You would think two letters from the FAA would get the point across. But you think it’s totalitarian not to give them just one more chance.
Receiving two warnings before getting a fine is extremely lenient.
But really, I don't care if it's extremely lenient by some standard. I care what policy will best dissuade antisocial behaviour with the minimal necessary fines imposed.
Clearly, in your view, a written warning from the FCC is obviously serious business, and if you got one you'd interpret it as such and immediately desist from whatever incited it. As this guy and the people disagreeing with you show, this attitude isn't universal.
Two warnings and then immediate financial execution just seems insane. If the the first and second letters had come with 1000 and 10000 dollar fines attached, almost everyone would have stopped by the first, let alone the second. There, no need to turn people into lifelong indentured servants.
(Of course, I imagine there's an incentive to maximize the amount of fines you collect, so that explains why it wouldn't happen that way.)
It is, though. He repeatedly operated his drone recklessly to such a degree that shows nothing but blatant disregard for air traffic and human lives. Every penny of this fine is well-deserved.
Or does it just matter that an authority said that's the fine that's warranted? If the FCC says it's 180k, 180k was just. If the FCC says 10k, 10k was just. If the FCC says a million, a million was just.
Think of it another way, imagine if the cops kept pulling you over for speeding. The first time you just got a warning, but they told you next time it'd be a $500 fine. Then you get caught again and they said "Ok we'll give you ONE more warning, but if you keep doing this, it's a $500 fine". Then the third time you get caught, when they give you a $350 fine you can't be all surprised pikachu at them. This guy knew the stakes (and was repeatedly reminded of them, by the enforcing body, who told him they would enforce the law if he didn't stop) and he kept on breaking the law anyway. They need to send a clear message that this is NOT acceptable behavior. This is closer to driving on the runway at an active airport than it is to an everyday traffic violation.
In terms of the magnitude of the fine - he was putting people's lives in danger, which I think justifies the amount. You also have to keep in mind that drones are an expensive hobby, it's not uncommon for people to spend over $3k on drone equipment. Many popular drone pilots on instagram etc are incredibly wealthy and drive crazy sports cars and the like. They regularly fly $1000+ drones inches from water / through forests etc, and they can afford to lose a few of them.
Put another way - if the normal response to breaking these laws was 2 warnings and a $10k fine over 2 years of publicly posting widely watched videos of yourself breaking the law, it wouldn't be enough to stop a lot of these people.
It is clear that he failed to understand the gravity of his recklessness prior to this fine, I am sure he understands now.
All things considered, his punishment was more or less a slap on the wrist:
> Interfering with the operation of an aircraft is a crime punishable by a maximum of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
(Source: fbi.gov)
For most people, that’s not payable in a lifetime.
I wasn't aware the purpose of government fines was bronze-age eye-for-an-eye-ism. But if it is, then I'd point out he didn't kill anyone.
In such a situation, it could easily cause a car accident, or crash through the window of a tall building, or worst-case scenario - which these laws are very much trying to prevent - it could end up in the engine of a plane coming in to land and endangering the hundreds of people on board.
If this drone was urgently delivering an organ for a transplant across the city, and flown by a professional operator with clearance from local airspace authorities, as well as multiple redundant systems to prevent catastrophic failure - then it's definitely worth the risk. But obviously that's not the case here, this was an amateur playing with a toy in order to make a youtube video. As such, it should only be allowed in the lowest risk environments - like big empty fields far away from people and airports.
And he has _intentionally_ lost contact with his drone:
> These clips also revealed flight in hazardous conditions including heavy rain, fog, snow, and close proximity to buildings in downtown Philadelphia. There was also posted proof of the pilot intentionally losing radio signal, and control, of his drone.
Here's the text of the 8th amendment of the US Constitution, part of the Bill of Rights.
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
As far as I am concerned, he is no better than someone who tries to blind pilots with a laser pointer (and there's precedent for that):
> Interfering with the operation of an aircraft is a crime punishable by a maximum of 20 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
(Source: fbi.gov)
Kudos to the FAA for nipping that in the bud.
No. No. NO. A western government should not behave like Russia or China or other despotic states, EVER. It has to be fair to everyone, and "making an example out of someone" is definitely not fair.
(Source: fbi.gov)
What he did is comparable, imho.
In actual reality he didn't even attempt to interfere, not by choice nor by accident. There wasn't any other aircraft. Even supersonic aircraft can be seen early enough to land the drone.
He operated his drone recklessly to such a degree that shows nothing but blatant disregard for air traffic and human lives:
> "These clips also revealed flight in hazardous conditions including heavy rain, fog, snow, and close proximity to buildings in downtown Philadelphia. There was also posted proof of the pilot intentionally losing radio signal, and control, of his drone."
Every penny of his fine is well-deserved.
The FAA website is quite clear about what Philadelphia’s Class B airspace is about: "The primary purpose of a Class B airspace area is to reduce the potential for midair collisions in the airspace surrounding airports with high density airtraffic operations."