Rumors are flying on Twitter and other social media sites that the drone operators’ worst nightmare has begun: arrests are being made, fines are being levied, and the FAA is enforcing laws against unregistered drones.
Actually, the FAA is probably not the entity out looking for lawbreakers at local schoolyards and parks. Instead, the FAA has requested the assistance of local law enforcement to crack down on drone violations, a move which could make drone operation more dependent upon the amount of time local police have on their hands and their general attitude towards drones than on federal regulations.
The FAA has issued drone enforcement guidance to every police department in the country. The 14-page Law Enforcement Guidance for Suspected Unauthorized UAV Operations is accompanied by a shorter FAQ and a handy pocket-sized reference card, just to ensure that every policeman in the country is clear: an unsafe or unregistered drone is illegal, you can demand registration papers at any time, and – there is a whole page in the document dedicated to this – drones are illegal at Disney. In case you were wondering.
The FAA guidance to law enforcement officers suggests that any drone operated in restricted areas, in a way that endangers others, or in a “careless or reckless manner” should be subject to investigation. This last is broad; anyone who has flown a new drone for the first time knows that “reckless” and “beginner” might often be the same thing, despite an operator’s best intentions. The guidance also informs law enforcement that registration numbers must be visible on all drones subject to the registration rules; leaving it open for law enforcement to question operators following all other rules but without a visible number.
Local law enforcement is meant only to document an instance of a drone violation before handing it over to the FAA; the guidelines are clear in suggesting that efforts center around identification of operators, interviews, and evidence collection. In a seemingly half-hearted and decidedly weak attempt to prevent enthusiastic police from going overboard on enforcing an illegal Christmas gift, the guidance discourages actual strip searches and handcuffs:
….other law enforcement processes, such as arrest and detention or non-consensual searches almost always fall outside of the allowable methods to pursue administrative enforcement actions by the FAA unless they are truly a by-product of a state criminal investigation. We do not mean to discourage use of these methods and procedures where there is an independent basis for them under state or local law. We simply wish to emphasize that work products intended for FAA use generally should involve conventional administrative measures such as witness interviews, “stop and talk” sessions with suspected violators, consensual examination of vehicles and equipment, and other methods that do not involve court orders or the potential use of force by law enforcement personnel.
Despite efforts to make the roles and responsibilities clear and to take ultimate control of drone issues, the FAA has been unable to establish total authority. While they are responsible for drone registration, a drone that causes damage or injury may very well be in violation of state or local regulations, and then all bets are off as to the fines and penalties that can be enforced.
While local law enforcement and the public are educated on the details of drone regulations, and the states and the FAA duke it out on who makes the rules, operators may be well-advised to keep their registrations handy and make sure they are flying in locally approved areas.
Miriam McNabb is the Editor-in-Chief of DRONELIFE and CEO of JobForDrones, a professional drone services marketplace, and a fascinated observer of the emerging drone industry and the regulatory environment for drones. Miriam has penned over 3,000 articles focused on the commercial drone space and is an international speaker and recognized figure in the industry. Miriam has a degree from the University of Chicago and over 20 years of experience in high tech sales and marketing for new technologies.
For drone industry consulting or writing, Email Miriam.
TWITTER:@spaldingbarker
Subscribe to DroneLife here.
It’s the old story of a few that spoil it for the rest – with that said, I have had a few close-calls while flying a small airplane during aerial photography flights. The other day, at 3500 feet, a drone travelling in the opposite direction passed just under my aircraft less than 100 feet below. I estimate our closure rate was in excess of 200 miles per hour. Some yahoo was responsible and probably having fun but as a commercial pilot, I take this as justification for registration and the requirement for mandated training and licensing before someone is killed. I am all for the drone technology and the excitement it’s generating but as long as there are those that operate these things carelessly, I will support the FAA in its’ effort to keep this technology in check.
“In check” I agree with your entire post minus these two words. The government has had years if not a decade to foresee the rise of the drones and to simply throw a guy in jail is not a deterrent to an adolescent it is practically an encouragement to the malicious use drones can perform. The government needs to get off its self righteous Heinz and determine laws that are fair to all. Not just pilots, not just passengers or even paragliders or downhill skiers. The government has sat on its duff far too long and now is trying to catch up to save face.
Laws that are fair, logical , and do not stifle or impede the industry that which is drones. If you are a pilot and you fly into an unsafe area then you are partly to blame. You should have stayed on the ground if unsafe. Is it fair for the government to keep aircraft industry in check with mesmerizing rules around drone parks which WILL come? That is what I mean the rules are changing as fast as the skies are filling and well constructed legislation needs to be addressed NOW. Meaningful fair laws not poorly thought out stop gap measures that are clearly invoked out of desperation. Laws that are fair to all. Throwing some 12 year old farm boy in jail for flying his new Christmas present above 400 feet in a farmers field is over reaching and impractical not to mention sheer lunacy. Yet that is exactly how this new drone law intends to proceed. UNACCEPTABLE.
I seriously doubt your claims Randy. Most common drone transmitters have range of less than half a mile at most! Visible line of sight is lost then also so I think that FPV or GPS was being used and most likely holding a steady altitude and attitude. this is if said drone was actually a drone and you were not mistaken at 200mph~ I am sure as a fellow pilot you are aware that in the last two years over 11,000 bird strikes on aircraft have occurred totaling millions of dollars of actual aircraft damage and loss of life.
BIRDS, NOT DRONES pose more of a viable threat to you flying at that altitude. I think people need to think long and hard about that before they get all up in arms against drones.
Maybe they can cry for better regulation of wildlife and current DNR practices in the areas most affected by bird strikes.
Food for thought…
Fly a decal or possibly risk a cavity search? Reminds me of a movie called The Matrix. Social freedoms are consistently eroded in a nanny state to where the “humans” for all intents and purposes are the robots not the drones!
Yet this is clearly what the FAA is invoking. First it was an innocuous $5 registration which appeared to be nothing more than a hidden tax. Wow when social freedoms are simply erased like this the natural reaction is justified, what is the hidden agenda? …very disturbing.