Drones

[5GallonBucket]

17 hours ago, tvc184 said:

On an interesting note (I think), someone better not get caught shooting down a drone. Drones are federally regulated aircraft including the airspace they fly in. Shooting one down carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and up to a $250,000 fine. 

Wow.
doesnt  A pedophile gets less time than that.

We got some ridiculous laws

[5GallonBucket]

18 hours ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

My fence is 8 ft 6. Wish it was 10

My fence is thick underbrush and pine trees 

[SmashMouth]

40 minutes ago, 5GallonBucket said:

Wow.
doesnt  A pedophile gets less time than that.

We got some ridiculous laws

Well, the alternative is don't shoot one down. Lol. 

[5GallonBucket]

1 hour ago, SmashMouth said:

Well, the alternative is don't shoot one down. Lol. 

I agree.  Still Doesn’t make the law any more ridiculous compared to some the most heinous crimes....

may need to look into who is writing these laws and punishments and remove them from that duty.

[Realville]

3 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

Wow.
doesnt  A pedophile gets less time than that.

We got some ridiculous laws

Yep

[Realville]

10 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Private citizens can’t get warrants.

 Shooting drones is a federal felony and probably several state crimes.

 You can commit any crime that you wish. If it is worth the consequences or you get away with it, great.

 I am not criticizing your opinion. I usually try to unemotionally talk about the law as I believe it to be. 

I never said private citizens could get warrants but if some else wants to invade your privacy on your own property I would think THEY would need to get some kind of warrant. We’ll just goes to show there needs to be more reform own some the ridiculous laws. Thanks for the info.

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

Wow.
doesnt  A pedophile gets less time than that.

We got some ridiculous laws

That isn’t true..... but it is often repeated on various crimes. Like, the prisons are full of people smoking marijuana when in fact no one is in prison for that  

So let’s go with pedophile which really isn’t a crime but a person sexually attracted to underage prepubescent children.  In Texas the age of consent to have sex is 17. We are criminally considered adults at 17. Even though it is legal to have sex with a 17-year-old, if you possess a nude picture of that same adult, it is up to 10 years in prison. That is for a single photograph of an adult.

Let’s say you are attracted to a 16-year-old girl who actually looks like an adult and is extremely well built.  That is not exactly pedophilia because even though the person is legally under age, she does not look like a child. So a 20 year old, even with consent, rubs on the girl through the clothes with no actual skin to skin contact.. it.carries up to 20 years. Just exposer to a child (even a 16 year old) with no contact is up to 10 years  

Sex with consent of a child under 17 (and not more than 3 years older) is up to 20. So boyfriend/girlfriend... it doesn’t matter  

If under 14 it is up to 99 years and it doesn’t matter any age difference  

So for a true pedophile., merely touching through the clothes is up to 20 years in prison and any kind of sex including just penetration with a finger for example, carries up to 99 years in prison which is equal to murder in Texas.

 But it will still often be repeated... but you can get more time for......

[tvc184]

7 minutes ago, Realville said:

I never said private citizens could get warrants but if some else wants to invade your privacy on your own property I would think THEY would need to get some kind of warrant. We’ll just goes to show there needs to be more reform own some the ridiculous laws. Thanks for the info.

OK but on the previous page you mentioned if someone wants to use a drone and would they need a warrant. Warrants are only issued  to law-enforcement. I’ve never seen people use the term someone for law-enforcement but if that’s what you meant OK.

if the police are conducting surveillance of your property with a drone then they do need a warrant just as they would with any other camera unless it is visible to the public.THEY do you need a warrant.

I am not sure what reform you need when the current law already requires a warrant to do what you are claiming. 

[tvc184]

11 minutes ago, Realville said:

I never said private citizens could get warrants but if some else wants to invade your privacy on your own property I would think THEY would need to get some kind of warrant. We’ll just goes to show there needs to be more reform own some the ridiculous laws. Thanks for the info.

Realizing that we all have our own opinions on what should be a crime and how much penalty it should carry, often when I see the term “ridiculous laws” I feel like that in most occasion the person really does not know what he/she is talking about. It is typically something that they “heard”....

[SmashMouth]

2 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

I agree.  Still Doesn’t make the law any more ridiculous compared to some the most heinous crimes....

may need to look into who is writing these laws and punishments and remove them from that duty.

THEN who would tell us how to live?

[WOSdrummer99]

@tvc184

So I understand the LE drones have to follow the same type of regulations for surveillance. But what rights do we have as for as protecting our privacy from the rest of the general public's drones? I would take someone flying too low around my house as a threat because I now know LE cant do that. I would feel that defending myself or my property would be justified? Maybe this is a better question for an attorney.

[SmashMouth]

46 minutes ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

@tvc184

So I understand the LE drones have to follow the same type of regulations for surveillance. But what rights do we have as for as protecting our privacy from the rest of the general public's drones? I would take someone flying too low around my house as a threat because I now know LE cant do that. I would feel that defending myself or my property would be justified? Maybe this is a better question for an attorney.

It’s still pretty unsafe as I’m sure @tvc184 and others would agree that shooting in the air at a moving target in a neighborhood is probably pretty unsafe. And when the crippled drone lands in the windshield of a moving car or up in MawMaw’s head while she’s walking her lap dog in the yard, your actions may surpass the goal you’re intending. 

[5GallonBucket]

2 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

THEN who would tell us how to live?

 God tells us how to live.

men write laws and punishments.....some are great and some not so great.

[SmashMouth]

1 minute ago, 5GallonBucket said:

 God tells us how to live.

men write laws and punishments.....some are great and some not so great.

Yes, I was being facetious. 

[5GallonBucket]

3 hours ago, tvc184 said:

That isn’t true..... but it is often repeated on various crimes. Like, the prisons are full of people smoking marijuana when in fact no one is in prison for that  

So let’s go with pedophile which really isn’t a crime but a person sexually attracted to underage prepubescent children.  In Texas the age of consent to have sex is 17. We are criminally considered adults at 17. Even though it is legal to have sex with a 17-year-old, if you possess a nude picture of that same adult, it is up to 10 years in prison. That is for a single photograph of an adult.

Let’s say you are attracted to a 16-year-old girl who actually looks like an adult and is extremely well built.  That is not exactly pedophilia because even though the person is legally under age, she does not look like a child. So a 20 year old, even with consent, rubs on the girl through the clothes with no actual skin to skin contact.. it.carries up to 20 years. Just exposer to a child (even a 16 year old) with no contact is up to 10 years  

Sex with consent of a child under 17 (and not more than 3 years older) is up to 20. So boyfriend/girlfriend... it doesn’t matter  

If under 14 it is up to 99 years and it doesn’t matter any age difference  

So for a true pedophile., merely touching through the clothes is up to 20 years in prison and any kind of sex including just penetration with a finger for example, carries up to 99 years in prison which is equal to murder in Texas.

 But it will still often be repeated... but you can get more time for......

So those in bold are equal to or less than someone shooting a drone taking video or pictures of people or property.

 

[5GallonBucket]

3 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

Yes, I was being facetious. 

I figured when you put “then” in caps.

i was letting those know that think man s laws supersede God s.

[WOSdrummer99]

2 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

It’s still pretty unsafe as I’m sure @tvc184 and others would agree that shooting in the air at a moving target in a neighborhood is probably pretty unsafe. And when the crippled drone lands in the windshield of a moving car or up in MawMaw’s head while she’s walking her lap dog in the yard, your actions may surpass the goal you’re intending. 

Agreed. Personally, I would not jeopardize anyone's safety. Some who have acres of "pine tree fence" may be more likely though.

A coworker just told me about a radio frequency gun, kinda like a potato cannon. He said he has seen videos of them disabling drones. I'll try to find some on youtube later.

[Realville]

4 hours ago, tvc184 said:

Realizing that we all have our own opinions on what should be a crime and how much penalty it should carry, often when I see the term “ridiculous laws” I feel like that in most occasion the person really does not know what he/she is talking about. It is typically something that they “heard”....

Well obviously The First Step Act which was a bipartisan criminal justice bill signed by Trump in December of 2018 felt there were some ridiculous laws on the books are it wouldn’t have passed. That’s not something I heard, that’s a fact. But if you want to have the opinion that you should get 25 years in prison for shooting down a little drone fine, I still find it ridiculous. 

[tvc184]

4 hours ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

@tvc184

So I understand the LE drones have to follow the same type of regulations for surveillance. But what rights do we have as for as protecting our privacy from the rest of the general public's drones? I would take someone flying too low around my house as a threat because I now know LE cant do that. I would feel that defending myself or my property would be justified? Maybe this is a better question for an attorney.

An attorney will know no more than reading the law. They have no magical insight.

 The public has the same restrictions (even More really) and can have criminal and civil cases against them. Any unauthorized photograph on a drone will allow the victim to sue for up to $5,000 per photo.

 You can go to Texas Government Code Chapter 423. It is an entire chapter on drone use and restrictions. 
 

 

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

So those in bold are equal to or less than someone shooting a drone taking video or pictures of people or property.

 

Yes but when most people say pedophile they are talking child molesting. Even touching a consenting 16 year old through the clothes carries the same penalty. Most people would not  consider groping your girlfriend outside of the clothes as a pedophile yet it can land a person in jail for a long time and a life time as a sex offender. That was just as an example. 

 What most people think of is having sexual contact with a small child (even without person to person sex) and that is equal to the murder of an adult.

 You can spin it any way you wish. 

[SmashMouth]

So...what if you use a drone to perform pedophilic acts and someone shoots your 2 year old goat? Does that make it worse?

[tvc184]

2 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

So...what if you use a drone to perform pedophilic acts and someone shoots your 2 year old goat? Does that make it worse?

It is for the goat...

[WOSdrummer99]

3 hours ago, tvc184 said:

You can go to Texas Government Code Chapter 423. It is an entire chapter on drone use and restrictions. 

 Thanks for the info.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Sec. 423.0046. This is particularly interesting concerning sports stadiums. It seems legal to fly if less than 30,000 capacity and over 400 ft. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no lawyer.

[tvc184]

3 hours ago, WOSdrummer99 said:

 Thanks for the info.

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Sec. 423.0046. This is particularly interesting concerning sports stadiums. It seems legal to fly if less than 30,000 capacity and over 400 ft. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no lawyer.

You don’t need to be a lawyer to read the law. Mostly you just have to watch for “and” and “or”. When I teach that at LIT I call those the two biggest words in a law.

You have to watch out because some of it is state law but much of it is federal law. For example this law says you have to fly more than 400 feet above the ground to comply with state law however a federal law prohibits flight over 400 feet. Also federal law prohibits flight above people. Basically you could almost not fly over a stadium without flying over people. As it says in that law, if you were doing it with consent of the people running to Stadium then it is OK. Mostly if you were a commercial pilot and you’re contracted by the management, you can fly over a sporting event..... as Long as you don’t fly over a person other than a person affiliated with the drone operation.

You can get waivers from the FAA for much of what would otherwise  be violations such as flying at night. You have to apply for the waiver that goes through Washington DC l. It’s not really a form. You have to explain how you’ll mitigate the danger to the public for each potential action that could happen. I have applied for and gotten two waivers from the FAA for the police department. I can fly drones for them at night and I can fly them in some limited airspace near the Jack Brooks airport.

There are other things that may be coming soon such as a device similar to a transponder on an airplane that identifies the drone when in flight. It is also being suggested of lifting some of the night flight prohibitions as long as certain conditions are met and flight over people as long as they have a safety device such as a parachute that deploys if the drone is disabled. 

[THE DUDE]

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

You don’t need to be a lawyer to read the law. Mostly you just have to watch for “and” and “or”. When I teach that at LIT I call those the two biggest words in a law.

You have to watch out because some of it is state law but much of it is federal law. For example this law says you have to fly more than 400 feet above the ground to comply with state law however a federal law prohibits flight over 400 feet. Also federal law prohibits flight above people. Basically you could almost not fly over a stadium without flying over people. As it says in that law, if you were doing it with consent of the people running to Stadium then it is OK. Mostly if you were a commercial pilot and you’re contracted by the management, you can fly over a sporting event..... as Long as you don’t fly over a person other than a person affiliated with the drone operation.

You can get waivers from the FAA for much of what would otherwise  be violations such as flying at night. You have to apply for the waiver that goes through Washington DC l. It’s not really a form. You have to explain how you’ll mitigate the danger to the public for each potential action that could happen. I have applied for and gotten two waivers from the FAA for the police department. I can fly drones for them at night and I can fly them in some limited airspace near the Jack Brooks airport.

There are other things that may be coming soon such as a device similar to a transponder on an airplane that identifies the drone when in flight. It is also being suggested of lifting some of the night flight prohibitions as long as certain conditions are met and flight over people as long as they have a safety device such as a parachute that deploys if the drone is disabled. 

so is this drone flight illegal? i have seen other photos from this flight where it was over the stadium

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up