AMA getting above 400 AGL - Not so successful
06-12-2022, 06:25 PM
#201
Senior Member
There is an apparent typo in the FAA response:
"In a very general sense, the answer is "yes." [that local LE are empowered to enforce FAA UAS regulations] However the
simple fact is the majority of local law enforcement personnel are familiar with FAA regulations.
It only makes sense in context as "are not familiar". I.E., they don't necessarily have to know the specific statute to respond.
"In a very general sense, the answer is "yes." [that local LE are empowered to enforce FAA UAS regulations] However the
simple fact is the majority of local law enforcement personnel are familiar with FAA regulations.
It only makes sense in context as "are not familiar". I.E., they don't necessarily have to know the specific statute to respond.
06-12-2022, 06:34 PM
#202
I previously asked for you to provide the FAA regulation that prohibits interference with emergency response providers in order to validate claims you made. For the sake of this discussion remaining civil and pertinent, it is your responsibility to do so. If you just want to toss irrelevant "gotcha's" out there, it might be best for you to remain on the sidelines.
Astro
Astro
06-12-2022, 06:38 PM
#204
There is an apparent typo in the FAA response:
"In a very general sense, the answer is "yes." [that local LE are empowered to enforce FAA UAS regulations] However the
simple fact is the majority of local law enforcement personnel are familiar with FAA regulations.
It only makes sense in context as "are not familiar". I.E., they don't necessarily have to know the specific statute to respond.
"In a very general sense, the answer is "yes." [that local LE are empowered to enforce FAA UAS regulations] However the
simple fact is the majority of local law enforcement personnel are familiar with FAA regulations.
It only makes sense in context as "are not familiar". I.E., they don't necessarily have to know the specific statute to respond.
Astro
06-12-2022, 06:42 PM
#205
Annddd, there you go with the name-calling. WHY must you do that?
Apparently, you don't have a clue on how to conduct yourself in an adult conversation and that, yes, there are "rules" to a civil discussion, one of them being responsible to provide support to claims you made when challenged. It is clear that you would rather submit "gotcha's" than have an adult discussion.
That does not make me a karen, it makes you ignorant.
Astro
Apparently, you don't have a clue on how to conduct yourself in an adult conversation and that, yes, there are "rules" to a civil discussion, one of them being responsible to provide support to claims you made when challenged. It is clear that you would rather submit "gotcha's" than have an adult discussion.
That does not make me a karen, it makes you ignorant.
Astro
06-12-2022, 06:47 PM
#207
Senior Member
The point of the exercise is that local law enforcement IS in fact authorized to enforce UAS regulations. Some may recall that back
when all this (drones) started the FAA sent out fact sheets to police departments across the country.
when all this (drones) started the FAA sent out fact sheets to police departments across the country.
06-12-2022, 07:01 PM
#208
READ the document I posted. It is VERY clear.
"However, other law enforcement processes, such as arrest and detention or non-consensual searches almost always fall outside of the allowable methods to pursue administrative enforcement actions by the FAA unless they are truly a by-product of a state criminal investigation. We do not mean to discourage use of these methods and procedures where there is an independent basis for them under state or local law."
What part of that is confusing you?
Astro
06-12-2022, 07:02 PM
#209
Senior Member
To understand "enforcement" by local law enforcement, it might be helpful to consider the officer as the first point of contact,
much like an Aviation Safety Inspector from an FSDO doing the same would also forward their report further up the chain.
much like an Aviation Safety Inspector from an FSDO doing the same would also forward their report further up the chain.
06-12-2022, 07:07 PM
#210
The opening statement is also very clear. It states, "The FAA retains the responsibility for enforcing Federal Aviation Regulations, including those applicable to the use of UAS. The agency recognizes though that State and local Law Enforcement Agencies (LEA) are often in the best position to deter, detect, immediately investigate, 1 and, as appropriate, 2 pursue enforcement actions to stop unauthorized or unsafe UAS operations. The information provided below is intended to support the partnership between the FAA and LEAs in addressing these activities."
This document also distinguishes that, "enforcemennt actions" are different than "Enforcement".
You can deny it and argue all you want, it does not change reality.
Astro
This document also distinguishes that, "enforcemennt actions" are different than "Enforcement".
You can deny it and argue all you want, it does not change reality.
Astro
06-12-2022, 07:15 PM
#213
Note the case where the defendant was brought up on charges of flying over 500'. case was dropped because it was an FAA reg., not a local law or ordinance. Again, this supports my statements.
Astro
06-12-2022, 07:30 PM
#219
Still waiting for the FAA reg. about interfering with emergency response. If you are not going to provide it, at least just say you can't provide it.
Your wurdz are only as good as the facts you can provide to back them up. What I'm hearing you say is:
Astro
06-12-2022, 07:59 PM
#222
Senior Member
was the case, or whoever else. That is just the first point of contact, i.e., just like a police officer taking your information an forwarding it to the FAA.
They have the authority to answer the call. But you'd rather spin and twirl like a little leprechaun, dazzling with wit and diddling about semantics.
06-12-2022, 08:11 PM
#223
If you're talking about a notice of proposed whatever enforcement action from the FAA, it won't come from an Aviation Safety Inspector either, if that
was the case, or whoever else. That is just the first point of contact, i.e., just like a police officer taking your information an forwarding it to the FAA.
They have the authority to answer the call. But you'd rather spin and twirl like a little leprechaun, dazzling with wit and diddling about semantics.
was the case, or whoever else. That is just the first point of contact, i.e., just like a police officer taking your information an forwarding it to the FAA.
They have the authority to answer the call. But you'd rather spin and twirl like a little leprechaun, dazzling with wit and diddling about semantics.
Especially when followed up by this quote from the FAA, "The FAA retains the responsibility for enforcing Federal Aviation Regulations" and, "However, other law enforcement processes, such as arrest and detention or non-consensual searches almost always fall outside of the allowable methods to pursue administrative enforcement actions by the FAA unless they are truly a by-product of a state criminal investigation."
A simple, "I was wrong" would suffice, instead of doubling-down on your lame attempt to save face.
Astro
Astro
06-12-2022, 08:18 PM
#224
Senior Member
speedracerntrixie posted it straight from the horses mouth, THE FAA. What that's talking about is the CHP can't criminally
prosecute an FAA regulation. Just like the insurance thing, once you're on a roll you just can't let it go.
prosecute an FAA regulation. Just like the insurance thing, once you're on a roll you just can't let it go.
06-12-2022, 08:53 PM
#225
If you read the words in the FAA text from Speedy, it is an arbitrary statement from ONE FAA official. If you'll notice, I asked Speedy to have the FAA guy to be more specific and we've heard crickets since then. I think it is safe to assume that he either didn't ask and wasn't interested in a more specific answer, he received an answer he didn't like, or hasn't received a reply. Key words of that text that qualified it as arbitrary and not a "hard" statement was, "In a very general sense, the answer is "yes"". That is nowhere near definitive and the FAA representative had no clue to the context of this conversation. If you were read further the FAA representative goes on to be more specific by saying, "In a more practical sense, the FAA empowers investigative and enforcement authority to its Aviation and Safety Inspectors in the regional Flight Standards District Offices". Both of those statements support what I have been saying all along, you are the one that is choosing to ignore the words and spinning to your narrative. I'm not surprised, it happens constantly in here.
The word of one FAA rep. does not trump the FAA written documents I have provided, as people have been known to be wrong, misspeak, or not be able to articulate effectively.
What part of the documents and quotes I have provided do you believe are wrong or do not support my position?
Astro