AVSIG: L.A. Arrests, Charges Two Drone Operators wwswsigarch.jpg (7236 bytes)

✈ . . . . . . ✈ . . . . . ✈ . . . . ✈ . . . ✈ . . ✈ . ✈ . . ✈ . . . ✈ . . . . ✈ . . . . . ✈ . . . . . . Touch-and-Go to our Live Forum (This is a Read-only Archive of the 2004-2017 AVSIG Forum)


AVSIG Discussion Sections >> Drones, RC, Sport, Recreation

Pages: 1
Mase Taylor
Top Gun


Reged: 04/29/04
Posts: 9446
Loc: SOCAL
L.A. Arrests, Charges Two Drone Operators
      #421674 - 02/08/16 09:37 PM

LINK

"The simmering dispute over whether federal or local laws regulate drones is heating up, as Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer has filed criminal charges against two drone operators accused of violating the city's drone ordinances.

“Operating a drone near trafficked airspace places pilots and the public at serious risk,” said Feuer. “We'll continue to use our new city law to hold drone operators accountable and keep our residents safe.” "

--------------------
Fly The Airplane As Far Into The Crash As Possible. - Bob Hoover 1922-2016 R.I.P.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
B. Butler (Oregonian)
Top Gun


Reged: 05/15/04
Posts: 9760
Loc: Ashland, Oregon
Re: L.A. Arrests, Charges Two Drone Operators [Re: Mase Taylor]
      #421677 - 02/08/16 10:41 PM

Good luck with that!

Arizona v. U.S., 567 U.S. ___, 132
S.Ct. 2492, 2502 (2012) (“Where Congress occupies an entire field . . . even complimentary state regulation is impermissible. Field preemption reflects a congressional decision to foreclose any state regulation in the area, even if it is parallel to federal standards.”),


--------------------
"Why not be a nihilist? A man has to believe in something."
-Bernie Gunther


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Russell Holton
AVSIG Member


Reged: 07/07/05
Posts: 14136
Re: L.A. Arrests, Charges Two Drone Operators [Re: Mase Taylor]
      #421678 - 02/08/16 10:52 PM

I think this is going to depend more on the financial resources of the two individuals and how much they want to fight this.

It looks to me the city is stomping on Federal territory. The Feds aren't going to like that.

I'm also curious about the Fedss interpretation (and the City's) about a "Airport". I wonder if heliports qualify. Complicating the issue, while most people know about airports, I don't know as they'd know about helipads in the area. Which raises a question of how the individuals were to know they were flying in a prohibited area.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
John O'Shaughnessy [FCM]
Top Gun


Reged: 09/13/01
Posts: 5059
Loc: Minnesota
Re: L.A. Arrests, Charges Two Drone Operators [Re: Russell Holton]
      #421703 - 02/09/16 01:40 PM

Quote:


I'm also curious about the Fedss interpretation (and the City's) about a "Airport". I wonder if heliports qualify. Complicating the issue, while most people know about airports, I don't know as they'd know about helipads in the area. Which raises a question of how the individuals were to know they were flying in a prohibited area.




The new "B4UFly" App from the FAA does include heliports.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/b4ufly/

Of course, it gets back to the very same question about registration of drones, etc. Those likely to register drones, are likely to know about and check this App, and (at least) know when they are in an area of concern. It's all the other folks who are likely to cause issues...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott Dunham (RDU)
Top Gun


Reged: 04/29/04
Posts: 6470
Loc: Chapel Hill, NC
Re: L.A. Arrests, Charges Two Drone Operators [Re: John O'Shaughnessy [FCM]]
      #421714 - 02/09/16 06:09 PM

I used that app down at our new digs in NC, and it turns out that before I fly my drone I have to notify Mr. Womble, who owns an "R" airport 4.5 miles from our house. Or at least I think he does - looking at it on Google Earth, about half of the "runway" is now a cultivated field.

I wonder if these poor farmers are going to know what to make of getting phone calls from every drone flyer within 5 miles.

I have a bit of an advantage in that I know how to find airport owner information. The app doesn't provide any contact help, and the average hobby shopper isn't likely to be familiar with the arcania of FAA documentation. I'm not so sure this is practical.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
John O'Shaughnessy [FCM]
Top Gun


Reged: 09/13/01
Posts: 5059
Loc: Minnesota
Re: L.A. Arrests, Charges Two Drone Operators [Re: Scott Dunham (RDU)]
      #421718 - 02/10/16 07:43 AM

Quote:

I have a bit of an advantage in that I know how to find airport owner information. The app doesn't provide any contact help, and the average hobby shopper isn't likely to be familiar with the arcania of FAA documentation. I'm not so sure this is practical.




I'd agree it could be better. I think that it handles the CYA aspect (for the FAA) of someone saying, "I didn't know there was an airport nearby."


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Stephanie Belser
Top Gun APC


Reged: 04/29/04
Posts: 5929
Loc: KFAM
Re: L.A. Arrests, Charges Two Drone Operators [Re: B. Butler (Oregonian)]
      #421727 - 02/10/16 12:35 PM

I might get a local town to remove their aircraft noise ordinance, based on a preemption argument.

Burbank v. Lockheed Air Terminal, Inc., 411 US 624 (1973)

--------------------
What the hell is an "aluminum falcon"?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Reams Goodloe
Top Gun


Reged: 05/07/04
Posts: 2582
Loc: Kent, Washington
Re: L.A. Arrests, Charges Two Drone Operators [Re: Stephanie Belser]
      #421949 - 02/17/16 01:02 AM


>>Burbank v. Lockheed Air Terminal, Inc., 411 US 624 (1973) <<

Yea, maybe.
Since that was a very close 5-4 decision, the change of a face or two on the court could wrestle control from the FAA and return it to the "local people", and "shrink" that "big bad government"....<eh?>

The constitution said nothing about airplanes. Why should the Supremacy clause carry the day here, they would ask....<g>
If the Founding Fathers meant for the government to play with controlling airplanes, surely it would have been written in the Constitution, don't you think???

Just a thought...<g>

- Reams-


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1



Extra information
0 registered and 6 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Mike Overly 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 5687

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us AVSIG

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5

Logout   Main Index    AVSIG Aviation Forum