FAA Investigating Teen That Made The Gun-Firing Drone

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating this kid? Really? I had no idea the agency had so much free time on its hands. Hopefully they bring that 18 year old criminal to justice. :rolleyes:

"The FAA will investigate the operation of an unmanned aircraft system in a Connecticut park to determine if any Federal Aviation Regulations were violated," it said in a statement. "The FAA will also work with its law enforcement partners to determine if there were any violations of criminal statutes."
 

Comixbooks

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
18,689
That would be crazy having a drone making poping noises right next to you while mowing the lawn.
 

Dead Parrot

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
2,831
My question when I saw the video was which govt agency would investigate. FAA for aviation violations, ATF for firearms, HSA for it being a possible terrorist threat, or CIA wanting to hire the kid to assist with their development of the same thing.:cool:
 

bucket

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 1, 2004
Messages
1,070
Pretty sure you aren't supposed to use drones as lethal weapons platforms, or the paperwork that comes with these things is lying.
 
D

Deleted member 222586

Guest
I don't see the problem there. Why would they pursue such a thing? What a waste of time and taxpayers money...
 

oROEchimaru

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
4,662
I agree 100%, I want a turret and wrench instead. It needs to be repairable by just banging it randomly.
250px-Engineer.png
 

Ashbringer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
5,522
You all know that people could put a gun on a remote toy car, or plane, or helicopter? If Half Life 2 has taught us you don't need a gun to be deadly.

latest
 

Advil

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
2,044
Because freedom isn't anymore.

It's TRIVIAL to put a gun on a RC quadrotor these days.

Big quad rotor... check.
Gun... check.
Simple solenoid to fire it... check.
Hell, hooking up a digital scope to be your flight camera is also amature work now.

The gov is now going to try to unsuccessfully regulate making something that anyone technologically inclined could build on their kitchen counter. (No machine shop needed)

How is that worth our trouble?

Once again it's a matter of responsibility. If someone kills someone with one of these, or shoots someone, or recklessly discharges the firearm... WE HAVE LAWS FOR THAT.
 

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
15,258
Oh boo fucking hoo at your "freedoms" of making unmanned vehicle that remotely fired guns might be infringed in the future.
 

d_stilgar

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
440
Don't get me wrong. I think having remotely operated firearms is a very bad idea, but . . .

I love the way the quote from the article sounds like this, "We saw this video and we didn't like what we saw. We're not sure if this is breaking any laws, but we're definitely looking into it because we do not like this. And if a law was broken, we'll make sure that this person is prosecuted to the fullest extent of that law, which we'll also have to look up."
 

wicked_chicken

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 30, 2009
Messages
316
Wonder what happens when the FAA realizes it has to dwelve into "secret" court rulings to figure out what "drone law" is...
 

rudy

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
8,704
Next headline:

Army Hiring Teen That Made The Gun-Firing Drone
 

WaltC

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
1,129
If there are no laws against discharging a firearm in the park then it is difficult to understand the FAA's involvement. Obviously, this thing wasn't even ten feet off the ground which--sorry FAA--doesn't qualify as commercial airspace under your jurisdiction--otherwise, balsa-wood gliders and board darts & a host of other gadgets would have to be FAA-regulated. Sounds like some loony Democrat Congressman called someone in the FAA and and asked them to investigate this citizen. More overbearing BS from the Obama administration...! Incredible overreaction, as usual. Those Democrats are scared of their own shadows. But, hey--you never hear them pushing to disarm the government, do you? Oh, no--just law-abiding citizens, mainly. And they sure don't want to toss out the gun-shooting illegals! This is by far the most ignorant, stupid federal government I've ever seen.
 

Darunion

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
4,462
oh no the scary FAA. So there would be a fine he would have to pay. I feel like this would fall more into the ATF's jurisdiction. Either way I personally don't see it as an issue if proper precautions and safeties were taken (knowing full well what a drone can do in a fly away I know that isnt possible without a pull string battery disconnect). I am sure this has happened more times than they could imagine, this guy just put it on youtube and got media attention is really what this is about.
 

Blazemore

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 18, 2000
Messages
1,829
Just a matter of time before a drone is used in a murder if it hasn't already....that's scary.
 

maxius

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 17, 2001
Messages
3,376
NO ONE SEES THAT A GUN FIRED FROM REMOTE ARIAL PLATFORM IS NOT AN ISSUE. SINE WHEN DID DRONES GET 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS. IF THE DRONE MALFUNCTIONED AND SOMEONE WAS SHOT WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE?!
 

Darunion

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
4,462
NO ONE SEES THAT A GUN FIRED FROM REMOTE ARIAL PLATFORM IS NOT AN ISSUE. SINE WHEN DID DRONES GET 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS. IF THE DRONE MALFUNCTIONED AND SOMEONE WAS SHOT WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE?!

So then as we know guns don't kill people, people kill people. Then that means the drone is the killer and would have to stand trial if it were a malfunction because that means it acted on its own.
 

Merc1138

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 25, 2010
Messages
2,128
NO ONE SEES THAT A GUN FIRED FROM REMOTE ARIAL PLATFORM IS NOT AN ISSUE. SINE WHEN DID DRONES GET 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS. IF THE DRONE MALFUNCTIONED AND SOMEONE WAS SHOT WHO WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE?!

The idiot operating it, just like anyone who negligently discharges a firearm they're holding in their hand... using existing laws that we already have.

BTW, your caps lock key seems to have malfunctioned.
 

sfsuphysics

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
15,258
you may not like what he has to say... but it's closer to the truth than most will admit.
.
Yeah perhaps, however it didn't take long for the chorus of "Liberal Democrats Obama der der der MUH GAHNS!!!!!!" to start.

That is probably what he was calling him an idiot over.
 

iRevert

Gawd
Joined
Jun 7, 2012
Messages
635
I don't see the problem there. Why would they pursue such a thing? What a waste of time and taxpayers money...

There are a few laws against it, I'm surprised the BATFE hasn't reared its head on this first.
 

Spire3660

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
1,032
Oh boo fucking hoo at your "freedoms" of making unmanned vehicle that remotely fired guns might be infringed in the future.

You know why we laud our fallen soldiers? Because they fucking died so i can build drones with guns on them. Its called Liberty and as long as im not harming anyone, there is no reason for government intervention.
 

spugm1r3

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2012
Messages
1,153
As long as the FAA refuses to regulate drones with anything more than guidelines, you will get people treating drones as an open opportunity to innovate. They can't simply rely on the places where another agency's sphere of regulation overlaps with remote control flying vehicles to be the benchmark for what you shouldn't do with a drone.

I'm not beating the regulation drum, but there is difference between freedom and negligence.
 

Merc1138

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 25, 2010
Messages
2,128
As long as the FAA refuses to regulate drones with anything more than guidelines, you will get people treating drones as an open opportunity to innovate. They can't simply rely on the places where another agency's sphere of regulation overlaps with remote control flying vehicles to be the benchmark for what you shouldn't do with a drone.

I'm not beating the regulation drum, but there is difference between freedom and negligence.

Ok, but making it illegal for people to do it who aren't causing any actual problems, does nothing to stop the people who would do it for the purpose of disrupting the lives of others.
 

CreepyUncleGoogle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
6,871
Once again it's a matter of responsibility. If someone kills someone with one of these, or shoots someone, or recklessly discharges the firearm... WE HAVE LAWS FOR THAT.

Yes, it's great to wait around until someone gets killed or maimed to react rather than proactively addressing the problem. I'm sure if someone you cared about was killed by a kid with an RC toy he stuck a gun onto, you'd be upset that no one addressed this issue until after the fact when a life is already lost.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Because freedom isn't anymore.

It's TRIVIAL to put a gun on a RC quadrotor these days.

Big quad rotor... check.
Gun... check.
Simple solenoid to fire it... check.
Hell, hooking up a digital scope to be your flight camera is also amature work now.

The gov is now going to try to unsuccessfully regulate making something that anyone technologically inclined could build on their kitchen counter. (No machine shop needed)

How is that worth our trouble?

Once again it's a matter of responsibility. If someone kills someone with one of these, or shoots someone, or recklessly discharges the firearm... WE HAVE LAWS FOR THAT.

EXACTLY, and if I knew which Conneticute park the boy discharged the handgun in then I would know if he broke the law. The issue here is not that a drone was used to fire a gun. It's that potentially a gun was discharged illegally and in a potentially reckless manner. The video is significant enough to warrant an investigation.

Now I do think the pro-drone guy is a douche. So unfortunate that the image of his precious hobby craft was tarnished by the great evil of firearms. How dare someone besmirch the image of the innocent sport of quad-rotor flying?

Yes we do have laws, and the cops will figure out if any of them were broken. The FAA getting involved is mostly stupid, but hey, there is a lot of that going around all the time so ....
 

Scythe

Gawd
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
546
Well..................There go the drones. :(

I'm sure the government will take a heavy handed approach that makes zero sense.

BTW, we should all thank this jackass. Yes...pretty cool, but just because you CAN do something.....doesn't mean you should.
 

TwistedAegis

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
8,958
The thing is, if you break a law and publicize it so damn much, you pretty much necessitate that some LE agency reaches out to slap your wrist, at a minimum.
 

CreepyUncleGoogle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
6,871
Damn, misspelled Connecticut.

Well, I doubt anyone who doesn't live there could spell it correctly either. It's a total alphabet soup of a word and I think whoever decided on the name should be like sprayed with silly string (yes, if someone ever invents a time machine, that's the FIRST thing they should do with it).
 

Gorankar

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
10,932
This would have been just as cool if he had used a paintball gun or an orange tipped air soft Glock replica, and it would likely have avoided all of this drama.

Seems pointless for the FAA to get involved in this.
 
Top