Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

Police handcuff, detain and ticket Part 107 Pilot under aircraft ordinance that does not apply

Us "old farts" have to have a "hobby" in our retirement years even if it only exercises our brain and the tips of our fingers.
As for the music...I for one NEVER left the 60's and early 70's
Rock on Golden Gate Great Oldies in San Francisco, radio KYA1260

OH, by the way...
At what point in history did it go from "innocent til proven guilty" to guilty til proven innocent????
Polite and compliant...ALWAYS the way to go with LEO's
 
Police always assume guilt. It is up to the courts to determine if they were right.

I agree with Pat, defer to the LEOs rather than argue. Especially if it is a hobby flight. If Part 107 have your paperwork in order.Access agreement/permission/contract, Part 107 license, insurance, FAA Registration. But even then it can be a challenge. I was drilling a groundwater monitoring well is a handicap space in a city owned parking lot. Hired by the city, etc. Meter maid STILL gave us a ticket for no handicap placard!! We went ot her boss, he tore up the citation!
 
over powered cops disgusting

but thats just bowing down to the police and against your rights and that`s what they are hoping you will do "we have the power".
it every body lets them get away with it then they will just keep treating people like **** and
he had not broken any laws
It's not bowing down to the police. It's about being wise and not being an idiot.
Getting myself handcuffed just because I know the rules? How about later take your complaint to the Chief of Police and showing him what the rule states. Now that's being WISE!
 
Last edited:
The other part that plays some role in this is that Crossroads Village is a theme park per se of a late 1800’s village and the steam locomotive and passenger train is part of that. Having a UAV hovering overhead is not part of the theme and most likely another guest of the park is what initiated the intervention of the Park Rangers.

I think if Jason had done some homework and informed park employees of his intentions beforehand. He could have gotten permission to video a maintenance run of the train when other guests were not around.

In fact if he probably could have used his 107 to advantage and had video of parts of the railway not easily accessed other than being on the train and then allowed the park to use the video in advertising in exchange for the access.

I have flown at other parks in the county system without incident, but keep away from other park users while doing so. I guess at this point I’ll have to take up the cause with the county board to get their new rule overturned. Thanks for being an arrogant putz!
 
  • Like
Reactions: AH-1G
I've only had one encounter with Dudley Do-Wrong. I live near (under the pattern of) and work on a military air base. I am an Air Traffic Control Systems Field Engineer, and know the tower staff quite well. I regularly fly in my back yard; no problems. Just call and get approval. I also monitor Unicom, and they know my cell phone.

I'm also an EMT and ambulance driver at a nearby volunteer rescue squad. I brought my H480 to the station because a crew member asked me to out of curiosity; I wasn't planning to fly. Building maintenance supervisor saw it, asked how good the camera is, and then asked if I could take some pictures of the roof, to make his climb to make some repairs safer. Sure.

Since the building was in the air base SFC/25 class C airspace (just like my house), I called the tower and was approved to 300'. I started prepping it to fly. A deputy came by and started giving me crap. I know the guy, and he ... has a reputation. He said that if it left the ground, he'd confiscate it and refer me for prosecution.

I told him to back that up in writing. He "couldn't find it, but the base has asked the department to aggressively enforce the 5 mile no fly zone". I knew then he was full of it (it's an advisory zone, not no-fly, unless inside the sfc/25 area, then it's a "permission zone". only inside the fence is no-fly). I called the tower back and had a chat with the tower supervisor. He told me something interesting: since I'm inside his airspace and have his approval, any other authority trying to tell me I can't is usurping his authority over his airspace, and subject to felony charges. He had to go before I could put him on the phone with the deputy.

Of course, deputy wouldn't back down. Bad mistake: I'm shooting buddies with the Sheriff (the elected guy). I called HIM, told him what was going on and what the tower said. There ensued a very loud, very short, very one-way conversation between him and the deputy.

I took off five minutes later, under the deputy's nose. Not a word. And the whole department got some training. Never had any issues with a deputy since.
 
I've only had one encounter with Dudley Do-Wrong. I live near (under the pattern of) and work on a military air base. I am an Air Traffic Control Systems Field Engineer, and know the tower staff quite well. I regularly fly in my back yard; no problems. Just call and get approval. I also monitor Unicom, and they know my cell phone.

I'm also an EMT and ambulance driver at a nearby volunteer rescue squad. I brought my H480 to the station because a crew member asked me to out of curiosity; I wasn't planning to fly. Building maintenance supervisor saw it, asked how good the camera is, and then asked if I could take some pictures of the roof, to make his climb to make some repairs safer. Sure.

Since the building was in the air base SFC/25 class C airspace (just like my house), I called the tower and was approved to 300'. I started prepping it to fly. A deputy came by and started giving me crap. I know the guy, and he ... has a reputation. He said that if it left the ground, he'd confiscate it and refer me for prosecution.

I told him to back that up in writing. He "couldn't find it, but the base has asked the department to aggressively enforce the 5 mile no fly zone". I knew then he was full of it (it's an advisory zone, not no-fly, unless inside the sfc/25 area, then it's a "permission zone". only inside the fence is no-fly). I called the tower back and had a chat with the tower supervisor. He told me something interesting: since I'm inside his airspace and have his approval, any other authority trying to tell me I can't is usurping his authority over his airspace, and subject to felony charges. He had to go before I could put him on the phone with the deputy.

Of course, deputy wouldn't back down. Bad mistake: I'm shooting buddies with the Sheriff (the elected guy). I called HIM, told him what was going on and what the tower said. There ensued a very loud, very short, very one-way conversation between him and the deputy.

I took off five minutes later, under the deputy's nose. Not a word. And the whole department got some training. Never had any issues with a deputy since.
There you go, this officer did not understand the interpretation of the rule, so he assumed he was in the right!
My first response, would have been, I have permission from ATC, not show me in writing.
We need to aggressively enforce the 5 mile rule, especially if you don't have a waiver or permission from ATC.
 
There you go, this officer did not understand the interpretation of the rule, so he assumed he was in the right!
My first response, would have been, I have permission from ATC, not show me in writing.
We need to aggressively enforce the 5 mile rule, especially if you don't have a waiver or permission from ATC.
My bad for trying to keep the post from being a book. IDID first tell him I had ATC approval - he even heard to my side of the tower callback conversation, so he KNEW I did. HE didn't listen, so it quickly escalated far beyond where HE wanted to take it. Dumb of him, actually: he KNEW I'm friends with the Sheriff, and he knows me well enough to know I don't back down when I'm right (he wasn't going to hear the end of it, either on the spot or in a courtroom, and he KNEW it). And he still didn't back down when politely explained ATC clearance. Yes, I stayed polite, just ... non-submissive.

And, yes, if you're threatened with enforcement actions, you have EVERY right to see the rule, reg, law, code, etc that the threat is based on: they can NOT make up stuff as they see fit!
 
  • Like
Reactions: thetrecker
well, as I mentioned some people try to exploit their authority, because they can.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PatR
My bad for trying to keep the post from being a book. IDID first tell him I had ATC approval - he even heard to my side of the tower callback conversation, so he KNEW I did. HE didn't listen, so it quickly escalated far beyond where HE wanted to take it. Dumb of him, actually: he KNEW I'm friends with the Sheriff, and he knows me well enough to know I don't back down when I'm right (he wasn't going to hear the end of it, either on the spot or in a courtroom, and he KNEW it). And he still didn't back down when politely explained ATC clearance. Yes, I stayed polite, just ... non-submissive.

And, yes, if you're threatened with enforcement actions, you have EVERY right to see the rule, reg, law, code, etc that the threat is based on: they can NOT make up stuff as they see fit!

The good part for you is that you are personal friends with his boss. The other is that you state this deputy has a reputation, so if that is so your friend the sheriff is not supervising his force properly and the blame for this incident lies with him not the deputy.

We may be an army in numbers, but being militant about it will not help our cause. Behind the scenes instruction of our LEO’s and governing bodies is a much more appropriate course of action. Sophomoric encounters with authorities in the public eye does nothing to embolden our rights to our airspace. Those only reinforce the general public’s perception of UAV pilots as rude and disrespectful.

We need to discuss these matters in a more intelligent way and get the information to all concerned. In the area you are from @FePhoenix it would be advisable for the military, local police, local government, and UAS pilots get together to develop a standardized procedure to fly in that area. Not just a privileged few that know the right people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rubik and AH-1G
The good part for you is that you are personal friends with his boss. The other is that you state this deputy has a reputation, so if that is so your friend the sheriff is not supervising his force properly and the blame for this incident lies with him not the deputy.

We may be an army in numbers, but being militant about it will not help our cause. Behind the scenes instruction of our LEO’s and governing bodies is a much more appropriate course of action. Sophomoric encounters with authorities in the public eye does nothing to embolden our rights to our airspace. Those only reinforce the general public’s perception of UAV pilots as rude and disrespectful.

We need to discuss these matters in a more intelligent way and get the information to all concerned. In the area you are from @FePhoenix it would be advisable for the military, local police, local government, and UAS pilots get together to develop a standardized procedure to fly in that area. Not just a privileged few that know the right people.
The dept had training as a result. Afaik, no one has had illegitimate encounters since, not just me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DoomMeister
Don’t be too concerned about creating a long post. If the info or story is good (yours was) the extra detail makes it a more interesting read.
 
As someone who has been a State Trooper for 18 years I will be the first to tell you that there are those 10% of LEOs that are uneducated and short tempered, just like there are those 10% of citizens that make up 90% of our problems. I have several law enforcement and fire fighter friends who are drone owners. Every jurisdiction has a multitude of state statues, county and city ordinances. It’s difficult to commit every single one to memory, and keep up with them when they change. The majority of non-Federal LEOs don’t know the first thing about Federal park laws or FAA rules. Police officers come out of the academy after being fed these statutes and ordinances via firehose and after that it’s their responsibility to research them when they are unsure. LEOs don’t know everything and are going to occasionally interpret statues/ordinances incorrectly. Most LEOs feed off the responses they receive during the interaction. If you are polite, respectful, and comply with the officers direction, you will be treated the same way. The side of the road is not the place to argue your traffic stop, and In this case, the park was not the place to argue your right to fly your drone. Comply and move on, then take it up with higher authority later on.
 
@SunshineState is spot on! Goal is not to be perceived as one of the 10% out of the gate.
Additional comments on the city's LEO education component, I've noticed that as the town / county / city Force get interested in SAR support, the knowledge of the Force increases substantially producing more positive conversations with sUAV Pilots. I've always been receptive to offering SAR assistance and would gladly assist with any LEO public activity or UAV event.

If in your HmZone turf or visiting, a friendly LEO conversation and helpfulness with one Force will spread back-mic to neighboring Forces further assisting in positive interaction. When entering a small town, park, etc, I'll often find a cruiser and informally introduce myself and my intentions... that's a positive, if in the least helps detect if there may be a negative receptiveness to avoid before setup.

The times I've been approached on a site, after a short friendly conversation: 1) they can quickly determine the atmosphere behavior is not a problem or challenge, 2) maturity of pilot, 3) cooperation & eye contact all work in the positive. Normally in conclusion, they'll often share additional sites to consider (off season soccer, baseball, etc) in the town that I could fly or practice. If they'd suggest I move on... I'll gladly pack it up and take the matter up with Chief at a later time. At 6'8" athletic, I attempt to reduce any perceived challenge, it's not the place or an advantage.

A small point I've learned on bike, bicycle, sUAV, etc... we all learn to "read" situations; LEO's are exercised in this practice and to also minimize their projected "read" the individual can assess form them. Friendly eye contact goes a long way, and I've always made it a practice to remove sunglasses when interacting... it improves the LEO's ability to "read" you. Allow them to retain the authoritative position, minimize a perceived threat, it improves the situation and has a greater chance to obtain a relaxed conversation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DoomMeister
[QUOTE="Dougcjohn, post: 173004, member: 12689. Allow them to retain the authoritative position, minimize a perceived threat, it improves the situation and has a greater chance to obtain a relaxed conversation.[/QUOTE]

Sooo, bringing your baseball bat with you when you "Step out of the car" may impede "relaxed conversation"?
 
Don’t be too concerned about creating a long post. If the info or story is good (yours was) the extra detail makes it a more interesting read.

And gives some of us old farts a chance to catch a nap... ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: PatR
over powered cops disgusting

but thats just bowing down to the police and against your rights and that`s what they are hoping you will do "we have the power".
it every body lets them get away with it then they will just keep treating people like **** and
he had not broken any laws

It's not bowing down. It's playing smart. He may win the battle which is not fought there on scene, but you will win the War by politically/legally fighting it with documentation/laws with the Major/Police Chief/Others. After educating the later, the first officer will have lost when he is corrected by the upper levels. And you will not have charges against your, lost your equipment, expenses fighting the charges.

Fight the battle you can win and avoid those you cannot!
 
[QUOTE="Dougcjohn, post: 173004, member: 12689. Allow them to retain the authoritative position, minimize a perceived threat, it improves the situation and has a greater chance to obtain a relaxed conversation.

Sooo, bringing your baseball bat with you when you "Step out of the car" may impede "relaxed conversation"?[/QUOTE]

LOL.. Pretty colorful ribbon attached may help... ya I tend to go defuse.
 
Last edited:
[QUOTE="Dougcjohn, post: 173004, member: 12689. Allow them to retain the authoritative position, minimize a perceived threat, it improves the situation and has a greater chance to obtain a relaxed conversation.

Sooo, bringing your baseball bat with you when you "Step out of the car" may impede "relaxed conversation"?[/QUOTE]

The problem with that is police officers always one or more "baseball bats" at their finger tips as you exit the car, and they aren't tolerant of people that have equality in that area.

In anything we do, and "we" should include members of the law enforcement community, "being respectful" goes a long way towards minimizing conflict. Being able to discuss something without a desire or requirement to intimidate the other party generally leads to peaceful solutions, even if that solution ends in the issuance of a citation.

If we intend to participate in activities not widely understood, or that are governed by complex rules and regulations, we need to learn the regulations that bind our activities. If we cannot point to legal reference documents that establish the framework for our activities we cannot defend our actions. That is also applicable to law enforcement personnel. If they do not know or understand the law, cannot make reference to the code section and code text that establishes their cause or reason for enforcement, they would not be enforcing the law, but would be using intimidation of the public under color of authority to impose their personal views and opinions. To obey or enforce the law, everyone needs to first understand the law. Our courts have pretty well established that ignorance of the law is not an excuse for failing to comply with the law. That is applicable to both the general population and law enforcement.
 

New Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
20,952
Messages
241,578
Members
27,284
Latest member
csandoval