Originally Posted by
TimJ
I think that maybe it depends on what connections that tabloid rag reporter has.
Someone without connections, we will never hear about it.
Yes, I agree about waiting on fresher rulings on this. But as far as a jury is concerned people seem too bias against drones that a proper conclusion could be made by a jury.
As things sit, a good lawyer could argue for either side with the currently written regs and rulings and win.

Hi Tim , oh yea I do agree that the one with the more money/connections always wins in court , I just can't ever see a situation where a reporter from say , the National Enquirer , would have more cash/clout than the actor whose run in with a spying drone was posted by Mongo in post #1 .
Originally Posted by
mongo
And speaking of which , to finally address the title subject directly , yes I too believe "This is why" , as the title suggests , that the general public ain't all that enamored with drones as the folks who fly / advocate for them would have us believe . I have said this before , when folks see my planes , and then ask if I have any drones and I say no , the greater majority of the reactions are relief . And then the #1 universal thing that almost all of them mention is "I'm afraid of one of em peekin in my window" , for real , and I do believe that's the public's #1 fear of drones , that they'll be used to spy on folks just like in Mongo's example here . Not once in my lifetime have I ever read of a "traditional model airplane" getting caught hovering just outside a celebrity's window taking pictures or video , and I'm fairly sure I'm not likely to hear of any such thing happening anytime soon in the future . I wonder how long it'll be before we hear of the next "peeping drone" story ?