I automatically refuse to accept any association of the terms "assault" or "military" or "war" with those features.
It's not a point I'll ever give in on. I'd cut off my own fingers first.
at least youll then be able to count to three.
I look at drones the same way I look at guns.
You can have a hobby drone with a camera. You can have a hot glue gun.
The military versions of these products are rightfully regulated.
Are you suggesting there should be no regulations for non-military weapons?
What sort of regulations do you think there should be for military weapons?
Farmerman is the only one here who doesn't know how to count.
I tend to agree with moderate Democrats (some regulations and licensing). This isn't the place to argue though.
This thread is about banning model airplanes.
The drone, packed with explosives, used the civilian flight path into Irbil airport to disguise its intent. It crashed into a CIA warehouse on the American airbase beside the civilian airport in April.
‘US forces described feeling the shockwave across the base, which now has the biggest concentration of US and British forces in Iraq. The warehouse was left in ruins, but no-one was hurt.
“They knew what they were hitting, but they didn’t know what was inside,” said one US commander.
For the last year and a half there have been some 300 attacks on US interests in Iraq, mostly rockets, as well as improvised explosive devices targeting supply convoys.
“This is a game changer,” the commander said. The drone was Iranian made, military grade, and a greater threat because of its precision. Drones are also fiendishly difficult to stop. Iran denies involvement in the attacks.’
The above is from today’s BBC news website, Middle East section, from an articles headlined,
Iraqis suffer as US-Iran shadow war shifts gear.
It is written by Quentin Sommerville.
I can’t post links or cut and paste hence the above.
It’s clear that drones are clearly more sophisticated and more of a threat than toy aeroplanes, and to describe them as such shows a clear lack of understanding.
This is America, the place that installed Israel’s celebrated Iron Dome, and presumably has the safe level of defence for its own forces. Yet it could not stop the attack on the warehouse because, “Drones are ...fiendishly difficult to stop.”
“This is a game changer.”
This is silly...
The drone in this article was an "Iranian made, military grade" weapon.
Confusing that with a quadcopter you can pick up at your local box store is a little ridiculous. People are starting with a pre-conceived belief and then googling for articles to support their hysterical fear.
Still no one can explain why people aren't calling for walkie talkies to be banned. (In Iraq, walkie talkies have caused far more damage and death with the widespread use of IEDs.)
And cue the sneering ostrich.
Iran would never let its hardware fall into the hands of America’s enemies after all. How could terrorists possibly expect to get their hands on that?
Iran’s support of terrorist designated groups like Hezbollah notwithstanding, we’re talking about an Iranian military grade drone put together under extreme sanctions.
How much easier is it to get similar components on the open market? If Iran can put it together under sanctions then how easy would it be for a few gifted amateurs and enthusiasts to put together something similar?
We’re not talking about a state of the art stealth drone used by the US military, we’re talking about something built under huge restrictions by a limited group of qualified people. Iranian scientists are being killed all the time.
Yet that was able to get through the most sophisticated defence system on the planet.
Vests (packed with explosives) have killed thousands of people. Do we ban vests? Pressure cookers here in Boston had a big part of one of our worst days of terrorism. Do we ban pressure cookers? And what about pipes, do we ban pipes?
This is a hysterical overreaction to a world that is sometimes dangerous. In truth, the risk you will die in a car driving to work is 1000 times higher than the risk of terrorism. No one is talking about banning cars.
Banning things just because they are in the news for a day isn't logical.
We do ban explosives.
We do attempt to manage auto accidents and fatalities through the enforcement of traffic laws, driver education, and continuing safety upgrades by manufacturers.
Attempting to get out in front of consumer products which pose a potential risk to others is quite logical. Obviously some thought went into limiting the nuisance factor; here's what's out there for rules now:
Height limit of 400ft -
Operators can only fly drones in uncontrolled airspace (Class G) up to 400 ft
Flying above 400ft requires permit -
Flying in controlled airspace (Class B, C, D, E) requires permit. This could be done in three ways I'll cover below.
Line of sight -
Keep your done within the visual line-of-sight of an observer who is next to you or in direct communication with you
No night flying -
Do not fly at night unless your drone has lighting
No flying near airports -
Do not interfere with a manned aircraft
Don't fly over crowds -
Do not fly over any person or moving vehicle
Don't interfere with emergency situations -
Do not interfere with emergency response activities (disaster relief, accident response, law enforcement, firefighting)
Fly sober -
Do not operate under the influence of drugs or alcohol
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that small civilian drones should be banned. The list of countries where they are already banned doesn't look like a club the USA would want to join. But the question, how much longer will it take before there really is a deadly incident — accidental or on purpose — is a reasonable question
Sure. It seems like you and I agree. There is nothing in this list that I have a problem with.
I agree that drones should have reasonable restrictions to prevent nuisance, protect wildlife and avoid interference with air travel. I also believe that mopeds should have reasonable restrictions for the same reason.
There are "deadly incidents" with skateboards and pool toys.
I don't have a problem with laws passed to protect airports or wildlife from drones, or bicycles or toys of any type. Reasonable restrictions on bicycles or kites or drones should be discussed on a case by case basis. As long as we are not panicking...
But the question, how much longer will it take before there really is a deadly incident — accidental or on purpose — is a reasonable question
It appears there have been some already and some serious near-misses. I remember reading about privately-owned drones interfering at airports here, delaying flights, etc.
I think this was when they first became popular and there weren't any rules and people being what they are, stupid **** happened.