, Minnesota

, United States

Posted on
2020-02-20 17:14:10
“FPV is like any other thing that requires patience, dedication and respect. One cannot even take a bind and fly out to a field without first spending hours to learn enough to even buy and fly one. There are also cheap, safe and small drones available for most people to learn on. Anyone spending hundreds of dollars and hours upon hours to fly is not going to take the exercise lightly. We don’t require licensing for riding lawnmowers, lighting a fire or riding a bike on the street. This policy is driven primarily by ignorant, fearful people to help them feel safe and like their privacy is respected. Those same people are often entirely ignorant of the experience and it is also telling about their character and ethics if their first projection is how they would use it / could use it to spy on people, create safety risks. Educating people with inviting and accessible programs is the path, not restricting and licensing. Marijuana is a great example of failed national policy that creates consequences for people where none should exist. It absolutely does not help to implement rules that are contrary to common sense practice and individual rights. Also, Fpv drones are something special in the course of human history. It is literally a spiritual experience mankind has been talking about, creating art for, engineering, dreaming and philosophizing over for thousands of years. To enact restrictions on something that is fundamentally personal and religious may incite complication down the road for first amendment issues of freedom to practice religion if the regulatory burden is too high for someone to engage their practice. Not a joke either. Regulate and control the activity into the ground and the state will be brought to task on constitutional basis. And for good reason. The goals of those special interests pushing for control are not founded on the respect for the individual. They are rooted in corporate greed and fear among the ignorant. Also, we have fucking guns everywhere. We have very, very little accountability or control for these guns either with background checks or once it’s sold, operation. It is ABSOLUTELY ASININE to prioritize drones as a public health risk or safety threat when held in parallel with our outlook and behavior towards guns. And if that’s a question, then someone simply needs to design a drone with a gun built into the design principle and you’re going to have a substantial and well funded Supreme Court case on 2nd amendment rights as well. How much more control will be wrestled from the state over something like that? If a drone is principally built around a gun, and perhaps the control scheme even feels and looks like a gun (are Motion Pilot in Switzerland), then yea, you’re gonna have a ton of gun nuts fighting youths government over what could have been a non-issue to begin with. Maybe far out but definitely not. The core of it though is that this is bad policy, and not additive or helpful.”