Interesting. seems a local jurisdiction could, should it choose to, make certain rules about them contraptions which would not be preempted by Fed rules.( my bold)
Quote
6
EXAMPLES OF STATE AND LOCAL LAWS ADDRESSING UAS THAT WOULD LIKELY NOT BE SUBJECT TO FIELD OR CONFLICT PREEMPTION9 Laws aimed at objectives other than aviation safety or airspace efficiency that do not impair the reasonable use by UAS of the airspace. o Such laws could include those concerning land use or zoning; harassment of individuals or groups; privacy; voyeurism; trespass on property; the exercise of other police powers; reckless endangerment; emergency medical services; search and rescue; law enforcement use of facial recognition; delivery of prison contraband; wildfire suppression;10 criminal mischief; transfer or delivery of controlled substances; taking photographs or videos with respect to particular facilities (e.g., water treatment facilities; prisons; oil refineries; chemical facilities; railroad facilities; amusement parks; energy production, transmission, and distribution facilities; and any system or asset described by title 42 of the United States Code, § 5195c(e)); requirements for police to obtain a warrant prior to using a UAS for surveillance; protection of wildlife; using UAS for hunting or fishing, or to interfere with or harass an individual who is hunting or fishing; and law enforcement operations.
I may have to visit our county supervisors and see what they think about doing so.
Yup, certain laws can be passed but simply flying over private property at an altitude of 400ft or 400ft greater than a building within 400ft is pre-empted by the FAA.
did you watch any of the videos?
if so, do you think the operators were "simply flying" or was there more involved???
The desert is a true treasure for him who seeks refuge from men and the evil of men. In it is contentment In it is death and all you seek (Quoted from "The Bleeding of the Stone" Ibrahim Al-Koni)
