The FAA’s flight restriction for drones is an attempt to criminalize filming ICE
tomrod
I agree with the EFF here. Government operators must operate in the daylight.
nandomrumber
How do you tell the difference between a drone with a camera and a drone with a grenade.
You can still film ICE / CBP from the ground.
Is there an argument that you and a #? Amendment right to the skies?
loloquwowndueo
How do you tell a difference between a phone with a camera and a phone with a grenade.
Filming ICE is no longer allowed.
calmbonsai
You don't, but legal precedent errs on the side of transparency and anyone who's flying a drone (legally) in an urban environment in the U.S. already has FAA permitting.
badlucklottery
> You can still film ICE / CBP from the ground.
"How do you tell the difference between a protestor with a camera and a protestor with a grenade?"
Do you see how the assumption of extreme (and very unlikely) danger is bad excuse for violating people's rights?
random3
how can you tell the difference between anything and anything?
Terr_
Your comment reads like: "This blanket prohibition is justified, because any drone could potentially be dangerous or appear dangerous, and DHS deserves unique and special legal privileges 'cuz reasons."
Is that your intent? A more-charitable interpretation which is harder to see would be: "In addition to the first amendment, could the second amendment also be a factor in striking down this policy as unjustified?"
Jtsummers
> How do you tell the difference between a drone with a camera and a drone with a grenade.
Today, it makes as much sense to worry about this as it does for me to worry about a tsunami hitting my home at 7200' above sea level. It's not happening, worry about it and implement policies when people start using grenade-drones.
tomrod
I agree with the EFF here. Government operators must operate in the daylight.
nandomrumber
How do you tell the difference between a drone with a camera and a drone with a grenade.
You can still film ICE / CBP from the ground.
Is there an argument that you and a #? Amendment right to the skies?
loloquwowndueo
How do you tell a difference between a phone with a camera and a phone with a grenade.
Filming ICE is no longer allowed.
calmbonsai
You don't, but legal precedent errs on the side of transparency and anyone who's flying a drone (legally) in an urban environment in the U.S. already has FAA permitting.
badlucklottery
> You can still film ICE / CBP from the ground.
"How do you tell the difference between a protestor with a camera and a protestor with a grenade?"
Do you see how the assumption of extreme (and very unlikely) danger is bad excuse for violating people's rights?
random3
how can you tell the difference between anything and anything?
Terr_
Your comment reads like: "This blanket prohibition is justified, because any drone could potentially be dangerous or appear dangerous, and DHS deserves unique and special legal privileges 'cuz reasons."
Is that your intent? A more-charitable interpretation which is harder to see would be: "In addition to the first amendment, could the second amendment also be a factor in striking down this policy as unjustified?"
Jtsummers
> How do you tell the difference between a drone with a camera and a drone with a grenade.
Today, it makes as much sense to worry about this as it does for me to worry about a tsunami hitting my home at 7200' above sea level. It's not happening, worry about it and implement policies when people start using grenade-drones.
I agree with the EFF here. Government operators must operate in the daylight.
How do you tell the difference between a drone with a camera and a drone with a grenade.
You can still film ICE / CBP from the ground.
Is there an argument that you and a #? Amendment right to the skies?
How do you tell a difference between a phone with a camera and a phone with a grenade.
Filming ICE is no longer allowed.
You don't, but legal precedent errs on the side of transparency and anyone who's flying a drone (legally) in an urban environment in the U.S. already has FAA permitting.
> You can still film ICE / CBP from the ground.
"How do you tell the difference between a protestor with a camera and a protestor with a grenade?"
Do you see how the assumption of extreme (and very unlikely) danger is bad excuse for violating people's rights?
how can you tell the difference between anything and anything?
Your comment reads like: "This blanket prohibition is justified, because any drone could potentially be dangerous or appear dangerous, and DHS deserves unique and special legal privileges 'cuz reasons."
Is that your intent? A more-charitable interpretation which is harder to see would be: "In addition to the first amendment, could the second amendment also be a factor in striking down this policy as unjustified?"
> How do you tell the difference between a drone with a camera and a drone with a grenade.
Today, it makes as much sense to worry about this as it does for me to worry about a tsunami hitting my home at 7200' above sea level. It's not happening, worry about it and implement policies when people start using grenade-drones.
I agree with the EFF here. Government operators must operate in the daylight.
How do you tell the difference between a drone with a camera and a drone with a grenade.
You can still film ICE / CBP from the ground.
Is there an argument that you and a #? Amendment right to the skies?
How do you tell a difference between a phone with a camera and a phone with a grenade.
Filming ICE is no longer allowed.
You don't, but legal precedent errs on the side of transparency and anyone who's flying a drone (legally) in an urban environment in the U.S. already has FAA permitting.
> You can still film ICE / CBP from the ground.
"How do you tell the difference between a protestor with a camera and a protestor with a grenade?"
Do you see how the assumption of extreme (and very unlikely) danger is bad excuse for violating people's rights?
how can you tell the difference between anything and anything?
Your comment reads like: "This blanket prohibition is justified, because any drone could potentially be dangerous or appear dangerous, and DHS deserves unique and special legal privileges 'cuz reasons."
Is that your intent? A more-charitable interpretation which is harder to see would be: "In addition to the first amendment, could the second amendment also be a factor in striking down this policy as unjustified?"
> How do you tell the difference between a drone with a camera and a drone with a grenade.
Today, it makes as much sense to worry about this as it does for me to worry about a tsunami hitting my home at 7200' above sea level. It's not happening, worry about it and implement policies when people start using grenade-drones.