Slashdot Mirror
Drone Hunters Lining Up and Paying Out In Colorado
coondoggie writes "What might have started out a whimsical protest against government surveillance tactics has morphed into more as a small town in Colorado has found itself overwhelmed with requests and cash for a unmanned aircraft hunting license that doesn't exist."
Yeah, not a real license. I don't care, I still want one.
a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
In Soviet Russia, drones shoot you!
[Uh, wait ... maybe not just in Soviet Russia ...]
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Are you listening? It seems your constituents may not be all that keen on having drones used on civilian populations.
Oh yeah, it's not an election year. So I guess not.
News at 11 - Bob Fink blew up the house of his best friend John Ackers today in Deer Trail after mistaking him for a CIA drone. John Ackers mistook Bob's missile as a terrorist attack and blew up Deer Trail's only Mosques in retaliation.
I think this may fit the definition of irony, that people, who just may eventually be hunted by drones, are trying to get licenses to hunt the drones, while the drones that hunt them, do not need any license, because the people have already given the government enough power to ensure both: that they eventually can be hunted by drones (and no license required) and that they can't actually get a license to protect themselves.
On the second thought, this is not irony, it's just oppression.
You can't handle the truth.
"Shooting at an unmanned aircraft could result in criminal or civil liability, just as would firing at a manned airplane." I thought manned airplanes flew at high altitude over my house because I WAS allowed to shoot at them. The trailer parks is getting to be a real drag.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
then sue the pants off of whomever decides that they have the fucking rights to shot my RC plane out of the air.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
A bunch of guys shooting up in the air in an uncontrolled manner.
I have never understood the hatred and mistrust placed on drones versus aircraft, fixed or rotary wing. It seems like a bunch of Luddites. Drones are cheaper, safer, and usually more capable at doing the task at hand than fixed wing or rotary wing aircraft at doing a job thats already been done for decades by law enforcement and the military. Also a drone, in the military at least, allows for a more calm and collected engagement of targets, reducing collateral damage and fratricide.
Am I the only one that did a double uber face palm after reading this?
Probably. I'm sure most of these people just want one for the collector value. Heck, If they were actually issuing documents I'd pay the $25 just to get one and show all my friends and co-workers.
no government entity is going to hand out licenses to hunt and destroy "GOVERNMENT PROPERTY"
Yes, because no one has ever obtained a hunting license and then legally hunted on federal or state owned game lands. Oh, wait, they have.
Obviously I was being facetious. I have a feeling that this is more of a protest for the majority of these people. I'm not sure what part of the nation you are referring to, as it appears that it's not just "that part". From TFA:
two weeks ago when the tally of personal checks made out to the town hit 983 [Deer Trails' own population is about 560] and $19,006. The checks came from all over the U.S.
Perhaps you've already huffed paint fumes one too many times to realize that there are citizens who aren't very happy about having drones used on the civilian population. You know, big brother, eye-in-the-sky and all. Maybe, just maybe some people believe this will draw a little more attention to the issue.
A license to hunt US Government property?
The license includes but is not limited to government property. Read the actual proposal.
Unmanned aerial vehicle. Below 1000 feet. Most people can't determine the altitude of a passing aircraft. The local airport gets calls from people all the time about pilots who are allegedly buzzing the city "too low", but radar shows they were quite legal (above 1000'). Some of these aircraft are ones like this, which is hard to tell is manned from a distance.
Thank goodness the law exempts "toy" vehicles, but includes manned aircraft that are "following" someone. Or looks like it has "weapons".
But you're right about stupidity. Stupid, thy name is Deer Trail.
Sorry, the law says the shooter must pay you the cost of the vehicle, that's all.
It's the kind of gag item they sell in truck stops next to the naked women mudflaps. Take a deep breath, dude.
I'm pretty sure an RC plane costs more than the shooter's pants, so he would technically be able to sue the pants off of the shooter and still get some money as well.
You forgot, "get off my lawn".
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
You cannot afford to have my pants removed!
The license, if it existed, would exempt you from being fined by the city for unlicensed shooting of a drone. The owner of the drones, particularly if the owner of the drones is the state or federal government, will not be so nice. As a joke, it's funny. People taking it seriously, believing it offers some legal protection, are delusional. It's like doing a search-and-seizure on your neighbor with a badge from a Cracker Jack box.
Does your solution to everything have to be shoot / bomb it? Surely you guys can be more creative - EMP, Deathray. signal jammer / spoofer, hack the drone maybe I dunno... There's got to be better ways of bringing down machines than technology that's been around since the Song Dynasty in China (960 - 1279).
I'm not signing anything
Let's start a Kickstarter campaign for the creation of a home-built rocket with visual target acquisition that can take out a drone! No high-explosives, just compressed air and a cloud of bb's for a turbine intake, or a bunch of high-test super-thin filament wire or fishing line to tangle the prop. Something likened to a weighted net they use for riot control.
Or maybe some kind of broad-spectrum jammer with double-stick tape to overload its ability to communicate? Mineral oil cloud to screw up the optics? Small spikes that trail thin wires to draw lightning? Trained flying monkeys to jump on its back and totally screw with its aerodynamics?
C'mon guys - out of the box thinking here. Not everyone in Colorado can afford a Phalanx cannon.
I'm sure a couple of Arduino's, a few das blinken lights and a big old mess of home made rocket propellant will get it done. Screw those rednecks with pimp-pistols and rifles...
Drone sure is good eatin'
Why else does all Y'all think I need a drone shootin' license.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
I don't think anybody likes drones except perhaps the people who build them. However, I'm really upset with the idiots who even think about pointing a weapon up in the sky -- or aiming a laser, for that matter -- in a misguided attempt to fight the spread of drones. There are *people* flying overhead all the time in aircraft both small and large, and there's no way to tell which aircraft is manned and which isn't even if you want to do something stupid. There's a federal death penalty for anyone interfering with an aircraft (or "related facilities") that results in death, so this is serious stuff. I don't like it when people go duck hunting without being careful not to point their weapons anywhere near a family cruising along in their Cessna. If you want to fight the spread of drones then do it in ways that won't get people hurt or killed -- resulting in more drones, probably. Defund them, prevent them from being based in or launched from your community or state, boycott their manufacturers and affiliates, tax them heavily, make their owners/operators/manufacturers personally liable for the worst torts imaginable, and/or whatever. But for the sake of the people up in the skies, please, please don't even think about shooting at them.
Hmm... makes you wonder, does it say anywhere in the constitution that a congressman actually has to be a human? Donkeys would be much cheaper, less prone to bribery and not that much more useless.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Personally, I'm all for being allowed to down planes flying lower than 1000 feet (with a grace area around airports since, well, they somehow have to get there). Anywhere else, they simply have no business flying lower.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Cut him some slack, for those US boys anything before 1774 is "in prehistoric times".
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I assure you, I can. You'd be amazed what violent criminals will do to other people for a small fee.
Yes, I believe you are. Most people recognize this as being about halfway between a funny novelty item and a serious protest.
I think you've huffed quite enough paint fumes for one day.
The permit system is supposed to control the manner in which they are shooting up in the air. It's all perfectly legal and controlled if we set up a permit system, just like with firearms in general.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
I also wonder where one finds a taxidermist that can put a drone on an attractive mounting.
Am I the only one that did a double uber face palm after reading this? HOW FUCKING STUPID HAS THE GENERAL PUBLIC BECOME?
Probably, most of the general public is stupid enough to realise it's just a big ol' joke. Take a breath before you flip out, you'll live longer.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
If it's in the bible it's safe to assume it never actually happened, and if it did nothing like the way it says.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
"HOW FUCKING STUPID HAS THE GENERAL PUBLIC BECOME? "
The head of the science committee in congress, an elected person, does not believe in dinosaurs and climate change.
WTF does that tell you about America at least?
slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
http://mgamepro.xtgem.com/
I am interested, but i know it is not real license! Thanks! Hamlet Petviashvili New Yourk 22 Ave Email - hutt1-petviashvili1@hotmail.com Stick War
Sorry, the law says the shooter must pay you the cost of the vehicle, that's all.
That's cool. I can put a lot of hours into building a vehicle. How much per billable hour do you think you'd pay for someone to build you a custom drone?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
That's not a drone license, that's a dog license with the word 'dog' crossed out and 'drone' written in in crayon.
From the original article:
"Even if a tiny percentage of people get online (for a) drone license, that's cool. That's a lot of money to a small town like us,"said Boyd
The funny thing here is that the FAA in all their "seriousness" has become the PR department, for free. The FAA's own Altitude Rules pretty much would keep aircraft above the area covered by the town's "Rules of Engagement".
Probably. The mount would need to have it in a dive angle firing a hellfire missile. This is fairly similar to all other predator mounts where they are shown just about to attack and kill.
Time to offend someone
I had to look him up, I didn't realize the chair of the science committee was a complete wackadoo.
Doesn't believe in meteors or dinosaurs... Well a dinosaur might not come crashing though your house {aka extinct} but meteorites are common... I actually make time for my kids and I to watch meteor showers when we know they are going to happen.
I've seen lots of comments about, "This is stupid, and can't possibly be legal." That said, legality of shooting down drones is irrelevant: this is about people who are willing to pay money to make sure drones aren't harassing Americans. I'd pay $25 for that. It's too bad it's not more money. For about $10bn., you could buy enough votes to actually start to change something.
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.
Yes, you need to be human, unless you know to make a donkey a citizen.
Yep, The US with an army 10 times larger than the next 20 combined (or somthing like that) has a majority of FUCKING IDIOTS.
And the chief idiot party is doing all it can to seize control.
If the rest of the world isn't already scared, they should be.
Don't think the government will hand out permits to destroy government property? You haven't lived in one of these Conservative cities where the chief judge dies from a cocaine overdose on a golf course during working (paid) hours (Rogersville, TN). They make idiots look like pHDs there.
slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
Person A: I'm telling you, you don't need a drone license! Person B: I do! I've bleeding got one, I tell you! Person A: That's a deer license with the word "deer" crossed out and "drone" written in in crayon.
I'm all for being allowed to down planes flying lower than 1000 feet (with a grace area around airports since, well, they somehow have to get there). Anywhere else, they simply have no business flying lower.
Wrong again. There are all kinds of reasons to fly lower. And your expectation that you can murder anyone who happens to be below 1000' in an airplane is just pathetic.
Instead of displaying penis envy by calling for the downing of anyone flying lower than you think they should, maybe you should go get a pilot's license and join the fun. And then face people like you who think you should die because you flew "too low".
A mere technicality. Pass a law saying certain donkeys are citizens, then bam, there you are.
The harder part is ensuring their age is above the Constitutional minimums. Not that they can't live that long, just who keeps records of donkey births?
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Technically, if the engine isn't pushing them through the air, they aren't flying.
They are falling ... with style.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
This is far, far better than what I was afraid this article was going to be about. The first image that popped into my head was "hunters" taking out licenses to use drones to seek out and bag big game. Unfortunately, I bet that will actually be a "sport" somewhere down the line.
Technically, if the engine isn't pushing them through the air, they aren't flying.
Technically, you are quite wrong. "Powered flight" requires the adjective to differentiate it from unpowered flight because both are still flight.
And technically, there are a large number of powered aircraft that are never pushed through the air by their engines. Pulled, yes.
They are falling ... with style.
I'm sorry, but you're demonstrating the common misconception that an engine failure in a powered aircraft causes the aircraft to fall from the sky. With style, without style, it isn't falling.
IIRC, the POH for the stock Cessna 172 shows that the power-off glide distance from 8000' AGL is 12 miles. That's about 8:1. Not as good as a glider, but certainly nothing close to "falling".
Don't feel too bad, many people don't know. I took a guy up over the mountains once and I could tell he was concerned about what would happen if the engine stopped. Lots of trees and pointy rocks below us, what a danger! I pulled the power back to idle, looked around, and pointed to an open field about 8 miles away. "There's where we are going." Once he realized that 1) we weren't plummeting from the sky and 2) we were approaching the place to land faster than we were descending, he lost his fear, and we went on with the flight.