Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard

DRONES


asisis
 Share

Recommended Posts

I woner about this drone guy's attitude: Equating dementia with objecting to drones.  People with dementia don't have it together enough to take any action about drones.  His argument is laughable.

I suspect this is the same guy who got his drone shot down when it was way too low before.  I look forward to seeing legislation that defines what is, and what is NOT okay according to today's reality.  I think 1000' is about right.  I don't want to hear it or see it.  The normally quiet airspace above Lakeside is one of it's pleasures.  Don't get me started about that useless noisemaker that just spreads the mess around:  leafblowers.  Those of us who have lived in Southern CA have some strong opinons about that, too.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember radio controlled model airplanes and helicopters? They were a lot noisier than today's drones, but now, most anywhere, they can only be flown in designated areas. Some people I knew flew the big 3 foot across gas engine model airplanes - their club was restricted to one area and had to carry $1million liability. So it would be a pretty simple amendment in the laws regarding model airplanes to include drones as well. A lot of people are doing bad things with drones, invasion of privacy photographs, drug smuggling, in the middle east they are using them as bombs. Does drone guy speak for every operator Lakeside - I don't think so. Does he have liability insurance - I doubt it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gringal, I do not know you and you sure don't know me.   Your suspicions are incorrect.   I have yet to fly anywhere other than above my own property.  Your belief that drones should be at 1000 feet is dangerous.   Drones in Mexico are limited to 150 - 400 feet in altitude by law for good reason.   That is high enough to avoid privacy concerns and low enough to avoid collisions with aircraft.  Gringal's problem with me lies in the fact that I believe young people are more accepting of new technology than older people.  You are free to disagree but don't mis characterize my position.   My point about dementia is that incidence increases with age, showing that age is a factor in biology and psychology ( a response to your ageism criticism).   I do not believe that people with privacy concerns have dementia, that is ridiculous.   I do, however, believe that much of the negative public perception of drones is based on a PERCIEVED but NON-EXISTANT intrusion of privacy.   150 feet away with a wide angle lens is hardly an invasion of privacy.  If someone wanted to Spy on you, climbing a tree with a dslr and telephoto lens would be much better option than a drone.  But we do not vilify all cameras and photographers.   Plus the naming is wrong.  RC helicopter is much better, it does not have the military connotation that drone has.   Perhaps an analogy might help.  Drones can be used for many purposes just as cars can.   Don't demonize all cars and all drivers because some other driver commits a crime.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I perceive from your posts that you are quite angry about any opposition.  But please try to consider the opposition's point of view.

It is your logic that I disagree with. Your analogy about cars and drones doesn't work since cars can't fly and rarely enter a householder's property to have an accident.   Another point: nobody needs to fly a drone over a densely populated area: it is perfectly fine with me for you to practice aerial photography over open areas.  I just don't want your noise pollution over my house.  Just imagine if the drone photography devotees grew in number and you had a 300 member drone club flying over our lakeside towns.  Yech.  Mexico, and even the Lake Chapala area, has plenty of open space to photograph.

I concede that it may well have been another drone operator who shot down, not you.  I would never shoot down anything that didn't belong to me unless it constituted an obvious threat, which nosy, noisy drones do not.

Enjoy your hobby.  Just please, be considerate of others who don't want to share the results of it.  That includes Mexican familes, young and old expat people as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The car anology works quite well for me.  It's fairly simple logic.   Some people operate machines responsibly while others do not.   I do not demonize all drivers or cars in this world because a few drive wrecklessly.   The same follows for drones, because a few may choose to fly irresponsibly, I do not demonize all pilots or drones.   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Up in the greater Seattle area they are experimenting using drones to deliver packages from such companies as Amazon. So far it has been working quite well most of the time. More and more of the younger crowd is getting involved with Drones. Of the three owners I know lakeside all are 25 to 40 years of age.

Take a look at Amazon. They've got Drones for kids starting and $20 US and all kinds of more sophisticated drones for grownups both with and without cameras, some costing several thousand dollars. more and more real estate agents are using them to help film and sell houses via the internet. Farmers are using them to survey their crops and determine where more or less water is needed etc.

I get the idea that soon drones will be common place and used by many.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about the world, but there are way more reckless and dangerous drivesr here in Mexico. Likewise with drones, the ones I often see are young teenagers, with rich parents/grandparents etc. They have no training whatsoever, no idea of any "rules", and they are flying entry level models. If you really wanted to start the drone "hobby" Lakeside - start a club, teach people the rules and how too safely operate these devices. It could be a lot of fun. Like aerial obstacle courses, time trials, balloon pops, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who consider this a privacy issue, in this day and age of cellphones, street cameras, and Google glass, you can pretty much forget about privacy.  No matter where you are, someone could be taking a photo of you without your knowledge and posting in onto social media sites or news sites.

Unfortunately, that is not going to change, so we just have to learn to live with it.  Not saying that it's right, just that is the world we live in now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, suegarn said:

For those who consider this a privacy issue, in this day and age of cellphones, street cameras, and Google glass, you can pretty much forget about privacy.  No matter where you are, someone could be taking a photo of you without your knowledge and posting in onto social media sites or news sites.

Unfortunately, that is not going to change, so we just have to learn to live with it.  Not saying that it's right, just that is the world we live in now.

That does not mean we cannot protest the noise pollution aspect of it until some kind of reasonable restrictions are put in place regarding drones flying low over residential areas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could imagine drones could be a real pain in the REAR. I bet that with time it will just be another new option that when used will usually be used in a responsible manner. Just like a cell phone you can be a real pain taking cell phone call at a meeting or at church. Most of us learned when and where to take or make cell phone calls. And we will do the same with Drones  [I hope :) ]

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2017 at 7:19 PM, LakeViews said:

Do ultralights, planes, helicopters, hang gliders, and satellites have the same potential as a drone to take photographs?    Yes.   So why single out drones as OK to shoot down?   When is it OK to destroy another's property?    I have zero intent on invading anyone's privacy when flying.   So far what I hear is that there is a percieved intrusion of privacy and that this intrusion then justifies the destrustion of someone else's property according to a few minds here.   I happen to disagree.

Is there any proof of this intrusion of privacy?  Or is this a percieved intrusion?   I assume it is only a percieved intrusion.   So really you folks are talking about destroying someone else's property out of sheer paranoia.   No one wants to see a shriveled gringo lying in their backyard, that's not the point.   We are flying to take sweeping vistas of the beautiful geography and architecture of the area.  Drones are a great new tool for cinematography.    Treating drones with disdain, fear and outright violence is interesting psychology and deserves analysis.   Thinking that one's property rights allows the destrustion of someone else's property is a really odd stance and also deserves analysis.

I am left wondering what the purpose of flying a drone is.  Isn't it because it has a camera?  Aren't there already aerial views of the area available to view?  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm wondering if I should be concerned now about drones flying over our property in the daytime, or wait until they post the videos of two old people having sex in and around our outdoor pool? Your opinions are appreciated. P.S. We do have high walls to not disturb our lovely neighbors.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LakeViews said:

If anyone thinks a drone is spying on them or is worried about it, then the issue is more likely with their own psychology.   I would look into paranoia and a grossly inflated ego. 

If I was a male teenager, with grossly inflated hormones, I know what I would be snooping for - the legendary topless female sunbathers on their roof gardens - my cousin Pablo's friend swears this is absolutely true!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, El Cartero said:

Lakeviews, we all got your point!   You seem insensitive to ours.   Please end this ridiculous and negative banter Sr. Mod, it's obviously on a downward spiral!

Yes, please extinguish the views of the one person here that actually owns a drone.   That way we can all have a mono tone fear of the upcoming dystopian robot apocalypse when we hear a flying object.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technological progress! Gimme a break - you slap down some cash for your electronic peeping tom. I spent months building my RC controlled replica triplane, spent many hours with the model rocketry club, learning velocity projections and potential fuel mixes, even amateur astronomy has more interesting people and things to learn - and - this will give you a woody - they get to play with high powered telescopes!

and the word is Luddite - maybe some grammar and elocution lessons are in order.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, CHILLIN said:

Technological progress! Gimme a break - you slap down some cash for your electronic peeping tom. I spent months building my RC controlled replica triplane, spent many hours with the model rocketry club, learning velocity projections and potential fuel mixes, even amateur astronomy has more interesting people and things to learn - and - this will give you a woody - they get to play with high powered telescopes!

and the word is Luddite - maybe some grammar and elocution lessons are in order.

You said it.  The most objectionable thing about this guys posts are his rather snarky putting down of any opinion other than his own with a variety of insults.  Neither has he suggested how his drone benefits anyone other than himself.  People in this area, and I mean nearly everyone from teenagers to great grandparents, has readily embraced the new technologies which improve communication and the ability to reach out and acquire knowledge, so his claims are empty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...