft. But the bill, which now just needs to be signed by the president, also addresses drones. From a report: And while parts of the bill extend some aspects of drone use -- such as promoting drone package delivery and drone testing -- it also gives the federal government power to take down a private drone if it's seen as a "credible threat." The wording comes from another bill, the Preventing Emerging Threats Act of 2018, which was strongly supported by the Department of Homeland Security and absorbed into the FAA Reauthorization Act. In June, as part of its argument as to why it needed more leeway when it comes to drones, the agency said that terrorist groups overseas "use commercially available [unmanned aircraft systems] to drop explosive payloads, deliver harmful substances and conduct illicit surveillance," and added that the devices are also used to transport drugs, interfere with law enforcement and expolit unsecured networks. Video -- What Happens When a Drone Hits an Airplane Wing?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Senate Passes Bill That Lets the Government Destroy Private Drones More

Senate Passes Bill That Lets the Government Destroy Private Drones

Comments Filter:

  • I guess stealing a Cessna or dirigible or van, or semi and loading it up with fertilizer will never go out of style. /s

    • I guess stealing a Cessna or dirigible or van, or semi and loading it up with fertilizer will never go out of style. /s

      It at least reduces the size of the arsenal that can fly over walls and fences ...

      • The trouble is, there are other provisions in there...that as I understand it, require EVERY drone operator (commercial or private) to pass a FAA test, and essentially be blessed by the FAA as a pilot, along with associated fees, etc.

        However, it gets worse than that....the new law also now requires you to carry that license documentation with you at all times flying a drone, and any time any law enforcement (local, state, etc) wants to harass you, and see you flying a drone, they can stop you, require you

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by lgw ( 121541 )

          So the bar is higher than flying a light plane? Insane. I guess theres nothing that we won't have a moral panic over.

        • How is any of this constitutional?

          This allows people to be deprived of their property without any due process.

          • How is any of this constitutional?

            This allows people to be deprived of their property without any due process.

            Well, apparently the legislators and entrenched bureaucracy no longer consider that when draft/passing laws and regulations.

          • Civil forfeiture laws have been used to deprive people of their property without due process since the 1920s and prohibition, but they really stepped it up in the 80s with the war on drugs.

            Good luck getting power-hungry politicians and police forces to give up that cash cow.

          • How is any of this constitutional?

            You have no Constitutional right to fly a drone. Airspace is inherently "public", so the government gets to regulate what happens there.

            Much like you have no Constitutional right to drive a car on public roads - that's why you have a driver's license, and why the state can deny driver's licenses to people.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by rtb61 ( 674572 )

              Just tp note, although this legilsation is buried with in FAA stuff, it has nothing to do with the FAA and is in fact tied to Homeload security, so all Federal lands, including national parks et al, basically nearly all public lands. Look what else was in there "A roadmap for a United States and coalition strategy to reestablish security and governance in Syria", a fucking roadmap to invade and take over the government of Syria, what the fuck does that have to do with the FAA. Not even trying to pretend to

  • We need more drones taken down (Score:5, Funny)

    by OrangeTide ( 124937 ) on Thursday October 04, 2018 @12:52PM (#57425454) Homepage Journal

    I'd like to see more drones taken down. I'd also like a new federal program for private citizens to apply for a drone hunting permit.

    • Re:We need more drones taken down (Score:5, Informative)

      by alvinrod ( 889928 ) on Thursday October 04, 2018 @12:57PM (#57425500)
      You don't need a permit, at least not if you're in Kentucky and only blast the drones that come onto your property [arstechnica.com].

      • Yeeehawww!

        I wonder if I could get the same ruling in California too, as long as I don't shoot some film studio's drone. The courts are overly protective of Hollywood.

        PS - yes, you can own firearms in California. it's not a big deal if you're away from the big coastal cities. You used to be able to open carry here in unincorporated areas until recently [ca.gov]

    • Because how dare people have a hobby!
      Oh look a harmless drone flying around. I is following the rules, being used safely not spying on people. But lets shoot it down, because someone has a hobby!
      We can't have people having a hobby, unless it is shooting stuff. Then in that case it is our god given right!

      • I guess don't trespass on my property. You can use the airspace 80 ft above my property all you like, as long as you stay in accordance to FAA rules. And ideally you should have joined the AMA and paying your dues towards liability coverage [modelaircraft.org].

        A few years ago my RC club had a plane's battery catch fire in a dry field, and luckily we were nearby to extinguish it. But if you're outside of a reasonable range because you're flying FPV illegally, I'm going to take your toy out of commission. I'll politely return th

        • Is this a common problem in your community?
          Where I live, people usually fly drones on their property, or with permission above others. They normally don't want to pay hundreds-thousdands of dollars for a Drone, to have it just kinda fly all over the place just to create chaos.

          • Is this a common problem in your community?

            Happens a lot at the beach. But I'm not allowed to bring guns on the public beach. Also it might be upsetting if people were shooting in the air all the time, but it's Santa Cruz so a lot of weird shit goes down and nobody seems to care.

            Where I live, people usually fly drones on their property, or with permission above others.

            In urban areas people don't have acres of property. So they fly in parks and at beaches.

            They normally don't want to pay hundreds-thousdands of dollars for a Drone, to have it just kinda fly all over the place just to create chaos.

            We've reprimanded multiple members in our club for doing just this. They like to fly around illegally with FPV and make YouTube videos of their illegal flights. One guy had footage flying

            • Happens a lot at the beach. But I'm not allowed to bring guns on the public beach. Also it might be upsetting if people were shooting in the air all the time, but it's Santa Cruz so a lot of weird shit goes down and nobody seems to care....

              In urban areas people don't have acres of property. So they fly in parks and at beaches....

              The examples you are giving are people flying in public areas....ie, open to use BY the public.

              That should cause you no harm since it isn't over your private land, but you see

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by PPH ( 736903 )

                What's wrong with flying at a public beach?

                Nothing. As long as you keep your drone above a minimum safe altitude. Crash your toy into a bunch of people and those blades can do a lot of damage.

              • The examples you are giving are people flying in public areas....ie, open to use BY the public.

                technically it's not permissible to fly drones in a public space without permission from the entity that controls that space (city, county, or state)

                That should cause you no harm since it isn't over your private land, but you seem to be arguing that it is...?

                The other example is flying over private land, see the part where I talk about people flying 10+ miles out. That's all hills and meadows, some of it part of the county's Open Spaces preserve, some of it private land. Many of the open spaces are under fire advisory so drones are often prohibited at those times, even when they aren't it's not a smart thing to do.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by bblb ( 5508872 )
        No one cares about your hobby unless you're putting your drone where it shouldn't be... fly your drone into a no fly zone, it gets taken down. Keep your drone in your backyard, "hobby" your ass off all day and no one will care.

      • spying in people's windows a hobby? buzzing close to people's heads for a laugh? (like a coupe were doing in my neighborhood)

        hobbyists like that need their toys broken. maybe a punch in the face too.

    • Should be open season. If it is over your property and within range of birdshot, it is fair game.

    • Typical American. The answer is always a gun.

    • Only a property owner or law enforcement should be allowed to shoot down a drone (under specific circumstances). There are safety issues to consider. A damaged drone can easily kill someone falling down from the sky.

      • It's theoretically possible for a falling drone to kill someone, but I would not classify it as easy.

        Odds are probably higher for an accidentally shooting. Or for the drone pilot to chase his falling craft and get run over by not looking both ways before crossing the street.

        Many of the ordinances that restrict drone(UAS) are to do with safety. It's not safe to fly them over highways for example. It's not safe to fly them over a redneck farmer's property. Lots of places you shouldn't be flying them.

  • Supprises no one. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Riceballsan ( 816702 ) on Thursday October 04, 2018 @12:54PM (#57425480)
    Really this is the least of issues by any law enforcement I know of. I'd at least consider drones considered lower stakes than human life, and it doesn't seem like we have much trouble with laws allowing law enforcement or government agents to shoot humans that "might pose a threat".

    • The funny part is only that some legislative drone thought it would be useful to add the language, when they can already destroy private property in any way they want if they determined it is part of a credible threat.

      Heck, they could already shoot the operator if they thought the threat was imminent!

    • I'd at least consider drones considered lower stakes than human life, and it doesn't seem like we have much trouble with laws allowing law enforcement or government agents to shoot humans that "might pose a threat".

      I don't disagree but now what am I supposed to do with all these drone disguises I was going to sell to people to prevent them from being shot by the police? ;)

  • Drone fanbois, no doubt, will seethe at this.
    You have no one to blame but yourselves, really; you failed to police your own sufficiently, and now drone owners who refused to behave apporpriately and not use their drones irresponsibly have brought the government down on all of you.
    Enjoy playing with your drones in your backyards, that's about the only place you'll be allowed to use them now.

    Don't hate the messenger, hate the message. I didn't do this to you, and hating on me won't change anything, so hav

    • I tried to point that out to the national model airplane organization (AMA), and that they needed to make a distinction between traditional models and drones - because *it was metaphysical certainty that drones were going to be heavily regulated* and nothing they could say was going to stop it. But no, they decided to embrace drone idiots just like everyone else. The result is *very likely* to wipe out most forms of RC gliders, large-scale, jet turbines, and the original form of model aircraft, free-flight

      • ...and require airmanship tests for everyon.

        That IS a part of this recently passed law.

        Everyone will have to pass a FAA pilot type test, and you are going to be required to have that license on you at ALL times you are flying, and any law enforcement type can stop you at any time they see you flying, and have an encounter, requiring you to show your license, and if not on you, can confiscate your equipment.

        • Yes, they are requiring you to take a test. And you will be required to have proof of passage on you (but they don't call it a "license", or even an "airman's certificate"; one important distinction would be that it's not revocable). But the seizure and forfeiture provisions aren't in that part of the bill, they're in a separate section that concerns UAS which threaten DHS-protected facilities. So if you fly your model into a nuclear plant or sewage plant or any of a number of other facilities, they can

          • But if you're just flying around in a field with your unregistered model airplane without having taken a test, this bill does not allow them to seize the equipment.

            From my understanding of what was passed, it was so broadly written, that they indeed can interpret it to mean they can confiscate from you on the spot for any reason they deem "dangerous".....and we all know law enforcement will always 'err' on the side of broad powers for them.

            Hell, there are still people in New Orleans from Katrina that neve

      • Here's the thing, just to be clear: when I was a kid, I built and flew model airplanes. If I were a kid now, I'd think drones were awesome and would want one; when they came out, I thought they were pretty cool and saw no downside. Then idiots started doing idiotic things with them, like invade people's privacy, fly them into wildfire areas and in the way of firefighting aircraft, flew them at airports and other places they don't belong, and I said "you people need to police your own better", meaning track

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by vbdasc ( 146051 )

          I'm sorry, but self-policing doesn't work. When you have a new cool toy that is powerful enough to be able to do real harm, there will be idiots abusing it, and a tough regulation will follow. That's the way of life.

          • Model airplane people have been self-policing, mostly successfully, for about 100 years and without drones/quadcopter/FPV, this issue would never have come up.

  • I hate it when I first hear about cool and useful stuff in news stories about how it's no longer available...

  • MUH GUNS! MUH DRONES! MUH FREEDUMBS! (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    B-b-but the only thing that can stop GOVERNMENT TYRANNY is a good guy with a drone!!

  • I wonder how long it will be before some evil bastard crams a drone full of a noxious substance and flies it to a location where the government will provide the means to scatter it all over a nice, wide area. How long would it take to clean up an airport contaminated with some kind of nasty, superfine powder?

    Really, it's just a different kind of evolution.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by vbdasc ( 146051 )

      How long would it take to clean up an airport contaminated with some kind of nasty, superfine powder?

      Orders of magnitude less than the supermax prison term awaiting the evil bastard, methinks.

  • is that a drone with camera gives too much power in hands of citizen journalists.

    In the past all one needed a high fence and a guard, and not one could see an estate, a factory, a dump, etc.

    Now it becomes much harder to hide issues.

    • You appear to have forgotten that private aircraft exist that are not drones.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Max_W ( 812974 )
        A manned aircraft cannot fly lower than 200 - 300 meters (depending on a country). It can fly only according to a flight plan. A manned aircraft produces enormous noise. It costs a lot of money, even renting or fueling one for an hour costs a lot of money. It weighs thousand of kilograms, while a drone weighs hundreds of grams, seven(!) orders of magnitude lower.

        I read and view aerial photos (from a drone) of several cases when a public servant with a modest salary possessed a kind of royal property wort

  • ...drone that is flying over the private property. There was a court case that settled that a while ago.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some.

Close