Hopefully I am not inadvertently spamming our forum members.  I found an article about very poor behavior here in the United States:

FAA reportedly hunts pilot of rule-violating Bengals drone video - DroneDJ

Notable quote:  “A lot of us go through a lot… (l)earn the rules, follow guidelines, get certified,” lamented Indy Aerial Drone Photography LLC in a comment. “You are definitely one of the reasons rules will get stricter, and (you’re) hurting the hobbyists the most. I don’t know anyone that flies that will approve of this.”


My fear is exactly that, this behavior will encourage regulators to formulate regulations that are more restrictive.

Link no good here

JayOhio Posted at 1-20 13:52
Link no good here

Well that stinks.  I'm trying something different:  https://dronedj.com/2022/01/19/f ... engals-drone-video/

Hopefully that's an improvement.

JayOhio Posted at 1-20 13:52
Link no good here

I edited my original post, I think it's working now.

yup works now and it doesn't surprise me.

Charles Adams Posted at 1-20 13:55
I edited my original post, I think it's working now.

Yep, it's working. Thanks.I hope they throw the book at him!!!

Perhaps they will mandate the reduction of the transmit power to CE levels to limit range :-)

I believe breaking a TFR is still 1 year in prison and 100K fine...

The video's poster has closed the comments on the video, not many were supportive and he has apparenly done something with his instagram too.

I think there is another message that can be drawn from this, many of the negative comments came from drone fliers and show that not all of us are.........

I normally am not critical of others flight choices, though I am a vocal proponent of following the regulations.  This was ridiculous.  I hope that in this case they can identify and prosecute him and prove that the current regulations we have are sufficient.

NGC Posted at 1-20 14:15
I think considering the video is publicly posted, other videos of his have his face in them, and they likely have his IP address- they already know who he is. Go to his channel and see his cop video. That’s also not going to win him any points when they prosecute him.

A good example of how (NOT) to make friends and influence people!  

NGC Posted at 1-20 14:15
Go to his channel and see his cop video.

the cop video has been deleted or was last time I looked it disappeared yesterday apparently, there were a number of commentsin the bengal's video about the cop videoand about its deletion.

My fear is exactly that, this behavior will encourage regulators to formulate regulations that are more restrictive.
That's not what happens when people break laws.

Labroides Posted at 1-20 14:55
My fear is exactly that, this behavior will encourage regulators to formulate regulations that are more restrictive.
That's not what happens when people break laws.

Maybe you need to look at Australia's history from the last ten to twenty years.

Labroides Posted at 1-20 14:55
My fear is exactly that, this behavior will encourage regulators to formulate regulations that are more restrictive.
That's not what happens when people break laws.

I have a different opinion and different experience.  Regulators love to regulate, rule makers love to make rules.  There are numerous examples here in the U.S. (that I won't go into because I want to keep politics out of my conversation) where a law is broken, and proposals are made for additional regulations.

Thank you for sharing.  Yes, this "pilot" is nothing more than an impulsive child and should be sent to time-out.  If he is an adult, his time-out can be jail.

Charles Adams Posted at 1-20 15:04
I have a different opinion and different experience.  Regulators love to regulate, rule makers love to make rules.  There are numerous examples here in the U.S. (that I won't go into because I want to keep politics out of my conversation) where a law is broken, and proposals are made for additional regulations.

yes people continue to speed on the highway and they get faster and faster.  you know what happens?  they raise the speed limit.

TonyPHX Posted at 1-20 15:10
Thank you for sharing.  Yes, this "pilot" is nothing more than an impulsive child and should be sent to time-out.  If he is an adult, his time-out can be jail.

disagree.  nobody should go to jail if nobody was hurt, nobody was injured, no criminal damage, and/or this isn't a repeat offense.   was it bad?  sure.  but prison?  cmon.

The Saint Posted at 1-20 15:15
yes people continue to speed on the highway and they get faster and faster.  you know what happens?  they raise the speed limit.

I understand the analogy, but I don't think that in this case the analogy holds.  If more people choose to violate the regulations regarding stadiums and sporting events, I have confidence that the reaction will not be to ease up on those regulations.

Charles Adams Posted at 1-20 15:04
I have a different opinion and different experience.  Regulators love to regulate, rule makers love to make rules.  There are numerous examples here in the U.S. (that I won't go into because I want to keep politics out of my conversation) where a law is broken, and proposals are made for additional regulations.

There are penalties that can be imnposed when someone breaks laws.
People break road rules all the time.
Do authorities make more restrictive traffic regulations every time people break the existing road rules?
No .. they impose the prescribed penalties for breaking those rules.
It's an irrational suggestion that the response to someone breaking existing regulations would be to make more restrictive regulations.

I don't know why drone forum members have this idea that more restrictive regulation is the solution when regulations are broken.
It makes no sense.

Mobilehomer Posted at 1-20 14:56
Maybe you need to look at Australia's history from the last ten to twenty years.

What are you aware of here in the last 10-20 yrs that I should look into?
I can't think of anything relevant.

PM me to save cluttering this thread.

Labroides Posted at 1-20 15:34
There are penalties that can be imnposed when someone breaks laws.
People break road rules all the time.
Do authorities make more restrictive traffic regulations every time people break the existing road rules?

There may be a misunderstanding.  I do not promote more regulations to solve this specific issue.  I'm against it.  But I still have the fear based on my experience with U.S. regulators and rule makers that others may try to over-regulate our hobby.  I agree that it is irrational to propose additional regulations upon regulations that already limit a behavior.  I despise laws that make something already "wrong" more "wrong".  And "despise" is a very diplomatic word for my feelings on the matter.

I think that it can be argued that my fear that this could lead to over-regulation is irrational.  But I hold a different opinion.

I think we are on the same page though (violently agreeing?).  I think neither of us would support additional regulations to limit or curtail this behavior.

Charles Adams Posted at 1-20 15:18
I understand the analogy, but I don't think that in this case the analogy holds.  If more people choose to violate the regulations regarding stadiums and sporting events, I have confidence that the reaction will not be to ease up on those regulations.

i think the regulations in the stadiums will never ease.

even if there are zero additional violations and no further issues, the rules will never relax.

not saying they should relax since inside the stadium is likely private property.  however, i disagree about around the outside of the stadium and way out into town.  i understand restrictions during game where there's airspace in use.

what i cannot agree with is jailing someone over this.  or fines into the thousands of dollars.  no drone has ever hurt anyone.  this is about distractions, interruptions, game and photo rights, etc which is all civil.  one day the nfl will be flying drones in the stadium and anyone who believes drones flown by the nfl are sooooo much better than drones flown by everyone else.  let's say in 2025, the nfl is flying their own drones all over the stadium, they have insurance, they have solid equipment, they have training; injuries and mishaps are nil.  but we will have people sitting in jail who did the same exact thing and didn't hurt anyone either but their "timing" was off.

are drone pilots in jail next to the photographers who took pictures on the sidelines, writers who penned bad stories about coaches, streakers who ran across the field and flashed the entire world, vendors who sold bad food and poisoned the entire bench?  no!  because those things are ok compared to flying a gd drone.  photographers, writes, vendors....they don't accept jail time for actions that don't rise to a certain level.  imagine paying a $50,000 for violating vlos and next year, faa decides vlos is ok.  do you get your $50k back?  why go to federal prison, let's send the first time offender to state prison.

if you fly a drone and you scare people or you hurt someone or you destroy property, you might end up in jail....agreed.  interrupting a game, grabbing unauthorized photos, etc. = small fine.  violating airspace rules = medium fine.  everything should be reasonable and measured against anything else bad that happens in the world.  but i don't make the rules.

so is this guy on the fbi most wanted list?  /s

i've never heard of any hobby or group of hobbyists who are happy to accept super inflated fines and possible jail time as the drone pilot.  i keep hearing about the importance due to "safety" but i didn't see anything unsafe in that video that rose to the level of prison.

The Saint Posted at 1-20 15:46
i think the regulations in the stadiums will never ease.

even if there are zero additional violations and no further issues, the rules will never relax.

I think we mostly agree on the overall points, and minorly disagree on some details.

My wife has been hurt by a drone.  That drone is now named "Chewey", and Chewey is not allowed boating any more.  There is some debate as to the exact cause.

The Saint Posted at 1-20 15:18
disagree.  nobody should go to jail if nobody was hurt, nobody was injured, no criminal damage, and/or this isn't a repeat offense.   was it bad?  sure.  but prison?  cmon.

Jail.  Not prison.  Let the jerk cool his heels for a few days.

Why even put this garbage on here?

The Saint Posted at 1-20 15:18
disagree.  nobody should go to jail if nobody was hurt, nobody was injured, no criminal damage, and/or this isn't a repeat offense.   was it bad?  sure.  but prison?  cmon.

I believe you can go to jail for dangerous driving, you can also be put into a mental institution for being a danger to yourself. And I do think people have a responsibility to themselves and others.

Charles Adams Posted at 1-20 15:40
There may be a misunderstanding.  I do not promote more regulations to solve this specific issue.  I'm against it.  But I still have the fear based on my experience with U.S. regulators and rule makers that others may try to over-regulate our hobby.  I agree that it is irrational to propose additional regulations upon regulations that already limit a behavior.  I despise laws that make something already "wrong" more "wrong".  And "despise" is a very diplomatic word for my feelings on the matter.

I think that it can be argued that my fear that this could lead to over-regulation is irrational.  But I hold a different opinion.

I very much agree with labroids , rules are set and agreed before the game starts and if 90% of people abide by the rules they will be seen as a huge success. For the 10% who choose to break the rules there will also be punishments set out for them before the games begin. If a rule was putting people or property in danger, then that when you might see a change. Why continually punish the 90% when you could easily increase the punishment for the 10% as they will for repeat offences. The likelihood of changing the rules is more likely to increase the percentage who break them .

If on the other hand more than 50% break the rules , thats when rules might change.

hallmark007 Posted at 1-21 02:24
I very much agree with labroids , rules are set and agreed before the game starts and if 90% of people abide by the rules they will be seen as a huge success. For the 10% who choose to break the rules there will also be punishments set out for them before the games begin. If a rule was putting people or property in danger, then that when you might see a change. Why continually punish the 90% when you could easily increase the punishment for the 10% as they will for repeat offences. The likelihood of changing the rules is more likely to increase the percentage who break them .

If on the other hand more than 50% break the rules , thats when rules might change.

There are some FAA regulations I would like to see relaxed, and I am hoping that FAA doesn't add any more regulations to this hobby.

A question I ask myself:  Can this newsworthy event be used to help support an argument for de-regulation?  I don't see how this person's behavior helps me make my argument to de-regulate.

Or the converse question, does this newsworthy event help me to argue against more regulations?  Again, I don't see that this person helped me make that argument.

The Saint Posted at 1-20 15:46
i think the regulations in the stadiums will never ease.

even if there are zero additional violations and no further issues, the rules will never relax.

"no drone has ever hurt anyone"
I would agree that excessive levels of punishment are counter productive, but I have to stop you here. A decade ago you might have been correct, but people have now been injured by drones, due to incidents during overflight. A triathlete in Australia, a 5K spectator in Canada, a UK toddler (lost an eye), a woman at Seattle Pride and a cyclist in the Golden State Race Series...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_UAV-related_incidents

So yeah, I wish you were right, that nobody has been hurt, but it's no longer true. Let's hope we can keep the numbers very low.

Charles Adams Posted at 1-21 04:21
There are some FAA regulations I would like to see relaxed, and I am hoping that FAA doesn't add any more regulations to this hobby.

A question I ask myself:  Can this newsworthy event be used to help support an argument for de-regulation?  I don't see how this person's behavior helps me make my argument to de-regulate.

I think you should ask yourself “Is 90% of people complying with the rules a better starting point to relax some rules , than one predictable idiot who the rule makers know will always break the rules .

Rule makers are well aware that some will always break the rules no matter what.

Interesting story, thank you for sharing!

NGC Posted at 1-21 01:19
So if someone drives drunk but luckily no one was hurt- or if someone does something incredibly negligent and just by “chance” no one was hurt- no jail? That’s an interesting interpretation of how the how
the justice system should run. Thankfully you obviously aren’t involved in anything to do with law. Or logic, for that matter.

it's not about what i think, it is what actually happens.  if you are driving drunk and you don't crash your car or hurt anyone and you get arrested and taken to "jail", you will most likely never see a jail or prison sentence for your first offense.  i have no doubt there are a few people in society this does not apply to but for the most part....this happens a million times over and over.  and nobody changes the drunk driving laws to tighten it up or make it more restrictive to prevent it from happen.  even when some idiot is 100% drunk and crashes and kills a family of 4, yes he gets jail but the law doesn't change.  the general public simply aren't going to accept jail time for a high bac and "nothing else."  unfortunately, yes there has to be that something else.  that's what i am saying for drone pilots.  fly irresponsibly and pay the fines but $50k and jail time has to involve that "something else."  

hallmark007 Posted at 1-21 07:23
I think you should ask yourself “Is 90% of people complying with the rules a better starting point to relax some rules , than one predictable idiot who the rule makers know will always break the rules .

Rule makers are well aware that some will always break the rules no matter what.

I wish I had as much faith in rule makers

Here in the U.S. it is not uncommon for some to platform on "stop/prevent" even when it's unrealistic.

That's really a side topic not what I had intended to discuss in this thread.  Which is...

I'm not pleased with this individual's behavior (for what it's worth), I hope consequences are imposed that encourage better behavior and discourage this behavior.

Charles Adams Posted at 1-21 08:34
I wish I had as much faith in rule makers

Here in the U.S. it is not uncommon for some to platform on "stop/prevent" even when it's unrealistic.

The real problem here is public perception, while you know that this is a Maverick Idiot the 1%, the public perceives this as what we all do with our drones and it those people we need to have on our side. But clowns like this are the cause of all of us having the same reputation.

Charles Adams Posted at 1-21 08:34
I wish I had as much faith in rule makers

Here in the U.S. it is not uncommon for some to platform on "stop/prevent" even when it's unrealistic.

I'm not pleased with this individual's behavior (for what it's worth), I hope consequences are imposed that encourage better behavior and discourage this behavior.

Well said Charles, well said.