This is funny : Drones

So I take my daughter into the local police station this morning because she needs an annual police background check for teaching placements in University. Well it's taking longer than usual, OK it happens.
Well it turns out there was an old guy ahead of her ranting and raving about a drone that is flying around his apartment. The poor cop is telling him that it's checked out and it's a local real estate firm photographing the building and legal to do. The old guy would have nothing to do with that and apparently was Hilarious in his ranting about being spied on. I guess these damned things are getting popular. Best Buy has quite the assortment and some of those are serious money. I guess no toy is too expensive if you can afford it....LoL !

Time for some rules concerning the use of drones:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2...alls/22007615/

It's coming.

I own one, use it once in awhile for my photography. But the sad reality of the the human race and the "me" mentality so prevalent in society today. Ensures the majority won't think of "others" and respect their privacy, and crack downs are needed.

Saw something the other day, where flight crews fighting wildfires had to be grounded due to a drone trying to get footage.

Some states have already brought in legislation making camera mounts illegal. I expect more.

And for those using them commercially I hope/expect the laws tighten up and the cost (insurance and more) likewise go up.

Rather pathetic the paranoia some people have about these things, there are already alot of rules, some being very stupid, to get a descent picture of a person mine would have to be very close while those that would be used for spying you probably wouldn't spot.

The one I bought was less than $100 and is fun, others have much more expensive models.
http://www.oodmag.com/community/show...t-you-have-got

and for the suckers...
http://www.outdoorhub.com/news/2015/...hotgun-shells/

I use a drone for capturing some fishing scenes in northern lakes where I fish. It's a fun hobby. I live I the city and I wouldn't even dream of using it there. I have insurance and know all the regs. It's just not worth the hassle even in a park. It attracts people and then you are grounded. The drones will get tougher and tougher to use going forward because of entitled a holes ruining it for others. Not surprising. Cheers.

Down here - if one hovers over your yard we shoot it down - it's called target practice -

True mosquito but for less than 2g, a person can get a very capable one. For 4g and more you can mount high end camera's.

Less than the price of a tin can, motor and trailer.

It's only going to get worse if there aren't crackdowns. As flower john said, it's the "idiots" and those with the "me" mentality that are causing problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

True mosquito but for less than 2g, a person can get a very capable one. For 4g and more you can mount high end camera's.

Less than the price of a tin can, motor and trailer.

It's only going to get worse if there aren't crackdowns. As flower john said, it's the "idiots" and those with the "me" mentality that are causing problems.

---

Agreed, but there have been Remote piloted vehicles and radio controlled helicopters/airplanes for decades but not alot of legislation other than safety. It will be the ones like the jerk above and the odd idiot that will put idiot legislation in place, limits on professional use like you already mentioned and insurance requirements etc. are going to see towns ban selling, flying them (like bans on the sale of air rifles in Brampton...) etc. and more stupidity.

Simple no peeping legislation modified to include drones etc. and appropriate fines and loss of gear and having a public information on the laws would do what is needed ... BUT ...we will see if some common sense happens or not. Safety laws are a must and the police having the ability to call a temporary ban in an area for security, emergency and safety. In reality for the perv's there shouldn't be any other legislative difference from an idiot with a drone than an idiot with a cell phone.
http://www.bramptonguardian.com/news...y-of-waterloo/

I like the target practice option:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skeeter1

I like the target practice option:)

---

When I saw those stupid shells I thought I would love to see a range use them as a tow device for a target sock, it would be great for goose or duck practice, shoot the drone and you bought it + a fine of course.

Mosquito's were used as target tugs.

http://www.belgian-wings.be/Webpages/Navigator/Photos/MilltaryPics/post_ww2/De%20Havilland%20DH.98%20Mosquito%20T-TT.3/mosquito_t3_ma3.jpg

http://www.airsceneuk.org.uk/hangar/...a719/ta719.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoePa

Down here - if one hovers over your yard we shoot it down - it's called target practice -

---

I'm with you there JoePa...bang bang bang....reload...bang bang bang...LMAO

JBen did you not say that we have no right to our own image? What is the difference between driving around taking people pictures from a car or boat and from the air? Nobody owns the air but if you shoot down a drone you will soon find out who owns it, when the cops show up and YOU are charged. No I do not have one.

There was a guy in the USA who shot one down in his backyard and got into some trouble. Posted the follow up here because it gives a sense of the confusion on the issue when it comes to privacy. Cheers

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...-than-alleged/

In most cases the owner of a property does not have the mineral rights and a company can be digging gold or diamonds 100 feet under their house and there is no claim to compensation, claim to water rights to water adjacent their property too generally doesn't exist in Canada, so the same can probably be said of air rights too. Like a picture taken of a scene or landmark if the drone is high enough or has enough other things in the picture (like the google street view) the owner will likely have no claim and be accountable for any damage to a drone even if it is over his property. The real estate man taking pictures of the buildings and area had every right to do so for example and the guy at the police station or the guy that shot the one down in Kentucky are just out of luck and to paranoid or stupid to realize it.

It isn't just above and below the property too, I know a person who has a cottage up on the Bruce Peninsula and with the changing water levels the lawyers are making a mint on who owns what, public access rights etc. He said he has told them he wants nothing to do with it and was laughing that even though the property lines are defined the idiot beside the public access area is making a claim to property outside them and with the lower water levels people are using the public access and the area he considers his. Apparently some people use the bushes behind his house as a toilet so he has a good reason to complain but if the county just put up a porta potty at the end of the road it would take care of that issue but instead both sides are blowing tens of thousands on lawyers which I was told the fight had been on for over 5 years. Common sense isn't something that common anymore, sort of like the Liberals, spend $1B to study a $1M project. :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

JBen did you not say that we have no right to our own image? What is the difference between driving around taking people pictures from a car or boat and from the air? Nobody owns the air but if you shoot down a drone you will soon find out who owns it, when the cops show up and YOU are charged. No I do not have one.

---

"Pretty much" G. It's more complex than that, but that's the gist of it. The roots of that are copyright law. The moment I push the button, I own the rights to that image for 50 years plus 1 day after my death.

There are some laws with respect to what can/can't be taken. If I'm on private property I can be asked to stop. Many areas are doing that these days for security reasons. However if I'm 6 inches outside the property line I am within my rights. And the law protects me, the police can't ask me to delete the images or try to take them. Accost me, and it's "you" getting charged.

I always ask people if I can take images, many don't. To each their own.

Now, as a photographer, while I can take any images I want. I can run into hot water depending on how I use them.

Look at this way.
If your in your tin can, pitching docks for LM, and a cottage owner puts a deer slug into your tin can...whose in trouble???

That said, personally I see the needs for some crack downs. Largely aimed at limiting the pure hobbyist, thrill seekers. They are the ones that typically don't care about other people...these units can seriously hurt people, and yes invade privacy.......airspace and put planes at risk and more.

If you can stand outside my property lines and take pictures of my kids in our backyard pool, is that not the same as flying a drone over the backyard , 20 yards in the air for the same pics? Not arguing, just looking for some clarity as to where those blurred lines are.

No blurred line there, it "is" the same.

Difference being, if Im in a tree taking pics of your kids in your pool. You can see me, maybe somewhat politely ask me what the hell Im doing. If your kids are at the beach and I have my camera trained on smoking hot 15 yr old daughter………you could ask me what the hell Im doing…Maybe call the cops (they can't do much) but there'd be a report and radar checks to see if Im a registered offender and….

If Im half a click away and using a drone….or using it to fly by your daughters bedroom at midnight, or many other things….

So the difference is the ability to confront, who is taking your picture?

I don't know if confront is the term Id use but yes, that's one of them…speaking as a photographer and as a drone owner. I can literally if I want take an image of you anywhere. I don't need your permission. The exception to that is private property, and the property owner can just as they can say "no motorized vehicles"…say "no pictures". Since 911 many public spaces, but private property are doing just that.

I can display them on my website, Facebook, whatever. If though I sell the image, or the rights to it or use it for promotional purposes, without your permission, I can land in hot water. Now all that said, I don't. I ask and even when people are ok with me taking an image, if they aren't ok with it being on my site or FB…It doesn't end up there. But quite seriously if someone ever did come after me…It wouldn't go well for them, and they would be the ones in legal hot water.
*****

There was an incident, not quite sure but lets say 6-8 years ago, where a staff photographer for one of the papers was taking pictures of people at the Eaton Centre corner of Yonge/Dundas. He (or she) took an image of a Muslim. That person and her friends assaulted the photographer, (religious belief against images) and slapped him..Guess who got into trouble.

Basically think about what celebrities endure. I'm betting many here, who seem "riled" love the shots of female celebrities wearing next to nothing on beaches. In their pools....

Politicians say like Rob Ford I know many here were thrilled and titalated by all the images of him, drunk, embarrassing himself, smoking crack, driving, eating KFC……or sports players or a gazillion things.

Drones though are ripe for abuse and imo, their usage should be cracked down on.

What do think of those who would shoot your expensive pieces of equipment from the sky, because you are invading their privacy?

Well considering I wouldn't invade their privacy, or their quiet Sunday morning breakfast (they are noisy) . If I did happen to be flying one sort of nearby and someone did trash it.

They'd be in legal hot water.

No different Im sure if someone trashed Joes boat because he was pitching for bass under a dock. Right Joe ;)

Kidding aside.
Hopefully there are some changes. ANyone that uses one commercially, which here in Canada means earns 1 penny off anything. They have to register with transport Cda, have adequate liability insurance…Yes, some photogs have crashed them into brides heads, or other things/places…

Anyone that uses them recreationally, there isn't much that can be done. Think of it as a guy pitching a jig towards your boat or dock and invading your cottage space/tranquilty…would you trash their boat, punch them?

And because there are people who will abuse them..I see a day coming..

Even Cabelas sell the damned things !!!!
http://www.cabelas.com/product/3D-Ro...&ctb=SUBFEAT1a

Well I'll tell you something - if some drone comes flying over my property and keeps going I have no problem - if it stops and hovers over my place its coming down - realizing that the owner most likely have a monitor and camera he can see what is happening so I hid somewhere so he can't see me shooting - down comes the drone - I pick it up with a pair of gloves and take it for a ride - when and if the cops come I say nothing or admit to nothing - that's my 5th amendment right - I'm innocent until proven guilty - most people get in trouble with the law because they admit to something - it will be pretty hard to prove that I shot down the drone - besides maybe I didn't and someone else did it -

Then consider this - two objects can't occupy the same position in space at the same time - so who is to say that the drone owns a particular spot in space - my bullet has just as much right to be there - now if you say that the object who occupies that space first is owner than as some as it moves and happens to trespass the space my bullet is occupying a collision occurs - just so happens that the drone loses - simple physics -

Lovely an entire U.S neighborhood fire shots at a drone. Safety first ! Lol

That is a pound of cure ! Lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yellow dog

Lovely an entire U.S neighborhood fire shots at a drone. Safety first ! Lol

---

Baahh! Don't need the whole neighborhood. One decent shooter can handle it.:ninja:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

Baahh! Don't need the whole neighborhood. One decent shooter can handle it.:ninja:

---

It's best if a number of people shoot at it - that way they won't know you actually hit it - case closed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoePa

Then consider this - two objects can't occupy the same position in space at the same time - so who is to say that the drone owns a particular spot in space - my bullet has just as much right to be there - now if you say that the object who occupies that space first is owner than as some as it moves and happens to trespass the space my bullet is occupying a collision occurs - just so happens that the drone loses - simple physics -

---

Joe, this has to be right up there with Cliff Clavin's Buffalo theory! Bravo!!!! :D

Well Joe.

I figure with all the gun owners down there that are quick to defend their property. I wish youwell because I know who I'd put my money on.

http://m.ourwindsor.ca/news-story/57...res-up-youtube

Call this guy joe!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU

Some neat drone pictures.

http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/...src=SOC&dom=fb