Thread

Vacate a drone restriction that criminalized recording immigration agents

96 points · 17 comments · hn_acker

TGower · 1790091717 · focus · HN ↗
The article doesn't mention the safety angle at all. It's reasonable to argue that even though the Ukraine conflict has popularized drones as weapons, given that we haven't had a major incident yet this temporary flight restriction was premature, but not mentioning it at all makes the bias pretty clear.
The TFR (which made it illegal to fly a drone within a bubble 1000 feet high and 3000 feet radius of a mobile asset) has been replaced by a NOTAM that basically says flying near them in a way that poses a credible safety or security threat means they can sieze or destroy your drone. I'd say this is the better resolution, and to me represents a "genuine change of heart" by the FAA, finding a way to serve the safety purpose of the TFR without overstepping.
1. petcat · 1790092462 · focus · HN ↗
  > not mentioning it at all makes the bias pretty clear
  Yes, the bias is assumed since they are the petitioners. It is not their responsibility to make the FAA's case, or even mention any aspect of it at all.
  The FAA will be the ones responsible for making their case before the court.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.