I will admit that I have not read through the entire bill. I did talk to my District VP about it last weekend. My understanding is that the AMA is working with the FAA to iron out some exemptions . He did not know exactly what those exemptions are going to be and who they will cover. He was of the opinion that AMA will not make any announcements until the exact extent of the exemptions are known. Out of everything that I am aware of, the only issue I have with it is the proposed 400' limit although I beleive this will be one of the things that will be waived for LOS model operations. I would like to see the exception include everyone regardless of where they fly LOS but I won't have any issue if it applies to CBO flying sites only. Reason being that I can see adding model fields to FAA charts relatively easy. My buddy Chris could even add R/C flying fields to the next edition of Pilots Guide. Having models fly over 400' in random areas I think is what the FAA is trying to eliminate. That being said, most schoolyard flying is being done with small models that usually don't go that high anyway.

Bottom line is that I don't think the FAAs goal is to shut us down. IMO the main goal for 302 is give them a better tool to prosecute offenders. For example, in the Boston case where a couple of guys were flying a quad in a city park and struck a child in the face. The only real options the city had was to charge the offenders with operating in a city park and hit them with a 160.00 fine. Really in the long run it was smart on their part to go that route as opposed to tying to prove reckless endangerment as now the parents have a misdemeanor conviction on their side to help them pursue a civil case. The bill is not going to prevent anyone from doing something stupid but will give the courts a tool to aid in prosecuting offenders.