FAA drone registry axed

Chris0nllyn

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
You may remember the FAA requiring people to register their drones right before Christmans 2015.

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals just struck that down.
https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/inter...20585258125004FBC13/$file/15-1495-1675918.pdf

All because the FAA is too dumb to know their own rules.
To begin, Taylor does not think that the FAA had the statutory authority to issue the Registration Rule and require him to register. Taylor is right. In 2012, Congress passed and President Obama signed the FAA Modernization and Reform Act. Section 336(a) of that Act states that the FAA “may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft.” Pub. L. No. 112–95, § 336(a), 126 Stat. 11, 77 (2012) (codified at 49 U.S.C. § 40101 note). The FAA’s 2015 Registration Rule, which applies to model aircraft, directly violates that clear statutory prohibition. We therefore grant Taylor’s petition and vacate the Registration Rule to the extent it applies to model aircraft.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Lurk

Lurk

Happy Creepy Ass Cracka
The Congressional prohibition was specifically written into the Act to stop the Obama regulators from moving forward with the registration requirements. Despite the language, the FAA regulators went forward with the regulatory plans.
 
Hijinx

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Lurk said:
The Congressional prohibition was specifically written into the Act to stop the Obama regulators from moving forward with the registration requirements. Despite the language, the FAA regulators went forward with the regulatory plans.
Click to expand...

The law didn't mean much in the Obama Administration.
 
Bonehead

Bonehead

Well-Known Member
In my opinion far too many of those damn things in the air. I saw a Youtube video of one firing a semi auto pistol. Anyone with 100$ can have one.
 
Bonehead

Bonehead

Well-Known Member
Gilligan said:
How about with a full auto weapon?..would that be better?

Muah ha ha haa...

[video=youtube;SNPJMk2fgJU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU[/video]
Click to expand...

That is exactly why they should not be in private hands. It won't be long before some jihadist uses this very method, or to deliver a small explosive device. Virtually undetectable in flight.
 
SamSpade

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
I've always been a little leery about the overuse of drones especially commercially.

After 9/11, we restricted the use of our skies over certain areas of the country - but - apparently gave the green light to *drones*, more or less.
A plane MIGHT carry a suicide bomber - but a drone carries no life at all and thus, zero risk of death for the perpetrator.
 
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Bonehead said:
That is exactly why they should not be in private hands. It won't be long before some jihadist uses this very method, or to deliver a small explosive device. Virtually undetectable in flight.
Click to expand...

You do realize that video is fake...right?
 
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Were it not for a drone, I wouldn't have this lovely picture of home...

St. George Island.jpg
 
Bonehead

Bonehead

Well-Known Member
Yeah I know they can be very useful. I know a farmer that uses them to determine fertilizer distribution on a large farm. There is the potential for misuse. I have seen a video with a semi auto pistol mounted on a drone with some sort or actuator, it was not fake.

I just don't think every Tom, Dick and Harry should be operating them.
 
Chris0nllyn

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Bonehead said:
Yeah I know they can be very useful. I know a farmer that uses them to determine fertilizer distribution on a large farm. There is the potential for misuse. I have seen a video with a semi auto pistol mounted on a drone with some sort or actuator, it was not fake.

I just don't think every Tom, Dick and Harry should be operating them.
Click to expand...

Sure there's always going to be someone who misuses something. Guns, drugs, cars, drones, etc.

I guess the question is, in a country founded on so-called "freedom" should we ban everything that has a potential for misuse?
 
Bonehead

Bonehead

Well-Known Member
No I am not suggesting a ban but to regulate them via the government but that is another slippery slope best left alone.

The freedom is "so called" for sure.
 
LightRoasted

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...

Bonehead said:
There is the potential for misuse.
Click to expand...

Such as the potential misuse of say, a .... hammer? a ..... baseball bat? a ...... pet rock? Geez, there is so much potential, what's a person or regulatory body to do? How about this simple concept, simpleton; If a person, harms the person or property of another, using anything with potentialitis, (just made up that word), that person gets charged with an appropriate crime? Using my simple method, anyone who wants to, can now carry a firearm, at anytime, anywhere, for any reason. But do something stupid, ie. threaten someone, shoot someone when not in done defense, etc., get charged with a crime. See how easy that is? Go ahead and take a moment to ponder this, it's ok.
 
Merlin99

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
Bonehead said:
No I am not suggesting a ban but to regulate them via the government but that is another slippery slope best left alone.

The freedom is "so called" for sure.
Click to expand...
Regulating them will work, no ones ever caused any harm with a regulated device.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top