WattFlyer RC Electric Flight Forums - Discuss radio control eflight

WattFlyer RC Electric Flight Forums - Discuss radio control eflight (http://www.Wattflyer.com/forums/index.php)
-   UAV / FPV (http://www.Wattflyer.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=252)
-   -   Woman assaults teenage quad pilot (http://www.Wattflyer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73897)

xmech2k 06-15-2014 04:23 PM

Woman assaults teenage quad pilot
 
http://abcnews.go.com/US/conn-woman-...ry?id=24076891

The ignorance of the public is showing. As pointed out over at RCG, in the video the ten took, you could hardly tell the difference between humans and hippos, not peeping Tom footage. She's in more danger from cell phone cameras. Fortunately the teen kept his head on straight and videos her attack, and she got arrested.

Wrongway-Feldman 06-15-2014 06:51 PM

My problem with this story is the same as media stories about quadcopter, tricopters, and the like. They insist on calling them drones. For some reason this irks me. The word drone has a very negative connotation. It is associated with military unmanned vehicles. When the average joe hears the word drone the first thing that goes through their head is not a hobby grade rc multirotor but a large military aircraft that is used to kill people.
What name you give something is very important as to how people respond to it. The media is fully aware of this and use it hype stories and play on people's fears.

tobydogs 06-15-2014 09:22 PM

sadly the media is hype to make news out of anything that fly and could be construed as drone worthy titles. they call police observation quads drones and we fly similar quads.

i to think of warbird drones flying missions to kill over seas when i hear the name drone.

Fishbonez 06-15-2014 10:18 PM

The interesting part about this story for me was this.
I was watching CBS News with Scott Pelly now the story before this one was about a man who did designs on the beach as art. Pretty cool stuff I might add. Anyway they talked about how he filmed in on "a quad copter with a neat little video camera for all to see"
Next story about a woman who beats up a teen after being told to stop using his drone
yep the entire story they called his quad a drone but yet before the artist had a quad hmm

xmech2k 06-15-2014 11:31 PM

Yes, unfortunately, by Miriam-Websters dictionary definition, any unmanned, remotely or autonomously operated air or waterborne vehicle is a done. So my new E-Flite UMX Pitts is a drone. If you read the AMA's 'Report 101', they separate drones from hobby aircraft by defining drones as mission oriented vehicles.

On a lighter note, I thought of a better title to this story: 'Drone Craze Becomes Drone Crazed'

Larry3215 06-17-2014 09:12 PM

Look at this from the other side for a second. That kid could easily have been taking very embarrassing closeup shots of the people on that beach and then posted them on facebook, the net or shared them with friends who would do the same.

She was very justified in my mind with her concern about her privacy and having embarrassing pictures of her posted all over the place.

This is exactly what the public is afraid of - and I think with good reason. It makes no difference at all that in this particular case the pilot wasnt taking close ups. The fact that he posted the assult just reinforces the publics fears that embarrassing videos of them could appear on-line without their knowledge or permission.

She handled it poorly of course and it will cost her.

Bottom line though is that incidents like this - right or wrong - will hurt our hobby.

Wrongway-Feldman 06-17-2014 09:16 PM

The problem is that by law one has no expectation of privacy in a public place. That is why surveillance cameras on streets and in parks are legal.
Violence against the pilot of the quad was uncalled for.

Wrongway-Feldman 06-17-2014 09:19 PM

I'm surprised the paparazzi hasn't started using quads to get close to the stars.

DHC Beaver 06-17-2014 09:51 PM

I do not condone flying over people in any way,shape or form.Lets face it,you are still relying on one battery for power,so if that malfunctions for any reason at all,you could injure people.
This woman clearly went over the top,granted,but this sort of incident will become more frequent with brainless halfwits being able to fly these quads wherever they think they should.
A crowded area full of people certainly isn't a suitable place to fly!
This moron does no service to the modeling community with his arrogant and careless attitude.Unfortunately,this is becoming a more widespread problem with "park" flyers too.Because there are no controls,anything goes,and safety goes out the window.
I sincerely hope it doesn't come to wholesale bans on flying models of any sort,as that is quite a possible consequence to the actions of irresponsible minorities.

fhhuber 06-17-2014 11:18 PM

Early target drones were oversize free flight models.

Some target drones of the 1980's and 1990's were .60 glow powered 3 channel RC models, with no real difference in equipment vs common sport/hobby RC models.

Larry3215 06-17-2014 11:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wrongway-Feldman (Post 950710)
The problem is that by law one has no expectation of privacy in a public place. That is why surveillance cameras on streets and in parks are legal.
Violence against the pilot of the quad was uncalled for.

The public doesnt care if thats the law or not and they are the ones who vote the laws in.

In addition, they may tolerate the government takeing pics of you in public but they absolutely will NOT tolerate private people - kids especially - taking and posting beaver and cleavage shots on youtube or facebook.

There are already many cities around the country trying their best to ban "drones" - including police drones - without bothering to define the term at all closely.

You and I will be included in those bans.

Larry3215 06-18-2014 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DHC Beaver (Post 950715)
I do not condone flying over people in any way,shape or form.Lets face it,you are still relying on one battery for power,so if that malfunctions for any reason at all,you could injure people.
This woman clearly went over the top,granted,but this sort of incident will become more frequent with brainless halfwits being able to fly these quads wherever they think they should.
A crowded area full of people certainly isn't a suitable place to fly!
This moron does no service to the modeling community with his arrogant and careless attitude.Unfortunately,this is becoming a more widespread problem with "park" flyers too.Because there are no controls,anything goes,and safety goes out the window.
I sincerely hope it doesn't come to wholesale bans on flying models of any sort,as that is quite a possible consequence to the actions of irresponsible minorities.

The AMA - and every other rc organization on the planet - agrees.

From the AMA safety code:


Quote:

B.
RADIO CONTROL (RC)
1.
All pilots shall avoid flying directly over unprotected people, vessels, vehicles or structures and shall avoid endangerment of
life and property of others.

So if that kid - or almost all the other pilots in most of the FPV vids Ive seen recently - had an accident they would not be covered under AMA insurance.

Once the FAA gets its act together, that AMA safety code will also have the force of law behind it and he would then be guilty of a violation of federal law.

Better enjoy your reckless FPV fun while you can guys - the hammer is getting closer to falling every day.

I just hope it ONLY falls on the irresponsible FPV'ers and not on all of us indiscriminately.

xmech2k 06-18-2014 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry3215 (Post 950733)
...
In addition, they may tolerate the government takeing pics of you in public but they absolutely will NOT tolerate private people - kids especially - taking and posting beaver and cleavage shots on youtube or facebook.

...

Here's the hysteria part. Are you assuming those are the kind of photography he was doing? From what I saw he wasn't. He was getting higher altitude area shots where you couldn't tell if they were men or women. And mind you, I'm not a quad or fpv fan myself. You really think people can have more success getting photos like that with a drone than with cell phone or key chain cameras? Try to find a cell phone that doesn't have a camera. What about when I go to the beach with my family, and see a beautiful sunset. I want a picture. Do I have to get a signed waiver from anyone who may be in the frame?

Wrongway-Feldman 06-18-2014 04:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xmech2k (Post 950750)
Here's the hysteria part. Are you assuming those are the kind of photography he was doing? From what I saw he wasn't. He was getting higher altitude area shots where you couldn't tell if they were men or women. And mind you, I'm not a quad or fpv fan myself. You really think people can have more success getting photos like that with a drone than with cell phone or key chain cameras? Try to find a cell phone that doesn't have a camera. What about when I go to the beach with my family, and see a beautiful sunset. I want a picture. Do I have to get a signed waiver from anyone who may be in the frame?

Very true. Cameras are everywhere. If you are in a public place where every Joe Blow can see you with their eyes you can have no complaints about pictures being taken.
If however you are in your bedroom on the 5th floor of an apartment building then you have every right to be pissed at someone flying an aerial video platform up to your window and recording you.

I also am all for safe flying practices. Don't engage the hobby if you could possibly hurt someone.
But the fundamental problem of this story is one that underlies modern society. Her response was to resort to violence. It used to be one would call the police and when they arrived they would mediate the situation. These days if someone cuts you off in traffic or gets to the black Friday door crasher item before you a fight breaks out.

xmech2k 06-18-2014 04:41 AM

Yes. And there are already laws about taking pictures of people in their 5th floor bedrooms, no matter how is taken.

Wrongway-Feldman 06-18-2014 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xmech2k (Post 950758)
Yes. And there are already laws about taking pictures of people in their 5th floor bedrooms, no matter how is taken.

That is because you have an expectation of privacy in your home.
A public place does not allow for that other than conversations. Those cannot be recorded without consent. If you place yourself where people can see you then you can have no expectation of privacy. Don't want people to video you picking your nose then don't pick it in public.

kyleservicetech 06-18-2014 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xmech2k (Post 950547)
http://abcnews.go.com/US/conn-woman-...ry?id=24076891

The ignorance of the public is showing. As pointed out over at RCG, in the video the ten took, you could hardly tell the difference between humans and hippos, not peeping Tom footage. She's in more danger from cell phone cameras. Fortunately the teen kept his head on straight and videos her attack, and she got arrested.

The only problem with this, is, no matter how the situation turns out, our hobby will always wind up with the short end of the stick. :mad:

Larry3215 06-18-2014 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xmech2k (Post 950750)
Here's the hysteria part. Are you assuming those are the kind of photography he was doing? From what I saw he wasn't. He was getting higher altitude area shots where you couldn't tell if they were men or women. And mind you, I'm not a quad or fpv fan myself. You really think people can have more success getting photos like that with a drone than with cell phone or key chain cameras? Try to find a cell phone that doesn't have a camera. What about when I go to the beach with my family, and see a beautiful sunset. I want a picture. Do I have to get a signed waiver from anyone who may be in the frame?

My point is that it makes no difference if he was taking close ups or not or if the pictures were embarrassing or perfectly benign or even if they were strictly landscape pictures and had no people in them at all.

The ONLY thing that matters to the public is he was flying a drone and taking pictures of women at the beach.

Thats what 99.9% of the people will take away from that article. They will assume that he had bad intentions. They will assume that he was going to share them with his buddies and post them on the internet.

The women will ALL think the girl was perfectly justified in punching him in the nose.

The men will be 100% sure he was taking juicy shots and many will be disappointed he was too hi to get good details. They will all think that was what he was planning even if he didnt get any "good" shots.

The fathers will be telling their daughters to call the police if they see a drone in the sky.

All of them will have a negative attitude about drones next time it comes to voting about banning them.


Quote:

Originally Posted by kyleservicetech (Post 950762)
The only problem with this, is, no matter how the situation turns out, our hobby will always wind up with the short end of the stick. :mad:

Absolutely. We are the ones who will loose.

Larry3215 06-18-2014 06:40 AM

One more thing on the expectation of privacy.

Its one thing to know that every yaho out there has a cell phone and could be taking your picture. If you're on the beach you can usually spot someone pointing a camera at your crotch when you go to scratch.

However, drones are sci-fi stuff to most people. They are mysterious and frightening. They could be hundreds of feet in the air or behind a tree or hiding in a bush where you cant see them.

That adds a whole extra level of fear to the situation. Its something new that most people dont understand and so they are frightened.

Frightened people want to feel safe. They will only feel safe if they stop you from doing what they fear.

xmech2k 06-18-2014 07:25 AM

So you're basically agreeing that he wasn't really doing anything like those nasty spy pictures, but the public paranoia is mostly unfounded and completely out of proportion to the perceived problem? Which is what I'm trying to say. But if we just cave in and not use the benefits of this new technology, and any new technology, why not just move back into the caves now?

solentlife 06-18-2014 08:44 AM

I have two issues with this :

a) I disagree that any Multi-rotor / Drone or whatever should be allowed to overfly any public - he did that and in my book should be in court on a separate charge of Disregard of Public Safety.

b) He posted the video on youtube NAMING the woman ... which has now caused her harassment and in any court case - possible bias.

Personally - I am against just letting these jerks fly anywhere and filming / photo'ing whatever they feel like doing. It will lead to unnecessary restrictions to general model community if not controlled voluntarily. What the videos or photo's are is not the point ... the point is this woman did not want herself video'd or 'space' invaded.

If I am on a beach, public space - I will not 'invade' anothers privacy or enjoyment of the space and I expect others to reciprocate. If there was a Multi-rotor doing what this guy did - I would be immediately asking the guy to stop.

The only claim that she did not ask him to stop is from the guy himself. I find it hard to believe that she just went up to him and smacked him one !

Unfortunately there are some idiots who get hold of these machines and are not so understanding ... so what if she goes up to him ... asks him to stop ... and he's one of the idiots that refuses to stop ? The news report is not too clear on this and does not actually fully report both sides ... it's 'edited'.

The public will view / read about these sort of incidents and the ignorance of what really constitutes general modelling will not be taken into account. The result being public wish to ban / unreasonably control modelling.

It's a short passage from overflying a beach to the old girl walking her dog in the park ...
The dog-walker will read about this idiot or similar ... she will want her park to be free of any model etc. etc.

My conclusion from the limited evidence here ...

a) The guy may have refused to stop, angering the woman.
b) She was upset enough to slap him one.
c) His posting up the video naming her ... his interview - both indicate to me a person who will do what he wants regardless.
d) He should be in court as well to answer for endangerment in a public place.

I have a multi-rotor with camera ... and I would never consider doing what this guy did ... I respect others 'privacy' whether it's a public area or not.

My view ...

Nigel

pattern14 06-18-2014 01:38 PM

same horse, different colour
 
You read the same BS with Gun owners, motorcyclists and off road adventurers'......most do the right thing, the minority group of idiots give them all a bad name. Still, they have not banned beer because drunks get into fights every Saturday night or kill someone driving home.

solentlife 06-18-2014 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pattern14 (Post 950793)
You read the same BS with Gun owners, motorcyclists and off road adventurers'......most do the right thing, the minority group of idiots give them all a bad name. Still, they have not banned beer because drunks get into fights every Saturday night or kill someone driving home.

Unfortunately the comparison fails for very good reason :

Gun Owners in USA quote the Constitution and freedom to bear arms.

Motorcyclists are far more common in any country than Model flyers and have a louder more successful voice.

Off-Road adventurers are not driving their Off-roaders amongst the beach-people or park-goers .. if they do - they are a very small number and usually hell-bent on something other than just taking a few videos.

Drunks ? Many countries incl. USA have laws about being drunk in the street .. look at your 'open brown paper bag' laws !!
Drunk drivers .. can you imagine the uproar if cars were banned - the totally unlikely event ?

Here we are talking about what most public regard as a toy ... it will be tolerated in circumstances that the 3 examples above will most certainly not be. But should an accident occur ... or some 'unsuitable photo / video' appear in public - then the toy will be an easy target.
Don't forget that it will also be viewed that any child can obtain and operate ... without breaking any age law etc.

Different ball-games I'm afraid.

I am not against Multti-rotors - I own one and fly one. But I suggest sensible use off before imposed laws.

Nigel

solentlife 06-18-2014 01:59 PM

OK - Question : (MR = Multi-Rotor)

It has been said that the video and photos taken by this guy are wide shot and individual people are specs on the beach.

That would indicate that the MR is at a height that would not really be an annoyance ... unsafe to fly over others ... but at a height.

At such height it would also not be so evident that video or photos were being taken.

So how did the woman know ? What prompted her to confront the flyer ?

Did the guy do something with this MR that gave rise to her realising the intent of the flight ?

Not enough known in the reports I'm afraid ... I'm not so quick to condemn her as others seem to be. I would like to know more about the facts surrounding it all. Did he swoop down for some better shots ? Did he lose control for a moment causing it to fly lower ? Did his flying give rise to concern ? Did someone advertise the fact he was video'ing / photographing ?

Lot of unknowns here ....

Anyone have his direct youtube address ? Lets see what the guy really is about ...

Nigel

pattern14 06-18-2014 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by solentlife (Post 950794)
Unfortunately the comparison fails for very good reason :

Gun Owners in USA quote the Constitution and freedom to bear arms.

Motorcyclists are far more common in any country than Model flyers and have a louder more successful voice.

Off-Road adventurers are not driving their Off-roaders amongst the beach-people or park-goers .. if they do - they are a very small number and usually hell-bent on something other than just taking a few videos.

Drunks ? Many countries incl. USA have laws about being drunk in the street .. look at your 'open brown paper bag' laws !!
Drunk drivers .. can you imagine the uproar if cars were banned - the totally unlikely event ?

Here we are talking about what most public regard as a toy ... it will be tolerated in circumstances that the 3 examples above will most certainly not be. But should an accident occur ... or some 'unsuitable photo / video' appear in public - then the toy will be an easy target.
Don't forget that it will also be viewed that any child can obtain and operate ... without breaking any age law etc.

Different ball-games I'm afraid.

I am not against Multti-rotors - I own one and fly one. But I suggest sensible use off before imposed laws.

Nigel

It was simply a statement using examples where the majority do the right thing, but the minority bring on the bad reputation. ;)


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:50 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 WattfFlyer.com
RCU Eflight HQ

Page generated in 0.10516 seconds with 13 queries