The FAA oversteps the mark, prohibits drone hobbyist from flying INSIDE their own house.

[@thirty3fpv]

The FAA is absolutely making an example of him because they know most hobbyists will disregard RID otherwise.

[@NoOneFPV]

Most of us will still give the FAA the bird. I certainly am.

[@IpokeSmot420]

FTFAA

[@WestVirginiasBigred271]

I have been flying drones since 2013 Ive never had any problems mikey's mistake was allowing his KZbin channel to be monetized and flying beyond VLOS and in restricted or controlled areas. He can still fly drones he just needs to do it privately. He can unbind his DJI drones from his DJI account and create a new email address and profile giving false information there would be no possible way to identify him as the pilot. He can also fly FPV drones without an app nobody would ever know he was flying unless they seen him with their own eyes

[@EmpressOfExile206]

Yeah we *will disregard* that 🐂💩 because the FFA gave *_themselves_* the "authority" to _regulate_ our *private rights* as 🇺🇸 citizens‼️ To quote the Founders: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759 "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

[@josh3771]

Meanwhile FAA approves a smoke stack with less than 100ft clearance on approach down the runway centreline in Burley leading to a fatal crash

[@Riverrockphotos]

Bingo. that Steam stack should are never have been approved

[@1oldgoat383]

In the meantime 80000kg planes full of people are falling apart over our heads , good job FAA keep us all safe from the toys 👍👍

[@Bigheadcase]

Billion dollar crime syndicates in league with our corrupt puppet politicians running the world, what could go wrong?

[@simonschneider5913]

the fact that what you wrote is actually true still blows my mind. we are on our way to "idiocracy". i cant imagine who is sitting in those bureaucracies thinking they are doing something good. those have to be people with a mental disorder.

[@keithcarpenter5254]

Never was about safety......all about control, and money......

[@simonschneider5913]

@@keithcarpenter5254 i think youre right. they begin to realize the usefulness of drones, and they are intent on denying those to anyone but themselves. its all over the globe, to varying degrees.

[@danielthrasher7052]

@@keithcarpenter5254 Was going to say that but you beat me to it 🤠

[@rome8153]

Love your knowledge of our hobby ..... Right On man

[@dankron_]

FAA is rubish but CASA is getting even worse. According to CASA you can only fly FPV outdoors if you have a CASA approval or you are flying at a club that has CASA approval, you can only fly without approval indoors... I feel like selling all my drones now... what a load of crap, there are so many empty places you can fly FPV here without endengering anybody. Australia is huge and there are so many places you can fly without seeing anyone around for days... why do i need approval for any of that?

[@MattExzy]

I'm in Australia, I just put my FPV goggles on a camera tripod - then I could just stand back and say "well, you see, it's mounted *with* line of sight..." - however, has anyone noticed that CASA dropped registration for 249g + stuff? As long as you're 5.5km from an airport or something. I'm making the most of that - compared to the US, it's actually a new golden age here. I'm building and flying stuff left and right lol

[@simonschneider5913]

like private firearms, they are scared of drones i feel, for "national security" reasons. they want to have full control and keep everyone in the dark, helpless.

[@BengalCatChilli]

wrong. CASA also regulates FPV flight inside. You have to use netting, get approval and insurance etc. Technically it's illegal to fly a whoop FPV inside where there is a path for the drone to get outside - i.e a window or doorway.

[@dankron_]

@@BengalCatChilli CASA website says you can fly indoors without approval, provided you can't escape the building

[@620ironwolf]

Does a falling tree make a sound if nobody is around to hear it?

[@kernag7688]

Bruce, please give us an update on what is happening out at the air-field? You still have a shop out there right? Thanks!

[@johnstone5927]

I’m with you 100%. If we don’t stand up for our rights and freedoms they will take each and everyone from us under the guise of safety. Be very specific on what you need us to do. I’ll do my best to spread the word. Thanks for all your hard work protecting this hobby for future generations.

[@KainniaK]

As somebody living outside of the USA, why you guys always say you are so free? This guy is not even allowed to fly a toy in his own house. How is that freedom?

[@cambridgemart2075]

The residents of the USA don't seem to be aware of how much more restricted they are compared to the rest of the world. The single exception is guns - they are free to kill their neighbours with firearms if they so wish!!!

[@Colin-px6il]

Most people like to believe they’re free but sadly we are not but we do like to believe it…….

[@davedave6565]

Hope you are well Bruce and thank you for what you do for the hobby!

[@jakthebomb]

Every time I hear a story of the FAA’s insanity my blood boils. The FAA shouldn’t have ever had any say in Drones.

[@simonschneider5913]

government has grown out of control in many places. i feel like living in the new soviet union..

[@conorstewart2214]

I do agree that pretty much every regulatory body involved with drones takes it too far, especially when there are other more dangerous air users, like paragliders, paramotors, or just someone recreationally flying a manned aircraft, those same air users are also totally against drones and give nonsense reasons to restrict us more. However I am curious why you think that the FAA shouldn’t have ever had any say in drones? It is directly in their jurisdiction, they handle aviation and drones are just unmanned aircraft. I know very few of their rules make sense, really only the don’t fly in restricted airspace or over crowds of people one. So they should be involved with drones but they shouldn’t have brought in most of the rules they did, there are still zero cases of accidents or deaths from normal, recreationally or commercially flown drones, (drones used by the military like in Ukraine are an exception and don’t count). Here in the UK the CAA is very much like your FAA and tends to follow the FAA’s lead. Here paragliders, paramotors and similar aircraft are regulated by their own separate body and have much less restrictions than drones do. They complain about drones a lot about how they could hit them, yet they refuse to wear or use anything to broadcast their position (they can be silent and they do fly at low altitude), they claim they can’t fit such a system on their harness and that their body will block the antennas yet somehow we can fit remote ID on drones easily. They just want to enjoy their hobby and don’t care about anyone else who wants to use the airspace. They complain about hitting drones, yet there are no cases of that happening and they don’t take any responsibility for their own safety. Recreational pilots are similar, they complain that they could hit a drone when coming in for an emergency landing, if they are emergency landing then they have more to worry about than a drone and them needing to emergency land is their responsibility and no one else’s, should cars just not use roads incase a plane needs to make an emergency landing on it? The reason for the amount of restrictions on drones is due to these other groups and airlines complaining baselessly about drones and making them out to be more dangerous than they are. The FAA and CAA are just caving to these other groups demands, probably driven (and maybe paid) by airlines. These regulatory bodies aren’t making anything safer, they are just making it worse for everyone.

[@gabedude68]

Appreciate the work you do. Should simply be a 1km zone around commercial airports, otherwise anything under 1kg should simply be a civil matter IF anyones greenhouse etc has something land on it.. sorry the Community couldn't give you enough support with your Court thing, I'm sure a lot of people would have liked to. For myself, I'm in the UK, and you're in New Zealand - I don't think they would listen if I did write to them, but if you think so, tell us where to write! Thanks again!

[@Joe-wk9ow]

It's also a Violation of "The Bill of Rights." No cruel or unusual punishments. Also no seizure of property without just compensation meaning the FAA has to pay Mike to take his property.

[@RecoveryoneDrone]

😂

[@keithcarpenter5254]

Unfortunately, only Americans were lucky enough to have such protection. Notice i said, were......demonrats, letting wahmens vote, etc, has eroded even those enshrined rights away laughably.....

[@jetliorigami]

It's their biggest target to date and the largest fine. ...... yet nobody was hurt an no property was damaged. Think about that

[@clifffield1]

Sadly, that argument doesn't stand up to much. (I agree with you too). I think what _should_ be considered is "intent". If rulings are to be made solely on outcomes, then someone who tries to kill someone with a shotgun, but fails to hit them, hasn't really done anything wrong either, because no one got hurt (leaving emotional trauma out of it for a moment). So, I think the "intent" that Mikey had (to not hurt anyone -- and he didn't) should really be the focus. Very much victimless crimes - but again, there's that minuscule chance that his drone might have dropped from the sky onto a road user and caused an accident etc etc.... It's an argument that kinda cannot be invalidated, sadly, because there's always that 'chance' of something happening. If any of this was based on a true risk calculation - then I think there'd be almost no drone pilot prosecutions because the risks are just so, so low. Just wanting to make it clear that I agree with you - just that I don't think the 'no one got hurt' argument will really be listened to because of the "what if" scenarios. I kinda think Mikey's made his bed in this instance. As sad as that is.

[@xjet]

I think that although intent is a factor, actual harm is also. That's why we have the crime of "attempted murder" and the crime of "murder" and they usually have different (although similar) levels of penalty associated with them.

[@clifffield1]

@@xjet Sadly, I think this could work both for, and against, Mikey in this case. I think it'd be easy to prove that (although, in reality, fricking tiny) there was _some_ risk in what Mikey was doing - and that he'd know that, which would then bring into question his intent... I hate the law for this type of crap, but you might be able to see what I mean here.

[@dronedude9523]

@@xjet There's a crime of contempt of court that upped his penalty here. It's hard to for you to rip anyone a new one when you leave out relevant facts. Mikey put himself in a position to be in desperate need of an attorney not arm chair attorney's who deal in irrelevant "facts" that will get immediately torn to shreds. Mikey admitted that they have him dead to rights on some violations. He doesn't need to go crying in court and get his ass tiny whooped over making a big deal over wanting to fly indoors.

[@davedauria4782]

​@@clifffield1I don't see the risk being that easy to prove. the dude has probably thousands of hours of video with zero damage. I would say that's pretty good proof that he was managing the risk just fine. meanwhile another Boeing plane just made an emergency landing in turkey because their front landing gear would not come down. clearly the FAA is an ineffective government agency. they go soft against huge corporations but super hard when it's one dude who can't afford a lawyer. people have died because of the direct actions of these corporations and still nothing is done.

[@smacfe]

I pity the poor FAA guy that would break into my house and try to cite me for flying my drone inside.

[@AggyGoesOutdoors]

Tell me, what would happen in this scenario?

[@sotm6078]

@@AggyGoesOutdoors Bang, Bang! This is my Casa!!!

[@AggyGoesOutdoors]

@@sotm6078 how is that approach going to work out long term in the real world?

[@impmeister1]

FAA is going after the hobbiest while boeing aircraft fall apart in the sky. But they do not want to go after boeing and its suppliers because they will end up on the boeing hitlist. A second whistleblower in the boeing story "died". So yeah its easier to go after small and defendless hobbiest who get backstabbed by their clubs

[@corneliuswowbagger]

Not so much the Boeing hit list as their paid lobby’s disfavor list!

[@adcraziness1501]

They want to cut down on hobbyist drones because there is a whole commercial drone delivery industry chomping at the bit to have the entire sky.

[@lc79tourer26]

I would have thought the FAA had far too much on its plate with real safety issues like the Boeing incidents that was allowed to manifest itself under their watch? This mush have happened because they took their eyes off the ball playing with all this drone rubbish they keep trotting out? Looking forward to your next installment

[@citizenblue]

Over-regulation killed this hobby for me. I have a hanger full of birds that haven't flown in about 5 years.

[@yngndrw.]

As much as I disagree with the regulations, in the interest of balance, I have a counter-point to your argument - Driving bans. They can ban you from driving and seize your vehicles, even though you can still drive on your own private property. In practice, the ban only covers enforceable locations. (I.e. Public highways) I would suspect that exactly the same applies here, the wording is key: "Defendant is prohibited from operation of any and all drones" - It does not specify ownership, only operation. It can be argued that a ban on operation is only enforceable within their area of jurisdiction, at least in my view.

[@mikenowland2739]

Just watched his videos . Like it or not Bruce people like him are making it harder for us model aircraft guys. We are lumped in unfairly with the drone community . By the way how’s Ron’s health ? Haven’t seen him or the other guys on your vids for a while .

[@UneducatedEngineer444]

I don't know if you'll see this k Xjet but I've been subscribed for over a decade and I just want to remind you to get out a fly a bit, whatever your favorite rc is and just have some fun. Also thank you for keeping us up to date. I sure miss the old days. But I still fly the way i want to :)

[@npsmith7699]

meanwhile it's raining planes and helos.................

[@joshhoman]

Literally.

[@finnybflyin]

Hi Bruce. This is Brenndan from Drone Me Up. I was one of the few subscribers who reacted the last time you asked. I'll be watching. Cheers

[@ShermanKenB]

His ban was from the Federal court judge for being in contempt of the court. He had already appeared in court and then in April was found to be violating the terms of his 1st court hearing. Kinda not smart on his part IMO. Judges in the US have wide latitude in contempt. Probably not best to piss off a federal judge....

[@JustPlainRob]

The FAA has no authority to ban him from flying drones inside his home, and I don't think that's what their proposal meant either. I think they mean he's never allowed to get Part 107 certified, he's never allowed to fly a drone in the public airspace, not allowed to fly at club sites, any type of regulated flight. And as far as seizure, it says they need to provide specific identifiers as well as the length for which they'll be seizing them. Whoops and other

[@TheWebstaff]

And another Boeing whistle blowers been uninstalled from the earth!

[@davebreakwell9754]

You’re right about that guy… but he DID go too far with ignoring their requests. (Just my 2cents on him) He definitely should at least have a new lil drone with a slap on the wrist! I’m a happy drone pilot in AUS 🙂 Love you’re channel 👍

[@BerndFelsche]

FAA should be prioritising the policing of regulations wiyh safety impact on people's lives. Seems like outsourcing such has left too many thumbs twiddling at the regulators, while passenger aircraft self-dismantle in flight.

[@JSKCKNIT]

He repeatedly violated court orders. He should be happy he wasn't thrown in jail.

[@robertshaver4432]

And Hunter?

[@brendonwood7595]

Someone flagrantly and repeatedly ignoring cease and desist requests for blatantly illegal behaviour being banned from any use of drones is in the same ballpark as someone accused of hacking multiple organisations being banned from use of computers, something that has happened on many occasions, and that I don't find unreasonable. That is a very different thing than saying nobody is allowed to fly drones in their own house. Are those being requested as bail conditions?

[@RonDavies-r3p]

Let’s get back to the airfield videos hey Bruce,l miss your old content !😢

[@machinegundroner9411]

I have to disagree with this one. I don't condone irresponsible drone use. When you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes like prohibitive court orders. You need to remember that a court order IS NOT an FAA order. It's an order from a judge. Court orders can prohibit a person from many things. Court orders can prohibit pedophiles from using or owning a computer or any device that accesses the internet, including within their own homes. There are court orders that prohibit people from owning firearms. A court can prohibit drone use, too. I agree with you that the FAA doesn't control your living room airspace and I'm confident the FAA knows that, too. I don't believe this court order was written with the defendant's living room airspace in mind. I believe it was written to prevent the defendant from violating FAA regulations a third time and to make him take the rules seriously since he didn't learn his lesson the first two times. As responsible drone pilots, we as a community should hold each other accountable to the rules. I agree that some FAA rules are stupid and pointless, but I'm also seeing rules slowly change and relax a little, too.

[@StacemanFPV]

The court doesn't care about intent.. Only what the letter of the law says.. So if he were to fly a drone in his living room that would in fact be in violation and they could arrest him for that and put him in jail.

[@jlight7346]

It's only ever going to get worse unless there's a major change in what the FAA is allowed to regulate. I can totally see any kind of RC aircraft operation being made illegal outdoors because companies like Amazon want a completely clear sky for their delivery drones. What do you think FAA regulators are going to do when Amazon knocks on their door with a shitload of money? Cater to hobbyists?

[@pista01slk]

Pretty much all 3 letter agencies have overreached their authority

[@eyespy1415]

The Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishments, but also mentions “excessive fines” and bail..

[@dronedude9523]

The Judge is the one who banned him from owning and operating drones for violating a COURT ORDER not the FAA. He sealed his own fate violating the order. This moved past the FAA deciding his punishment, you are aware of that, right? Also....... Worrying about Mikey being able to fly indoors is stupid because he could give 2 shits about flying indoors. He is so jaded from flying 1200 feet in the air, waayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of LOS, chasing trains etc that it would be torture flying in the house. He got in to this level of trouble because is obsessed with reckless flying and kept repeating the same stuff he was told not too by family, the FAA and the Judge. Judges don't play! Err on the side of caution if you are not sure you are violating a judge's order. That's the advice homie needed not this kind of nitpicking of the situation.

[@Jaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay]

Very hard to regard FAA as anything above contemptible these days. Utterly unfit for purpose, over-regulation gone properly mental. They are the foxes in charge of chicken security, and an absolute enemy of the hobby and personal freedoms relating to it.

[@superskeg]

Bruce: Interested in your thoughts re SCOTUS Chevron decision and FAA/aeromodeling

[@Soryt]

The world is gone crazy 🤬🤬

[@rcbits404]

If the FAA has no jurisdiction in peoples living rooms, I do not think this document applies to living rooms at all, and I do not think the FAA expects it to either.

[@richardb8492]

Bruce, what are your opinions on the new DJI goggles 3 with regard to their two way video and radio transmission and receivers that close to your head (brain)? I can see less of a concern in CE power level countries. I would love to see the radiation patterns of the googles 3 transmission antennas and if there is any rf protection for the head?

[@MCsCreations]

The worst part, Bruce, is that I think it's going to need to get much worse before it can get better... 😕 Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊

[@MikeLee-mz4zd]

Case law suggests that the FAA may also be overstepping their bounds requiring RID at less than 400AGL in Class G airspace over private property.

[@not-a-lot-of-options]

I am not defending the FAA here. I am merely "thinking aloud" on why I think they did this. Overall, the FAA has handled drones terribly, especially considering all the /other/ things going on within aviation right now. I think they are doing this based on loosely similar things that happen in court. Convicted hackers have been (as far as I'm aware) banned from owning and operating computers. This could be seen as an overreach: not all computers are internet connected or even necessarily capable of internet connectivity. But they would still be banned from running a computer without internet in their home to play old single player games, for instance. The thought being, "this person has proven themselves untrustworthy with computers, therefore we cannot trust them to own any". They're probably thinking, "this person has proven themselves untrustworthy with drones, therefore we cannot trust them to own any". Again, I don't agree with it. I'm just trying to theorise why they chose to go this direction with it.

[@demosloizides2060]

You're absolutely correct!

[@Smagsfpv]

Shouldn't @phillydronelife be able to fly inside a bando? 💙💙 Love ya Mikey boy

[@36736fps]

The government has always prohibited countless activities in your own house.

[@danielsnyder3563]

If a person egregiously violated the rules of the road for KZbin monetization their drivers license would be taken away forever.

[@obsculor]

Some times I riddle, would we really be worse off with a dictator?... Probably NOT!

[@randyferrell6648]

I’m against what the FAA is doing, “BUT” this guy broke the rules not only once but over and over again. Ban him from flying any and all drones is fine. The FAA is not going to come to your house if you’re flying a drone without remote ID and bust your door down. Get real put it into perspective and understand both sides. FAA has overstepped their rights but this guy has pushed their buttons and spit in their faces. Bust his butt and let everyone know it’s not right what he did. He is NOT a good representative for the ones that are doing the right thing.

[@FourthWayRanch]

Did you know the FAA doesn't even require people who weld on aircraft to be certified?

[@davefoord1259]

Contempt for authority is not a crime. Committing criminal offences is a crime.

[@ianwalton284]

The airspace in my living room is controlled by the Feline Aircraft Assassin.

[@MartinVenter371]

Yeah, the drone hobbyists must stand together!

[@davedauria4782]

I completely agree with you. personally I wouldn't really care though. It's absolutely unenforceable. if I was Mikey I'd be flying all I wanted to, I just wouldn't put it on video anymore.

[@larryg2705]

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out- Because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out- Because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out- Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me.

[@johnburns5783]

Thing is Bruce, Philly Drone Life regularly broke FAA rules re distance, height, flying over uninvolved people. He was warned on multiple occasions before this action was taken. Even on his last video where he discusses his meetings with the FAA, he admits his flights broke the rules, but didn’t know the rules ( even after many warnings from the FAA) He said he wanted to work with the FAA on his knowledge and even gain certification. He now claims the last flight of his drone was undertaken by someone wanting to test it before buying it off him. Bruce, if you were selling a drone and the buyer wanted to test it, would you be happy for them to fly it over a mile away from where they were controlling it ? I admire your fight against stupid rules, but honestly, you can’t defend the indefensible 👍 PS, no one’s going to watch his channel to see video of a whoop flying around his bedroom 😉😉

[@Superkuh2]

Everything you've said is true and also completely irrelevant. The FAA has no regulatory authority inside personal property buildings.

[@johnburns5783]

@Superkuh2 Well you watch phillydronelife's next video... "A two mile flight round my bedroom, bathroom and kitchen" 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Superkuh2]

@@johnburns5783 Your premise is that people only fly to make money on youtube and that's absurd.

[@johnburns5783]

@@Superkuh2 well let’s face it, from now on, that’s the only sort of drone videos he could legally make 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Superkuh2]

@@johnburns5783 Cool? I don't actually know who phillydronelife is. Don't care. Sounds like an appropriate punishment for breaking the law.

[@brentnevius2849]

Treasure valley, id"parks and rec." abuses the crap out of their "power". Fly over state determined to stay that way!

[@secretagb]

Yeah that's straight up not legal. There's also illegal taking of owned property. There's a LOT of that going on lately without consequence around here not just in hobby flying.

[@CurryKitten]

Whilst I don't agree with the FAA's intentions here, this sort of thing isn't unprecedented. Over the years there's been various hackers caught and their entire right to access a computer was withdrawn - whether it was connected to the Internet or not. This is the FAA petitioning to say "He can't be trusted, take away all his toys under all circumstances"

[@EmpressOfExile206]

Just because they've violated constitutional rights in the past *_does not_* mean we let them continue with this 🐂💩 now 💯 They gave *_themselves_* the "authority to _regulate drones_ a.k.a. our *private rights* as citizens... and if we don't stand up against this 💩 now, then you'll be crying when its *your* hobby and private rights being violated and not a soul is around to defend you either👏

[@EmpressOfExile206]

To quote the Founding Fathers: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759 "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

[@RecoveryoneDrone]

Make sure all of you pitch in to cover his court cost/lawyers fees to fight this........He went to court with no representation, who's fault was that. The DOJ saw fresh meat for the grinder and he got hammered.

[@Nkkdxn45j]

You say he's being picked out partly for not showing respect to the FAA. Probably so, but what have the FAA done to earn the respect of the RC model community? Precious little, and respect usually has to be earned, not assumed. It is the lack of proportionality in drone rules all round the world that gets me, but the reality, no-one can stop them, because that would need a public outcry, and we alone are just too insignificant.

[@bradpierce]

Most used to respect the FAA. Now most do not. Sad.

[@johnserious706]

He's lucky he wasn't thrown in jail. He can't be trusted with a drone, he has proven that.

[@getahanddown]

More suitable to ban him from outdoor flight. Still sucks for sure but removes the risk but allows private indoor or competition etc still.

[@Mrtcoltpilot56]

Here is another one for ya. Go figure. A recent incident above the USS Ronald Reagan at Yokosuka Naval Base in Japan has sparked a Navy investigation after apparent drone photography surfaced on social media platforms. The incident highlights new challenges for maritime security, with drones capable of quickly gathering intelligence or potentially posing a threat with malicious intent. There is more to this story, but I couldn't copy it all.

[@rohansully584]

FAA needs to focus on Boeing and actual aviation

[@jerseydronerschannel4328]

Public safety was so important that they waited 5 years to punish him? If they fined him $1000 5 years ago he would have changed his ways..

[@xjet]

You are absolutely correct. Clearly, protecting the safety of the public is very low on their list of priorities or they wouldn't have simply sat by and allow him to continue flying after it was clear he was ignoring their warnings. This is very much an example of lazy enforcement that serves nobody but the FAA themselves.

[@250drones]

They waited 5 years because he started flying and posting BVLOS drone flights again. That's why the most recent court action was taken. That's why.

[@xjet]

So how did he end up with so very many individual fines against him in the first place? Why didn't the FAA act in a timely way before he'd racked up $182K of fines at $1,500 a pop?

[@250drones]

​@@xjetthey did. Before the fines they sent him letters and had many phone calls. Micky explained it all in a video of his i watched last week. I don't want him banned but they did try to make him stop with warnings first. Technically the fine is $1500. But times the number of fines they issued. Saying 182k makes it sound like one fine. This is like someone racking up parking tickets over and over.

[@xjet]

Yeah... but they let him accumulate all those fines *before* they took action? Surely *good* enforcement with a view to protecting the public safety requires you to act promptly as soon as you become aware of a threat to that safety -- not to wait until the offender has had a chance to rack up so many offenses. Or perhaps the FAA recognizes that although the rules were broken, the risk to public safety was incredibly low so they gave this a very low priority -- in which case a total ban on flying is way OTT. The FAA seems slow to enforce its regulations *everywhere*... just look at the Boeing situation, how many died in Max9 crashes again?

[@keithcarpenter5254]

Pretty sure that the song said...." if you tolerate this....,then your children will be next......😮😊

[@franknielsen6620]

Please make the call to action easy. Like sign a partition or a template for an e-mail that can be send. Remember we are not all having the needed time, knowledge and/or written English abilities to doo this easily. So what could take you 10 min can be 1-2 hours for us to do.

[@ghettorecording2925]

oldguyFPV; In the United States, if there has ever been a law, regulation and/ or rule, that is unconstitutional on it face, it’s RID!

[@Steve25g]

You do, FAA has nothing to look for there, imo, as well in the airspace in my garden

[@rusack7174]

How would that even be enforced?

[@TheMadmacs]

if youre ok with a ban on owning outdoor drones, thats the end of it...... this claim he is banned from flying inside his own house is insane. and dont tell me it doesnt stipulate outdoor drones, thats the insane part.

[@xjet]

By the letter of the court order, it's *any* and*all* drones, without consideration to where they might be flown so that includes indoors. Perhaps the judge is unaware that tinywhoops exist and are regularly flown indoors at no risk to anyone. Ignorance ought not be justification or excuse for ridiculous diktats like this.

[@TheMadmacs]

@@xjet you have pedanticitius, your point is as solid as a fart but you think its a good point, a valid point. its not even a splitting hairs point. nobody would ever know if he flew indoors therefore? therefore???? its not so much this is not the hill to die on, its not a hill. think about it,,, your sayin its ok for him to be banned from owning and flying any drones outdoors, but the order should not restrict him from flying indoors, if it stipulated thaat you would be ok i assume? so.... tthe fact nobody can see him flyin in his own house means......

[@AchronTimeless]

@@TheMadmacs When they come with police to seize ALL drones from his home, then they will seize ALL drones and not sit and have reasonable discussions about pedantry.

[@TheMadmacs]

@@AchronTimeless thats a fairish point, but you can fly any drone outdoors and he can buy another one, and nobody would ever know.

[@haydenblack967]

FAA is probably scared of Boeing and decided toys would be an essier target.

[@ragndroneman]

Thank you Bruce for continuously fighting for us. I feel in his own way, Mikey was trying to do the same thing, maybe not quite in the correct manner, but he was vocal about how his little toys never hurt anyone, he has also said that he did try to get in touch with FAA during the time his case was, growing! He did flagrantly, break the rules but he was, in his way trying to make a point and, in his way fight for us. Its just a shame that so few people have the motivation to do the same. Like you say we need to start standing together. On that. I think it is disgraceful how certain youtubers, have completely thrown Mikey under the bus and tried to distance themselves from him in his time of need. After the same channels, not so long before wanted him on their channels. Would be great to see you and him have a chat when this has progrssed further, similar to the Mikey and Bot video, anyway..... I have recently moved from the UK to Australia and found some of CASA's, ideas/rules, to be a little bit, well different! But! I absolutely made sure I wrote to them regarding their proposals for the introduction of RID, a very lenghty email regarding the problems, inadequacy and potential abuse that RID would bring. Its just a bad solution to a very minor problem. Australia needs to, like other flight control agencies, start again with some policies and realise all kinds of unmanned flights are not the same, whoops, wings, quads and camera drones...... (the law here on fpv is just beyond my comprehension!) Anyway, thanks again Bruce. You are the GOAT when it comes to this. I wish you all the best, happiness and health and hopefully the powers that be WILL start listening to you at some point.

[@ripit_fpv143]

So really why do you associate yourself, and help platform someone who is frankly an example of the some of the worst drone behavior within the community? He does not practice anything you preach about 'safety over rules.' Out of all the people you could choose help platform up, him?! But wait, you don't endorse what he does. OK then. And, now you expect everyone to come to his defense. Philly was given yet ONE MORE CHANCE to fly within the rules and regs, and then BROKE IT. He uploaded a new video breaking the rules the day he went to court. The judge, obviously, finally had enough. Judge just happened to not think about flying tiny whoops inside his house when he order was made. This isn't some grand injustice or overstep that you make it out to be, and you are wrong about a lot in this video from a legal standpoint. Do not expect everyone in the community to rise up for this nonsense. There will be pushback against you. Outside of your usual sycophants in the comments here, there are many who see Michael and this situation EXACTLY for what it is. It has taken YEARS to get to this point, after just many warnings from the FAA, that then moved to fines. And now in bad faith you're attempting to thump fear in the community that everyone else could be next.

[@dronedude9523]

Well said!

[@r1m.dog78]

Well said.

[@toddburgess6792]

Just to be clear, is the FAAs jurisdiction over the entire Earth's airspace? I thought it was only the air above the United States. The salaries of the "officials" at the FAA come from what source?

[@notice_fpv]

The faa is an administrative group. Like the atf. Why does anyone pay attention to the "rules" they are not empowered to make?

[@SJMDronesMedia]

While I don’t hold anything against Mikey, it’s sad that despite numerous warnings about his flying and conduct that he continued to post his infractions or alleged infractions for all to see including the FAA, I’ve noticed posts have been removed , further more he was consistently encouraged by his viewer’s to continue flouting the rules as it was fun to them, it’s no fun now is it ! I find it to be a great shame as Mikey is a great pilot , entertainer despite his alleged wrong doings. I say alleged , as he hasn’t been given a fair opportunity to legally contest, challenge defend any of the allegations. I feel it’s safe to say he hasn’t helped the situation by publicly calling out the FAA, just not a good idea to do ! And it does nothing to help the droning community. Let’s hope that he is given a chance , opportunity to have legal representation as presently lawmakers are just doing what pleases them , again I’m not sticking up for anything he has genuinely done, but think fairness and transparency should be available to all

[@THEMASKEDMASTER]

✌🏻😎🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿F the FAA & F the CAA.

[@fcava-ti7mb]

You couldn't make this nonsense up. Unfortunately here in the UK we have some KZbinrs who actively support the CAA in their misguided overreaching legislation believing that they are supporting us in our hobby. Some of these KZbin channels are actually damaging our hobby, it is my opinion they are very naive and should be challenging this nonsensical rubbish. Unfortunately this will have a knock-on effect putting many people off the aeronautical hobby limiting access to the introduction and enjoyment of flying. Traditionally our hobby in many cases would lead to a career within one of the aeronautical industries or services. With the increasing demand for licenses, exams, insurance etc and the multitude of hoops to jump through we will have to resort to just flying within our living rooms if allowed.

[@y_i_fly6256]

This could be an example of an abuse of power. But understand it’s been now determined through the courts with the judge. They warned him, he went out and flagrantly flying as he use to. I have seen Mikey’s work out vlogs so it’s not like he has to give up his channel. I would love to see Mikey get himself back into shape again. He still has an audience, has fans so let’s continue to cheer him on. It’s the improvement of body, mind, soul and spirit so GO GO GO MIKEY GO!!!!

[@0waverunner0]

😂😂 would love to see them come inforce that....faa needs to stay in their own lane....

[@edruttledge342]

guy shoots his wife ... is convicted of murder and does 20 years ... is banned from ever having access to a gun/cannot own one. Can he handle a gun in his living room?

[@barrycole8378]

Are you OK Bruce?? I tried e-miling you, but it keeps getting returned.

[@sticksentertainment]

How do you feel about felons owning guns? As a part 107 pilot, I don’t agree with all of the rules, but I follow them anyway. Mike should have followed them too. If he had, then the court document you presented wouldn’t even be a thing. Regulation is necessary because people are stupid. Operations over people is a prime example. Without remote ID and registration requirements, we all know the amount of flying that would occur in urban areas over people and roadways would go up exponentially which, in turn, would increase the chances of a drone falling from the sky and hitting a person or crashing through the windshield of a vehicle.

[@Smagsfpv]

Mikey boy 💙💙🙌🙌🤘🤘

[@thatairplaneguy]

Phuk the fed

[@bimrz1642]

So he cant even fly simulated drones either...

[@torpedoLaw]

Unbelievable

[@jasonthompson6267]

Try doing the advanced drone liscence for Canada. what a crock of shit..

[@randyhall9088]

Hmmmm, you gonna talk about the ATF next?

[@747Max]

Wrong, Wrong, Wrong Bruce! Why didn't you link to the document or show it in its entirety?? Because you know you are the one that is overreaching with your analysis. The FAA is very clear on the extent of their authority and it ONLY pertains to the national airspace system (NAS). It's not necessary to say that when they petitioned the court. As I told you before, if this guy wanted to fly a drone inside a gymnasium the FAA would have NO AUTHORITY to enter, inspect, surveil or enforce regulations (because there aren't any for indoor flying). All you are trying to do is foment hate and anger towards the FAA. How's that working for the protesters on the college campuses, the public is becoming outraged at them. BTW, the $170K fine was not the first one the FAA proposed, if he had cooperated (and conformed) the fines never would have gotten that high. How many speeding or rolling through stop sign tickets should someone get before they lose their license. Purposeful and/or habitual non-compliance should carry extreme punishment. The FAA doesn't have the ability to arrest, seize property or initiate criminal proceedings against anyone, their next step (in trying to stop his behavior) is to get the court order so if he reoffends in the NAS, they can hand off to law enforcement for violation of the court order.

[@r1m.dog78]

Well said

[@raffly4449]

Part 107 already destroyed model aviation, you just don’t know it yet…

[@rkdbaj]

Don't fly dji then harder to detect from far away

[@Oldgreycowboy]

Wasn’t his name Juan Baldez So they should charge him and turn him loose.

[@BrianKushner]

Poked the bear!

[@mack1508]

I WILL NOT COMPLY

[@tymoteuszkazubski2755]

Then you will pay 😂.

[@davejoseph5615]

Don't care about Mikey. You can't fix stupid.

[@porousorificePilot]

Hey FAA how long can my RC stadium truck be in the air before I am a criminal? What if I tie a kite to my RC Truck but I don't go off a jump? Am I required to remove the rear wing so that it will not be an aircraft? With the rear wing removed am I limited to how much airtime I can get off jumps? Is that with or without the kite tied to it. Aah never mind, fuck off!

[@sullytrny]

We allowed unionized govmint