Drone Operator Tased By Ranger In National Park

lcpiper said:
It's like many of the taser videos on youtube. It starts with the cop approaching someone initiating the contact. Then the whole "Do you know why i stopped you bit". Somewhere along the line the person starts ignoring what the cops tells them to do. For instance, they get out of their car and when told to get back in the car they ignore the direction and keep running their mouth. Whatever it is they are not listening to the cop. At some point, and it's usually easy to spot in the video, the cop switches gears and you can tell, He just made up his mind, He's going to arrest this person. Usually it's prefaced by the words "I am placing you under arrest". From that point on if you run, try to get back in your car, continue to argue, if you resist when He grabs you, you have just made your immediate future very unpleasant.

Most people don't think well at this point, but being arrested is the smallest of problems at this point. A Judge could pitch the case, you never know. Arrest precedes charges, arraignment, and a trial, it doesn't necessitate them. But resisting that officer can easily add on other charges that become very hard to beat in court and frequently are far worse then the original issue the cop stopped you for.

Most of you guys don't need to be told this stuff, but I suspect there are a few that still do.
Click to expand...
Yeah a lot of people don't seem to understand, that no matter what situation you're in, whether you're guilty, innocent, you think the cop is in the wrong, etc. "mouthing off to a cop" is the never the correct course of action.
 
ShamisOMally said:
>Can't fly a drone in public

America. Amazing country. Go from fighting against the British because we're scared to fighting themselves scared of having their picture taken in public.

Fucking incredible.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you can't fly drones at any nation/state park and it's hardly a bad law. You can fly them in public as long as it doesn't interferer with air traffic.
 
Park rangers are like the George Zimmermans of the forest. A bunch of wannabe cops running around sticking their noses where they don't belong.
 
JiveMofo said:
so tazing a white man is excessive force?
Click to expand...

Because we all know white men are completely harmless.

465622-hitler.jpg
...Godwin in 1.

manson1.jpg


MTIwNjA4NjMzNTk5NTI2NDEy.jpg


lee-harvey-oswald-2.jpg


gacy.gif


MTE1ODA0OTcxNTk5NzU4ODYx.jpg


220px-Unabomber.jpg


timothy-mcveigh-1-sized.jpg


nicholsx00077-9jpg-cfdcfcf74c3d58da.jpg


what's shooting a black man in the back?
Click to expand...

Prudence. Because all black men are dangerous!

african_jesus.jpg


4fred16m.jpg


index.jpg


O.J._Simpson_1990_%C2%B7_DN-ST-91-03444_crop.JPEG
..Whoops!
 
A guy approached me in the dark and said, 'Bring it down!' and he was very angry. I had no idea he was a ranger. He sounded very angry, confrontational -- like he wanted to fight -- and I didn't really want to stick around for it so I just told him, 'I don't have ID and I'm leaving'
Click to expand...

An angry fellow-park-goer wouldn't ask for an ID. The only person that would ask for an ID is a ranger. If he had no idea he was a ranger, why did he feel he needed to tell this angry stranger in the dark that he didn't have an ID?

If he had just screamed "Bees! Bees!" and took off running it would have been a little more believable. "It was dark. I thought there were bees, so that's why I ran."
 
GaryJohnson said:
An angry fellow-park-goer wouldn't ask for an ID. The only person that would ask for an ID is a ranger. If he had no idea he was a ranger, why did he feel he needed to tell this angry stranger in the dark that he didn't have an ID?

If he had just screamed "Bees! Bees!" and took off running it would have been a little more believable. "It was dark. I thought there were bees, so that's why I ran."
Click to expand...

Bees don't fly at night o' basement dweller.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
That's kind of disappointing that it's not lawful to zap someone who's evading arrest. It's not like it does anything bad to someone except stop them from resisting or running off and it throws away the point of even having non-lethal ways of incapacitating someone. This societal sense of entitlement is getting way out of hand and we really need to address what's fundamentally wrong with people doing whatever they want and feeling like there shouldn't be any consequences or that they don't have to respond to legitimate concerns of a law enforcement officer. Society is broken and it's because average citizens have made it abundantly clear that they don't have the ability to act reasonably or responsibly. It's no surprise that those same kinds of people are objecting about those who are more intellectual and educated than them taking action to attempt to keep order for their own benefit while they rage out of control and then have the nerve to get upset about perfectly legitimate, non-violent consequences.
Click to expand...

A lot of people have died from being tased.
 
d8lock said:
A lot of people have died from being tased.
Click to expand...

A lot more people have died from being shot so I'm thinking the taser is a 100% good idea even if there are occasional deaths from it being used since you can't stop someone who's been drugged up on illegal stuff like weed or cocaine with pepper spray since they don't feel it. The taser is a good option for stopping some dumb drug addict or unruly anarchist with less risk of death than shooting them in the vast majority of situations where it's been used without long-term problems for the criminal.
 
FrozenLiquidity said:
According to the operators' mother:



Another commenter points out:

To which the mother replies:



It doesn't sound like anyone is really giving us the whole story, but I would personally think there would be better ways to resolve this than to resort to using a taser. If this guy had been asked to leave and escorted out of the park in a polite and professional manner we wouldn't be reading a news article about it.
Click to expand...


Or it sounds like a bitch of a mom covering for her asshole son.
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
A lot more people have died from being shot so I'm thinking the taser is a 100% good idea even if there are occasional deaths from it being used since you can't stop someone who's been drugged up on illegal stuff like weed or cocaine with pepper spray since they don't feel it. The taser is a good option for stopping some dumb drug addict or unruly anarchist with less risk of death than shooting them in the vast majority of situations where it's been used without long-term problems for the criminal.
Click to expand...

The taser isn't an alternative to the gun, it's an alternative to beating the crap out of them with a nightstick, an asp, or your fists. A lot of people have died from having the crap beat out of them too.

The only good reason to shoot somebody is if they are putting someone's life in imminent danger. In those situations you don't want to use a taser because they aren't always effective and you generally only get one shot (i think there are a few multi-shot tasers out there, but they are not widely available).
 
GaryJohnson said:
The taser isn't an alternative to the gun, it's an alternative to beating the crap out of them with a nightstick, an asp, or your fists. A lot of people have died from having the crap beat out of them too.

The only good reason to shoot somebody is if they are putting someone's life in imminent danger. In those situations you don't want to use a taser because they aren't always effective and you generally only get one shot (i think there are a few multi-shot tasers out there, but they are not widely available).
Click to expand...

I dunno why it wouldn't be considered an alternative to a gun. Sure there are lots of situations where it wouldn't be an ideal solution and then a police officer would pick a different thing-y to deal with a situation, but if the taser wasn't available, there would certainly be more situations in which an officer would be forced to resort to the gun instead or, like you said, smacking someone around a lot which is, I agree, lots more potentially deadly than a good subduing zappo to the brain jar.
 
That is just a bad move on the park rangers part, If he was concerned for the safety of the crowd , which is the stance they are taking, why would you tazer the person controlling the drone? that seems like the best way to ensure the thing is going to crash ....
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
That is just a bad move on the park rangers part, If he was concerned for the safety of the crowd , which is the stance they are taking, why would you tazer the person controlling the drone? that seems like the best way to ensure the thing is going to crash ....
Click to expand...

I think it had more to do with the person running away (ugh, his name was Travis too or something like that) and putting other park visitors at risk by pushing them out of the way on his escape rampage through the crowd.
 
Here's a tip folks. A park Ranger IS law enforcement. If he tells you to stop what you're doing and obey his commands, you better damn well do it. Tired of idiot parents and other entitlement assholes trying to act like they can do whatever they want. And of course the parent is going to try and make their child look like a saint. Look at the mother of the guy who blew up the Boston Marathon. She's still ranting about how innocent her son is. Give me a break.

Oh and here's a TOP tip. Never... ever... run from law enforcement. You immediately escalate the situation.
 
Astral Abyss said:
Here's a tip folks. A park Ranger IS law enforcement. If he tells you to stop what you're doing and obey his commands, you better damn well do it. Tired of idiot parents and other entitlement assholes trying to act like they can do whatever they want. And of course the parent is going to try and make their child look like a saint. Look at the mother of the guy who blew up the Boston Marathon. She's still ranting about how innocent her son is. Give me a break.

Oh and here's a TOP tip. Never... ever... run from law enforcement. You immediately escalate the situation.
Click to expand...
And law enforcement is known to lie and cover up their abuses. If someone has a toy helicopter (lets agree it's not a drone) and isn't causing a problem for anyone else, a simple ticket would have sufficed. It sounds at no point in time was this person ever under arrest or physically combative so the use of force (in this case a taser) was unjustified.
 
Sounds like this jerk was trying to flee the scene/ignored commands and got what was coming to him. Dumbasses gotta ruin it for everyone else.
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
That is just a bad move on the park rangers part, If he was concerned for the safety of the crowd , which is the stance they are taking, why would you tazer the person controlling the drone? that seems like the best way to ensure the thing is going to crash ....
Click to expand...

Who said it was for the safety of the crowd? The Ranger didn't make the law, He was just doing his job enforcing it. The butthead got tasered because he wasn't acting rationally and his running at night near others at the edge of a volcano is unsafe for him and for others. If the info we have is correct and the witnesses are correct about what happened then the Ranger acted properly.
 
pxc said:
I think that's the real disappointment here, that a guy flying a 3" toy quadrocopter wasn't summarily executed by the authoritah for "not listening".
Click to expand...

Well they were going to push him into the volcano, but fucker ran away!
 
Hypergreatthing said:
And law enforcement is known to lie and cover up their abuses. If someone has a toy helicopter (lets agree it's not a drone) and isn't causing a problem for anyone else, a simple ticket would have sufficed. It sounds at no point in time was this person ever under arrest or physically combative so the use of force (in this case a taser) was unjustified.
Click to expand...

You are so wrong on this. Keep thinking like this and it'll be you we read about getting tased one day.

Let's say I agree, it was just a toy helicopter. I'll play along with that, but the cop isn't sure if it's a toy or if it still falls into the category of what is prohibited. He can decide it's a toy all on his own, and hope his boss agrees, or He can play it safe and ask the guy to put it away. Problem is, the guy argues with him instead of simply listening and putting the stupid toy away. Now the problem isn't the toy, it's this guy arguing with the Ranger who is just trying to do his job and not get himself in a twist over this dickhead who won't just put his toy away. Now the cop decides to arrest the guy. We know the cop decided to arrest him because he chased the guy down and tased his dumb ass. All this because the guy couldn't just listen to the Officer in the first place. Even if the Officer was going to ticket him it's still his option to take it up with a Judge and let the judge see the big threatening 3" Drone for himself and decide if He is going to pitch the fine or make the guy pay it. Either way, paying a fine for playing with his toy in a State Park is far preferable to what Door Number Two has brought him.
 
lcpiper said:
You are so wrong on this. Keep thinking like this and it'll be you we read about getting tased one day.

Let's say I agree, it was just a toy helicopter. I'll play along with that, but the cop isn't sure if it's a toy or if it still falls into the category of what is prohibited. He can decide it's a toy all on his own, and hope his boss agrees, or He can play it safe and ask the guy to put it away. Problem is, the guy argues with him instead of simply listening and putting the stupid toy away. Now the problem isn't the toy, it's this guy arguing with the Ranger who is just trying to do his job and not get himself in a twist over this dickhead who won't just put his toy away. Now the cop decides to arrest the guy. We know the cop decided to arrest him because he chased the guy down and tased his dumb ass. All this because the guy couldn't just listen to the Officer in the first place. Even if the Officer was going to ticket him it's still his option to take it up with a Judge and let the judge see the big threatening 3" Drone for himself and decide if He is going to pitch the fine or make the guy pay it. Either way, paying a fine for playing with his toy in a State Park is far preferable to what Door Number Two has brought him.
Click to expand...
At no point in the story does it give the details of the ranger stating that the other guy is under arrest. Tasing someone for refusing to listen is wrong no matter how you'd like to spin it. Tasing should only be used for someone who is physically combative during the arrest.
Let me reverse it around. So before tasers were around, you were quite alright with cops punching people in the face for failing to listen? That's the old school equivalent.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
At no point in the story does it give the details of the ranger stating that the other guy is under arrest. Tasing someone for refusing to listen is wrong no matter how you'd like to spin it. Tasing should only be used for someone who is physically combative during the arrest.
Let me reverse it around. So before tasers were around, you were quite alright with cops punching people in the face for failing to listen? That's the old school equivalent.
Click to expand...

I have no idea why you are all locked up on insisting this is because the guy "failed to listen". You make it sound like they were just standing there arguing and the cop pulled his taser and zapped his ass and that's not what happened. This guy ran from the cop and the cop CHASED HIM DOWN and tasered him. Ever seen a cop chase a guy down just to tell him his fly is open?
 
So all RC aircraft are illegal at national parks? The law says "unmanned" aircraft. If it's radio controlled, I don't really consider that "unmanned", but I understand that interpretation obviously comes into play.

I don't have any drones or RC aircraft, but I do have several RC monster trucks and am in the early stages of planning a fun summer camping trip; potentially to a local national park. Not sure if the laws extend to ground vehicles like my RC trucks but if so, that would be a deal breaker.
 
GotNoRice said:
So all RC aircraft are illegal at national parks? The law says "unmanned" aircraft. If it's radio controlled, I don't really consider that "unmanned", but I understand that interpretation obviously comes into play.

I don't have any drones or RC aircraft, but I do have several RC monster trucks and am in the early stages of planning a fun summer camping trip; potentially to a local national park. Not sure if the laws extend to ground vehicles like my RC trucks but if so, that would be a deal breaker.
Click to expand...

Almost all parks have like a maintenance office or something with a phone listed on the internet. It's prolly best to look them up so you can call to ask what their rules are about whether or not you're allowed to play with radio controlled toys specifically and if there are any special rules regarding where or what kind of playing you can do with them.
 
If the law says unmanned aircraft why would you make the leap to RC Trucks?

Maybe you should just call and ask them yourself, ask them where the law is posted so you can read it.
 
lcpiper said:
If the law says unmanned aircraft why would you make the leap to RC Trucks?
Click to expand...

A Radio controlled quad-copter isn't an "unmanned aircraft" either (Radio controlled = manned) yet clearly this ranger at least felt that the law applied. Who knows what the fuck else they might feel it applies to. If I expect to deal with common sense and logic, I'm only setting myself up to be disappointed.
 
lcpiper said:
If the law says unmanned aircraft why would you make the leap to RC Trucks?

Maybe you should just call and ask them yourself, ask them where the law is posted so you can read it.
Click to expand...
So like a paper airplane is illegal? Sweet.
 
Hypergreatthing said:
So like a paper airplane is illegal? Sweet.
Click to expand...

It sounds like this guy was in a crowd (or at least a few other people, otherwise how would this ranger even know what he's doing, and how would there be bystander witnesses) flying his copter. Would you just throw paper airplanes in a crowd of people? Do you have no consideration for others?
 
So the guy was running around scared at the edge of a volcano and got tased and is now no worse for the wear. No harm, no foul, I say. Inb4 "but the mean lawman yelled at him!"
 
GotNoRice said:
A Radio controlled quad-copter isn't an "unmanned aircraft" either (Radio controlled = manned) yet clearly this ranger at least felt that the law applied. Who knows what the fuck else they might feel it applies to. If I expect to deal with common sense and logic, I'm only setting myself up to be disappointed.
Click to expand...

That's your definition, not the Government's and if the Government passed the Law then it's the Government's definition that we'll be using.
 
GotNoRice said:
A Radio controlled quad-copter isn't an "unmanned aircraft" either (Radio controlled = manned) yet clearly this ranger at least felt that the law applied. Who knows what the fuck else they might feel it applies to. If I expect to deal with common sense and logic, I'm only setting myself up to be disappointed.
Click to expand...

Radio controlled = manned? Radio controlled is the very definition of unmanned aircraft.
 
This happened at the Hawaii Volcano's National Park.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/
Click to expand...

Maybe we should do our own research and see what's what.

Model aircraft operations are for hobby or recreational purposes only.

The FAA has partnered with several industry associations to promote Know Before You Fly, a campaign to educate the public about using unmanned aircraft safely and responsibly. Individuals flying for hobby or recreation are strongly encouraged to follow safety guidelines, which include:

Fly below 400 feet and remain clear of surrounding obstacles
Keep the aircraft within visual line of sight at all times
Remain well clear of and do not interfere with manned aircraft operations
Don't fly within 5 miles of an airport unless you contact the airport and control tower before flying
Don't fly near people or stadiums
Don't fly an aircraft that weighs more than 55 lbs
Don't be careless or reckless with your unmanned aircraft – you could be fined for endangering people or other aircraft
Click to expand...

Now these are just the FAA's guidlines and not the State Park's laws.

Federal Law;
Drones, officially called Unmanned Aircraft Systems, are prohibited within all national parkland boundaries by regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations Thirty Six CFR 2.17(a)(3), which states: “‘…delivering or retrieving a person or object by parachute, helicopter, or other airborne means, except in emergencies involving public safety or serious property loss, or pursuant to the terms and conditions of a permit’ is illegal. This applies to drones of all shapes and sizes.”
Click to expand...

http://www.civilbeat.com/2014/07/no-drones-in-national-parks-but-ok-for-hawaiis-marine-monument/
Last month, National Park Service Director Jonathan B. Jarvis signed a policy memorandum that directs superintendents nationwide “to prohibit launching, landing, or operating unmanned aircraft on lands and waters” administered by the park service.
Click to expand...
 
lcpiper said:
A lot? Hmm, is it more then how many would have died from a .40S&W?

You must keep your perspective sir :D
Click to expand...

Yeah, because that drone requires being shot. The ranger could have easily chased the kid down and cuffed him. Some people have heart conditions. Not everyone killed by a taser is a drug addict. Makes me wonder if you guys just sit around watching fox news all day.
 
d8lock said:
Yeah, because that drone requires being shot. The ranger could have easily chased the kid down and cuffed him. Some people have heart conditions. Not everyone killed by a taser is a drug addict. Makes me wonder if you guys just sit around watching fox news all day.
Click to expand...

The kid was a father and that means he was actually a man, not a child, even if he was acting foolish.

And some people ride their bike 20 miles a day, so what.

When a Law Enforcement Officer approaches a person and initiates a talk with the purpose of have said person stop some action that they are currently involved with, and said person wants to argue about it to the point that the Officer is going to switch to Arrest mode, the person he is going to arrest just isn't acting all that rational and when said person decides to run from an arresting officer that reinforces the fact that this guy's just not all there at the moment.

Man this is like getting stopped by the Po Po for a busted tail light, the cop is going to give you a BS citation, and the driver freaks out and hauls ass and turns a nothing citation, that won't even amount to a fine, into a high speed chase ending with all the appropriate criminal charges.

Let's flip it. You are there at the park with your wife and kids and the Park Ranger comes over, IDs himself, asks you to bring down your toy UAV. Ball's in your court, do you do what he says and politely ask why after, or do you get into an argument and transform yourself into taser-bait?
 
Oh, and we weren't talking about shooting this guy or his drone. My remark about the .40S&W was in response to a comment about general taser use and a guy stating that tasers can kill people. In specific my meaning is that Tasers are not anywhere near as deadly as Sidearms.
 
Guys,

I fly Micro drone frequently and met serveral cops while flying and most of time they are very cool... Most of National Parks , i don't think u can fly it... But cops usually don't bother w/ Micro Drones...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top