Can't believe people really sit at home and get upset about some videos & a "writer" starving for a story.... Holy smokes folks nothing is going to stop people from doing what they do

Sit back enjoy the hobby & watch the videos
:shrug:

I don't really see what the big deal of this story is. So it's possible with a lot of work to make a flying paintball gun. What's that gonna do besides make games of paintball or airsoft much more interesting? Honestly that could be pretty fun. And okay, so anything you can do with a toy gun you could probably do with a real gun. So you can make a flying gun. Well, tons of people have guns already and use them perfectly responsibly. Just because one could conceivably mount one on a quadcopter doesn't mean there's going to be an epidemic of armed quadcopters flying around killing people. For people who are so inclined there are plenty of much easier ways to do a mass shooting than first building and learning to fly a gun equipped quadcopter. Nevermind the fact that most such people are mentally unstable and lack the patience or intelligence to do that in the first place. For those that actually could do this, there is an infinite number of other everyday objects they could turn into weapons just as easily. Of all the possible concerns people might have over misuse of RC aircraft, that is the absolute least likely to be a real problem. It's just not going to be an issue.

Originally Posted by prelator

I don't really see what the big deal of this story is. So it's possible with a lot of work to make a flying paintball gun. What's that gonna do besides make games of paintball or airsoft much more interesting? Honestly that could be pretty fun. And okay, so anything you can do with a toy gun you could probably do with a real gun. So you can make a flying gun. Well, tons of people have guns already and use them perfectly responsibly. Just because one could conceivably mount one on a quadcopter doesn't mean there's going to be an epidemic of armed quadcopters flying around killing people. For people who are so inclined there are plenty of much easier ways to do a mass shooting than first building and learning to fly a gun equipped quadcopter. Nevermind the fact that most such people are mentally unstable and lack the patience or intelligence to do that in the first place. For those that actually could do this, there is an infinite number of other everyday objects they could turn into weapons just as easily. Of all the possible concerns people might have over misuse of RC aircraft, that is the absolute least likely to be a real problem. It's just not going to be an issue.

And only a few months ago no one thought that privacy would jump to the forefront but all it took was for the right buttons to be pushed. This is no longer a conceivably possibility for the general public as the video clearly shows it has been done. The two people who posted videos deserve no credit for originality or ability as it has been possible all along but no one had bothered to show it on Utube. We need not list out for everyone the worse things than guns that could be freight and it would not require mental stability or means to mass destruction to create fear as Ted Kavinsky demonstrated. All that’s needed is a method of remote delivery like Ted used the mail and now there is a better one.

IMO the down side for us in this publicity isn't the relatively low chance that it will happen (lets hope) but that it raises just one more negative for anyone who doesn't like the idea of unregulated sUAV's. Many things in this sport would remain non-issues if the persons involved would just keep it private and forget about trying to be heroes on Utube. We are not yet home free and do not need any more problems at the moment.

Originally Posted by prelator

I don't really see what the big deal of this story is. So it's possible with a lot of work to make a flying paintball gun. What's that gonna do besides make games of paintball or airsoft much more interesting? Honestly that could be pretty fun. And okay, so anything you can do with a toy gun you could probably do with a real gun. So you can make a flying gun. Well, tons of people have guns already and use them perfectly responsibly. Just because one could conceivably mount one on a quadcopter doesn't mean there's going to be an epidemic of armed quadcopters flying around killing people. For people who are so inclined there are plenty of much easier ways to do a mass shooting than first building and learning to fly a gun equipped quadcopter. Nevermind the fact that most such people are mentally unstable and lack the patience or intelligence to do that in the first place. For those that actually could do this, there is an infinite number of other everyday objects they could turn into weapons just as easily. Of all the possible concerns people might have over misuse of RC aircraft, that is the absolute least likely to be a real problem. It's just not going to be an issue.

Agreed. Like all of the many "it only takes one idiot" posts in this thread and all over the FPV forum here, dating back years, nothing will happen. If the US government legislated against every stupid act performed by every idiot you wouldn't be able to leave the house. Hell, the US has mass shootings year after year (often multiple a year) and nothing has been done about it for almost twenty years, so why would they care about a silly paintball gun on a quad?

And they give drunks keys to a car.... muwahahahaha

Originally Posted by RandallJ

And they give drunks keys to a car.... muwahahahaha

A good place for a first post or maybe a new screen name for an ex-member but anyway who exactly is the THEY you refer to?

Some people just LOVE to argue over things that are not going to stop but hey I only have about 100 posts so I am probably not on the level with some of the "big hitters"

Originally Posted by Gary Evans

A good place for a first post or maybe a new screen name for an ex-member ...

I have never looked at this thread, and I intend to unsubscribe immediately after this post, but WHY?

Why do you feel the need to accuse him (well you didn't directly, but you most certainly implied it) of being a rebellious ex-member?

Is this how RCGroups treats people that are new to it?

I happen to know that he is quite new to FPV, he's into multirotors from what I can gather.

Originally Posted by Legot

I have never looked at this thread, and I intend to unsubscribe immediately after this post, but WHY?

Why do you feel the need to accuse him (well you didn't directly, but you most certainly implied it) of being a rebellious ex-member?

Is this how RCGroups treats people that are new to it?

I happen to know that he is quite new to FPV, he's into multirotors from what I can gather.

Sounds like you read your own story into my post. He wasn't accused of anything more less being rebellious. When someone wanders in for their first ever post with a strange off topic comment that wasn't explained they can expect questions. We unfortunately have a fair number of people who troll RCG's using alias user names as you can see in "recent infractions" section.
Everyone is welcome to post here as long as it is on topic and doesn't break the house rules.

Soooo back on subject....

Just checked the monthly report on DOT rulemakings in progress: http://www.dot.gov/regulations/decem...emaking-report. They've updated the NPRM publication date and pushed it back to June 24, 2013. Why am I not surprised they pushed it back another 6 months? It sucks for the commercial guys I know, but every time this happens, I can only think FPV got another reprieve, since it will only take them longer to outlaw us.

Yet another reprieve. The latest Model Aviation knowing something had to be included on the subject has a couple of rambling historical statements.

Originally Posted by prelator

It sucks for the commercial guys I know, but every time this happens, I can only think FPV got another reprieve, since it will only take them longer to outlaw us.

Speaking of the commercial guys, even if the FAA ends up giving some reasonable green light, how are they going to deal with the video transmission license? The FPV equipment we use is on HAM frequencies that can't be used for commercial purposes even on the ground. Is there a different set of wireless video equipment with decent range that can be used commercially in compliance with FCC regs?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/26/op...ones.html?_r=0

The AMA is only worried with securing their financial well being when all is said and done. If you don't live near an AMA modeled airfield or attend an AMA sanctioned event then you might as well fly renegade.
I am sure it will pan out also to be like HAM radio where you may have to take a test and pay a FEE, Government is going to get someting out of it for sure.
In the hobbiest world active HAMs can provide a realworld service justifying their use of the frequencies.
Most hobbiest flying FPV aren't equipt in skill or financials to be able to provide emergncy services to the Government and those modelers may end up getting screwed by this whole ordeal.
All in all this FPV/UAS is going to end up ruining RC modeling. The CL and indor rubber FF modelers may be the only ones to stand a chance.
And I am still waiting on facts proving a model airplane has endangered commercial aircraft.

You can go it alone or be in a group.

Pilots have AOPA, HAMs ARRL, drivers AAA, seniors AARP...

The best we have as aeromodelers is the AMA. If you want to change the AMA, best to do so as a member.

For sure one will get nowhere if one writes like a butthurt teenager except maybe with butthurt teenagers.