Thankfully they're well regulated in Britain:
1. No drones weighing over 20kg
2. No commercial use with out training, insurance, and licence
3. No flying out of the operator's line of sight
4. No approaching within 50m of any person or building (so no beach stalking)

This is my sort of drone!

Hopefully the US will implement these or similar. I think it might as the number of drones goes up and people complain ... or take matters into their own hands (shotgun/rifle/EMP).

Ok, but how are you going to control it afterwards?

Apart from the privacy issues, I wonder if these drones are heavy enough to harm or kill anyone if they have a failure while flying, or crash against something and then fall on someone.

Scooter Tramps always find a way.

Besides.

Is there not a app for that.

Well, that's just ridiculous. Security should have confiscated the drone (by throwing a bucket over it or whatever), then announced publicly had "found" a drone and invited the owner to go get it from their office. With valid id and proof of ownership, of course.

Probably. There's an app for everything nowadays.

Physics: how high is it flying, how heavy is it, does it have sharp points ? Pretty much any drone flying high enough can kill if it falls. Heavy ones don't need to be as high. If there is a sharp point it can probably kill you at any height. If it's carrying missiles ... well you know.

One more reason to forbid their use within cities, or ask for special licenses, at least.

This short youtube video shows how the military will use MAV ( Micro Air Vehicles ) for specific tasks

Air Force Bugbot Nano Drone Technology

SkyJack (based on aircrack-ng) should do the trick.
Next you can create your own drone army and attack your neighborhood, just like a pirate: http://samy.pl/skyjack/

I didn't dig up the newspaper story, which was more detailed, but, by the time security got to the scene, the perps had gathered up their toys and left.

Here's a story from today's news.

http://www.seattlepi.com/default/art...le-5646766.php

Flying a remote-control device around a tall structure in a city was a phenomenally stupid thing to do.

The problem isn't drones. It's the droners.

Drones should be allowed to fly only over dedicated fields, and the owner should possess a license stating that he/she is able to control it, maintain it and operate it safely. For professional use outside of dedicated fields the requirements should be even more strict, and ad hoc authorizations should be necessary.

If the jerk-operated spying drone mentioned above had a failure and fell over the girl, well, she might have reported serious injuries even if the "toy" was only a few inches above her. Any plastic or composite blade revolving at around 30'000 rpm should be considered as a potentially and seriously harmful device. Let alone the ethical problem posed by drones carrying cameras.

Regarding drones carrying guns and missiles, they are designed and deployed to kill people, and for this reason they are bad, whoever operates them.

On the Mexican Border here. There are better uses for a personal drone army.



I talked to my wife about the net gun. She was the Animal Control Officer in this town and knows her stuff. She told me she tried to requisition one for rabid skunks but the cost is a couple of grand and replacement net canisters were prohibitively expensive also.

So much for that idea.

Why the sudden interest?. If martha stewart can own a drone, why can't most others. You forget that she is a rich dame who was presented the drone and uses if to survey and assess her property. See http://time.com/3053003/martha-stewart-drone/ for example.

But I am sure that in the next natural disaster in inhospitable terrain when all other means have failed, drones controlled by amateurs and individuals will be sent in first to survey and find survivors. In that sense they will play the role of citizens effort that ham radios for example played in an earlier generation. (As late as the asian tsunami of dec/25/2004, ham radios operated by amateurs went in first and helped ill-equipped officials communicate).

OK