Annoyed fisherman hooks drone flying over pier (VIDEO)

Should be illegal to fly them over any crowded public place. Last year at the motherlode roundup parade (one of the biggest parades in the state). There was a guy across the street from us flying his over the thousands of people packed on the sidewalks. Everyone thought it was great until it dropped out of the sky from 60' and missed to young 6-7 year old girls by only a couple inches. After seeing how dangerous they can be I don't want them anywhere around me.

that goes for everything. Can't base it on 1 incident. that's like telling dog owners hey i don't want your dogs near me because I had a previous bad encounter with dogs and they are dangerous.

Or like saying car's are dangerous, they shouldn't be on the road (if you are a bike rider, you know what I mean)

Should be illegal to fly them over any crowded public place. Last year at the motherlode roundup parade (one of the biggest parades in the state). There was a guy across the street from us flying his over the thousands of people packed on the sidewalks. Everyone thought it was great until it dropped out of the sky from 60' and missed to young 6-7 year old girls by only a couple inches. After seeing how dangerous they can be I don't want them anywhere around me.

that goes for everything. Can't base it on 1 incident. that's like telling dog owners hey i don't want your dogs near me because I had a previous bad encounter with dogs and they are dangerous.

Or like saying car's are dangerous, they shouldn't be on the road (if you are a bike rider, you know what I mean)

Or like saying cyclists are endangering themselves by riding next to vehicles......and they shouldn't be on the road 

I hope this doesn't turn into a car vs bike thread jack[emoji33]

Meh or like saying don't ride a bike on the freeway or don't take a dangerous dog to a crowded public place.

Someone in my neighborhood has one and they've been flying it over my backyard. It's weird. I don't want some random weirdo taking video of my family playing in the backyard. I wouldn't shoot it down or cast a lure at it, but I did try to follow it home once, to ask the operator what he's doing.

Cars, bikes, dogs etc. being earth bound  are more avoidable. You can bike ride on the road or not, cross the street if you fear dogs. change lanes in a car but you cannot avoid feeling the effects of a drone over your head especially if it has video running. It is an invasion of personal space, sometimes in the case of law enforcement, quite necessary but not needed or wanted from people entertaining their self with a new tech toy. As far as photographing the wilderness....pack a camera in, make the physical effort. Ansel Adams seemed to manage it. Haven't seen much drone footage even approach the quality of his work.

Since we're on the subject

but I did try to follow it home once, to ask the operator what he's doing.

Drop it like a bad habit THEN ask what their intentions were when they come to retrieve it.

When you make the effort to find a bit of solitude be it on the water or beach or a hike on and off trail do you want an aerial intruder over head observing and recording your every move?  Unrestricted technology strangles the privacy we cherish.

.lol, so if I find bliss in finding and photographing remote or secluded landscape it's somehow less important than you hiking that same trail?

yup.  That's why they are banned in national parks, national wildlife refuges, wilderness areas and many other places.

Yeah, all that means is that the Federal park rangers drew a line in the sand as a knee jerk reaction to a few cited incidents. 

It's just a classic user v user battle where everyone is more important than the next guy. 

It is more like how much interference with another user's quiet peaceful enjoyment of the area are we going to tolerate?  Nobody goes to be ina secluded spot or place of exceptional natural beauty to see drones buzzing about, and they detract from the experience of everyone save the guy using the drone.  Its inconsiderate at a minimum.

It wasn't knee jerk when the entire park service banned them.  It was the great majority of park users who don't want the drones there.  There is a big difference between a public pier like in the original post in this thread, where we don't see anything in the video that would justify knocking it out of the sky or that it was otherwise being controlled inappropriately (although we don't know what happened before the video clip on youtube and its entirely possible that they drone was interfering with lawful fishing), and using a drone in a park or wilderness setting. 

If you are being inconsiderate when you use your drone, a couple things happen.  First, someone might break your toy.  Second, you are making it worse for everyone else who uses drones in a courteous and respectful manner. 

I remember seeing a dude with a remote controlled boat on the Russian river a long time ago at memorial beach. Swimmers and waders on one side. Dude with the boat on the other. He would send that boat flying at someone then turn at the last second. Over and over to different people. He finally split when people got in their cars to hunt his ass down. I would have paid to see that boat smashed and the dude get his ass kicked.

When you make the effort to find a bit of solitude be it on the water or beach or a hike on and off trail do you want an aerial intruder over head observing and recording your every move?  Unrestricted technology strangles the privacy we cherish.

.lol, so if I find bliss in finding and photographing remote or secluded landscape it's somehow less important than you hiking that same trail?

yup.  That's why they are banned in national parks, national wildlife refuges, wilderness areas and many other places.

Yeah, all that means is that the Federal park rangers drew a line in the sand as a knee jerk reaction to a few cited incidents. 

It's just a classic user v user battle where everyone is more important than the next guy. 

It is more like how much interference with another user's quiet peaceful enjoyment of the area are we going to tolerate?  Nobody goes to be ina secluded spot or place of exceptional natural beauty to see drones buzzing about, and they detract from the experience of everyone save the guy using the drone.  Its inconsiderate at a minimum.

Good question.  I don't own a drone nor do I intend on buying one but I'd say I'm pretty tolerant of them.  I don't mind them buzzing around but I'd have a problem with one hovering in my face, as I suppose most would.  How often is that really the case though, I'd imagine that most drone operators are not flying within feet of someone's dome.  It'd be unfair to assume that that would be normal behavior.

My question is, why is user 1's enjoyment any more important than drone guys?  I'm assuming both have tax dollars funneling into the park system, entry fees paying for upkeep and maintenance, why would one user have more of a right to use of the park than another?  Its like having an old man yelling at you to get off the lawn when its really everyone's lawn.

It wasn't knee jerk when the entire park service banned them.  It was the great majority of park users who don't want the drones there.  There is a big difference between a public pier like in the original post in this thread, where we don't see anything in the video that would justify knocking it out of the sky or that it was otherwise being controlled inappropriately (although we don't know what happened before the video clip on youtube and its entirely possible that they drone was interfering with lawful fishing), and using a drone in a park or wilderness setting. 

The entire park system is overseen by one agency, its a hot button issue, of course they would create a blanket policy across the entire system.  Everything I see, including the press release from the NPS, says its a temporary ban until permanent rules are established....and they cite safety concerns (but no actual incidents) and nuisance complaints (people that don't want others interrupting their tranquility).  You can call that what you want but its reactionary without a whole lot of cited evidence. 

I'm sure they will ban them.....thats what we as a society love to do.  Doesn't make it right though.

If you are being inconsiderate when you use your drone, a couple things happen.  First, someone might break your toy.  Second, you are making it worse for everyone else who uses drones in a courteous and respectful manner.

We can agree on this. 

Even in town, I would shoot it down if it was over my house and I didnt know the operator. If I knew the operator, I would go have a talk and follow up with a stern note. The first time. Then shoot it down the second time, and if there was any whining, stomp the puddle n stomp it dry. Respect for others goes a long way, and blatant disregard for others is not cool. Taking video of folks on their property without consent is something I can't abide.
Now, if we could affix a 410  and chase down ducks, I might buy one!

Now, if we could affix a 410  and chase down ducks, I might buy one!

Hummm.... #itsbangtime?

Now, if we could affix a 410  and chase down ducks, I might buy one!

Hummm.... #itsbangtime?

Nope.

§251.9. Computer Assisted Remote Hunting.
(a) It is unlawful to take or assist in the taking of any bird or mammal in or from this state, by computer-assisted remote hunting.
(b) It is unlawful to establish or operate a computer-assisted remote hunting site for the purpose of taking any bird or mammal from or within this state.
(c) For the purposes of this section, "computer-assisted remote hunting" means the use of a computer or any other remotely controlled device, equipment, software, or technology, to remotely control the aiming or discharge of any weapon, including, but not limited to, any firearm, bow and arrow, spear, harpoon or any other weapon capable of killing or injuring any bird or mammal, for the purposes of taking any bird or mammal.
(d) For the purposes of this section, "computer-assisted remote hunting site" means any computer, internet site or web-based device or system, or other electronically operated site or system used to assist in the remote taking of any bird or mammal.

Maybe in the state they are making the video it is legal?  There ate at least 49 others