Originally Posted by
speedracerntrixie
Echo, I think the root of our disagreement is that you think RID will,be a deterrent whereas I do not. Keep in mind that the same government that think we need RID is the same that thought stricter gun laws was going to reduce the number of shootings in Chicago, and the same that want to budget millions of dollars toward RID while Flint Mi. still has undrinkable water. Those 8 companies currently developing RID, who is funding that? I don't see them self funding as developing apps for just 1M perspective coustomers does not make much financial sense. With that said, off to the flying field I go.
It's not me that who thinks remote ID will be a deterent, it's the nation's top security officials. Your dissagreement is with
their expert opinion. And it's not a deterent per se for secrity officials. For the umteenth time, it's to identify non-threats.
It's the FAA who sees remote ID as a deterent:
"Unmanned aircraft operators who know they cannot easily be identified are more likely to engage in
careless, reckless, or dangerous behavior because they believe they will not be caught.
Your gun analogy might work if guns had remote ID. They don't.