Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Appeals court strikes down FAA drone registration rule

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Now all we need is for legislature to pass a law that makes it LEGAL to shoot them out of the sky when they are flying above your house. That'll show em who's boss.

    Comment


      #47
      I'm always for fellow Americans calling for more government regulations...

      Comment


        #48
        Originally posted by tvc184 View Post
        I never said that and have not mentioned airspace. This ruling was on the authority to require registration and sets fees for such registration.

        Only a congress (state/federal), county government or city government can make laws, period. Non-elected people have absolutely no authority to decide when and where to make laws.

        However.....

        One of those government bodies can give a commission/administration/council/whatever the authority to make rules, by law. In other words the elected officials have to pass a law that says something to the effect, "you have the authority to set prices of fishing licenses" or "You have the authority to set rules for vehicle inspections or "You have the authority to regulate airspace". I think one of those elected government bodies absolutely has the authority to grant such power.

        So yes, the FAA has authority where given, by the US Congress. The FAA can control airspace and does so. This is about registration.

        In this case the US Congress specifically said that the FAA does not have that authority. I quoted the law above.

        This is a quote from the court ruling:

        "In short, the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act provides that the FAA “may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft,” yet the FAA’s 2015 Registration Rule is a “rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft.” Statutory interpretation does not get much simpler."



        I have a hard time finding a valid argument against the Court's statement.

        The appeals court did not throw out laws for causing danger due to aircraft operations. Those rules are still in effect.

        The appeals court did mention some FAA local rules such as a ban on drones around DC. They did not rule on that issue which may or may not be valid. Since the petitioner did not file that appeal in a timely manner it was not ruled on.
        To me having to register a private aircraft for recreational flying, model airplane or drone is all the same.

        Once it's registered or, licensed, that's only the beginning. It juts gets more and more restricted until it's difficult to maintain compliance or until you just can't afford it. Look at recreational aircraft and everything they deal with. The next costly rules go into effect January 2020.

        The drone guys dodged a bullet this go round.

        Comment


          #49
          Originally posted by IowaHunter View Post
          Are you already answering your question?
          I guess I could've worded it better, but I haven't answered my own question.

          The "property" I was referring to is restricted - sensitive municipality property. We recently had a drone flying over this area. It could be just a curious recreational drone owner wanting to know what is beyond the fence. But there's also the possibility that it could be used for scouting a potential target. FYI, failure of this structure could result in loss of life and property for thousands.

          Its my understanding that restricting airspace is separate issue from restricting property. Is this correct?

          Comment

          Working...
          X