Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

California Bill Would Dramatically Limit Commercial Drones

Posted by Soulskill on from the won't-somebody-think-of-the-drones dept.

An anonymous reader writes: California's Senate Bill 142 would prohibit drones from flying under 350 feet over any property without express permission from the property's owner. The bill passed the California Assembly easily. Tech advocates have been battling privacy advocates to influence the inevitable regulation of private and commercial drones. Industry groups say this restriction will kill drone delivery services before they even begin. The legislation would also drastically diminish the usefulness of camera-centric drones like the ones being rolled out by GoPro. If passed, the bill could influence how other states regulate drones. The article notes that 156 different drone-related bills have been considered in 46 different states this year alone, and the FAA will issue nationwide rules in September.

5 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. Cry me a river by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 4, Insightful

    " Industry groups say this restriction will kill drone delivery services before they even begin. "

    Sounds like a good use of state authority to me.

    --
    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.
    1. Re:Cry me a river by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 4, Insightful

      that's very Libertarian of you, endorsing even more government regulations. "Cognitive dissonance" in operation?

      Uhm...using state authority to enforce private property rights is one of the few things most schools of libertarianism agree is a legitimate use of state power.

    2. Re:Cry me a river by Jeremi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      that's very Libertarian of you, endorsing even more government regulations. "Cognitive dissonance" in operation?

      Isn't a strong defense of private property rights a Libertarian principle? In this case, the proposed law would be enforcing property owners' right not to have uninvited guests buzzing around in their private airspace.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    3. Re:Cry me a river by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How about this; keep your fucking toys away from my property, you twisted pervert.

      And keep them away from mine also. We're not all libertarians here, you know.

      Actually, I cannot conceive of any situation in which I'd want drones to fly over my property, whether loitering or whizzing. I explicitly include package delivery services, as there is no way I'd want drones from amazon or others flying at moderate altitudes over my property. If law enforcement drones whizzed overhead, it would depend on the laws passed. We often sunbathe nude, and have every expectation of privacy while doing so, as the places we sunbathe are not visible from any public land or from any of our neighbor's land [*]. If law enforcement drones loitered without a warrant, they'd get shot down (we have enough acres to do this).

      [*] One or two military boys fly overhead occasionally in their chase games - typically once per month, but unpredictably. I suspect they're at rather more than 350 feet, and going much faster than a drone.

  2. kill drone delivery services? by fustakrakich · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How? If I gave permission with the order, they can land on my property. They just have to hover down from 350 feet.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”