D
Dervish
Guest
Alright, this thread isn't meant to be a shit show, so I'm just going to preface this sand mention it's not about government or other officially used UAVs or other such drones for spying and military purposes. If you want to discuss the finer points on the next entry in the Pixar Cars franchise about a Predator drone that can only express his feelings through Hellfire missiles, feel free to make a thread.
So, this is about this rise of personal drones as a hobby and toy amongst the population and what your thoughts on drones are. For those of you who have been living in a Vault and have arisen to find the world isn't an irradiated wasteland full of bandits and Deathclaws, drones are little flying machines that are kind of like fancy remote controlled helicopters that often have cameras attached to them. In practice, they're pretty cool; I've seen some incredible videos and pictures taken with drones, such as this:
And honestly, they look like a lot of fun to fly around. Some even resemble the Millennium Falcon. You'd have to be dead inside not to love that! But a lot of people are taking issues with them because of rising privacy concerns, as in they're bringing in a whole new world of unprecedented legal and ethical issues when it comes to privacy rights. There's been some instances like this man in Kentucky who shot down a drone flying over his property that have ended up in court battles; the judge in this case ruled that the man had a right to do so, and that he had a reasonable concern about his personal privacy being invaded by the thing, while the drone's owner obviously would be pretty livid about having such an expensive piece of property so cavalierly destroyed when he was just having fun with the thing... which brings up the whole argument of if intent should matter.
Let me explain a bit by what I mean by intent. Does it matter if someone is just flying their drone for fun and isn't actively watching people with it but might be crossing property lines, or should there be some consideration given to how the drone was being used? After all, a lot of them have cameras, so the video should be about to be reviewed if it wasn't destroyed. It also begs to question; at what elevation does your property stop being your property? Is it 20 feet, as high as your house, the trees, all the way up to space? Airplanes cross people's properties all the time, because duh, but will something like a drone require new legislation as technology increases that these things can hover at high altitudes without being noticed but still manage to watch the ground with increasing clarity and magnification. Is this something that we should start creating preemtive legislation for, or do we even account for the fact that these things can be potentially abused as tools for peeping toms, private investigators, paparazzi, perverts, would be thieves, and other ne'er-do-wells that would be using it to observe people, their activities, and their properties? Do we nip this thing in the bud now at the expense of the countless people who are using them just for fun, benign purposes? It's a complicated issue that I would love to hear what you fine people think.
This is going to go on an a tangent for a moment, but please bear with me.
Now, as a firearms owner, I'm used to being on the wrong side of a lot of public debates and legal shenanigans for the fact that I own what are considered deadly weapons that some segments of the population like the RCMP and, not to generalize too much, left-leaning city residents whose primary knowledge and experience around firearms comes from the news or word of mouth about people getting shot and murdered, and many of those people believe that private firearm ownership should be outlawed because of the potential for misuse and abuse at the expense of the hundreds of thousands of law abiding gun owners who have never had a run in with the law (fun fact; a couple years ago, a rifle I did own was reclassified as prohibited from non-restricted literally overnight by the RCMP, effectively making me a criminal for owning it. The rifle simply looks like an AK-47 while functioning like any other semi-automatic sporting rifle that is non-restricted. It was simply banned for being scary looking. The issue has since been resolved with new legislation, and I get to keep a treasured piece of property). While I certainly am opposed to such view points, it brings an interesting parallel to this topic. Would something like wide restrictions or even permits be something that should be considered for drone use, or is this something that should be handled on a case by case basis? At what point do we decide to try and head off their potential misuse over dealing with criminal uses individually? Like a gun, it has the potential to be used negligently in the wrong hands, so do we treat all drones the same way, or do we set up some framework where all kinds of people can enjoy it but with restrictions on use, or do we just adopt a laissez-faire attitude and just let people do whatever they want with them?
It's an interesting topic that's so new and relevant that I never really stopped to think about it recently, and I'm sure a lot of you guys never paid them much mind either. It's really one of those times in history where technology is surpassing our existing legal framework to properly account for something like this, and it's compelling stuff.
So feel free to chip in, and please keep it respectful; you might not agree with 420xXxBlazeitxXx's post about his god-given right to ogle women sunbathing topless with his drone, and while you are certainly welcome to address why you have problems with that, don't be aggressive about it.
I shouldn't have to say it, but in light of how general chat discussions usually go...
So, this is about this rise of personal drones as a hobby and toy amongst the population and what your thoughts on drones are. For those of you who have been living in a Vault and have arisen to find the world isn't an irradiated wasteland full of bandits and Deathclaws, drones are little flying machines that are kind of like fancy remote controlled helicopters that often have cameras attached to them. In practice, they're pretty cool; I've seen some incredible videos and pictures taken with drones, such as this:
And honestly, they look like a lot of fun to fly around. Some even resemble the Millennium Falcon. You'd have to be dead inside not to love that! But a lot of people are taking issues with them because of rising privacy concerns, as in they're bringing in a whole new world of unprecedented legal and ethical issues when it comes to privacy rights. There's been some instances like this man in Kentucky who shot down a drone flying over his property that have ended up in court battles; the judge in this case ruled that the man had a right to do so, and that he had a reasonable concern about his personal privacy being invaded by the thing, while the drone's owner obviously would be pretty livid about having such an expensive piece of property so cavalierly destroyed when he was just having fun with the thing... which brings up the whole argument of if intent should matter.
Let me explain a bit by what I mean by intent. Does it matter if someone is just flying their drone for fun and isn't actively watching people with it but might be crossing property lines, or should there be some consideration given to how the drone was being used? After all, a lot of them have cameras, so the video should be about to be reviewed if it wasn't destroyed. It also begs to question; at what elevation does your property stop being your property? Is it 20 feet, as high as your house, the trees, all the way up to space? Airplanes cross people's properties all the time, because duh, but will something like a drone require new legislation as technology increases that these things can hover at high altitudes without being noticed but still manage to watch the ground with increasing clarity and magnification. Is this something that we should start creating preemtive legislation for, or do we even account for the fact that these things can be potentially abused as tools for peeping toms, private investigators, paparazzi, perverts, would be thieves, and other ne'er-do-wells that would be using it to observe people, their activities, and their properties? Do we nip this thing in the bud now at the expense of the countless people who are using them just for fun, benign purposes? It's a complicated issue that I would love to hear what you fine people think.
This is going to go on an a tangent for a moment, but please bear with me.
Now, as a firearms owner, I'm used to being on the wrong side of a lot of public debates and legal shenanigans for the fact that I own what are considered deadly weapons that some segments of the population like the RCMP and, not to generalize too much, left-leaning city residents whose primary knowledge and experience around firearms comes from the news or word of mouth about people getting shot and murdered, and many of those people believe that private firearm ownership should be outlawed because of the potential for misuse and abuse at the expense of the hundreds of thousands of law abiding gun owners who have never had a run in with the law (fun fact; a couple years ago, a rifle I did own was reclassified as prohibited from non-restricted literally overnight by the RCMP, effectively making me a criminal for owning it. The rifle simply looks like an AK-47 while functioning like any other semi-automatic sporting rifle that is non-restricted. It was simply banned for being scary looking. The issue has since been resolved with new legislation, and I get to keep a treasured piece of property). While I certainly am opposed to such view points, it brings an interesting parallel to this topic. Would something like wide restrictions or even permits be something that should be considered for drone use, or is this something that should be handled on a case by case basis? At what point do we decide to try and head off their potential misuse over dealing with criminal uses individually? Like a gun, it has the potential to be used negligently in the wrong hands, so do we treat all drones the same way, or do we set up some framework where all kinds of people can enjoy it but with restrictions on use, or do we just adopt a laissez-faire attitude and just let people do whatever they want with them?
It's an interesting topic that's so new and relevant that I never really stopped to think about it recently, and I'm sure a lot of you guys never paid them much mind either. It's really one of those times in history where technology is surpassing our existing legal framework to properly account for something like this, and it's compelling stuff.
So feel free to chip in, and please keep it respectful; you might not agree with 420xXxBlazeitxXx's post about his god-given right to ogle women sunbathing topless with his drone, and while you are certainly welcome to address why you have problems with that, don't be aggressive about it.
I shouldn't have to say it, but in light of how general chat discussions usually go...
