Los Angeles, CA —The redundancy of reported drone news fables claiming privacy invasion and endangerment are getting very tiresome.   Okay, I agree that these stories are still somewhat novel and interesting.   Claims that the little camera drones are nearly colliding with conventional helicopter and other aircraft are nearly always patently bogus.   Careful examination by a journalist would expose the reality from fantasy. Police and news helicopter pilots see their career days being numbered by the threat of drones eliminating their jobs.   Helicopters cost $1,500 to $2,500 per hour to keep in the air.   The drones cost nearly nothing! Are the motives of helicopter pilots really pure when they disparage, denounce or otherwise criticize camera drones and their operators?    Can a little camera drone bring down a helicopter or airplane?   I won’t say it’s impossible but it is incredibly unlikely.   There are thousands of collision...

The FAA is trying to regulate little camera drones like mine out of existence.   They have already been shot down for their over-reaching by a federal judge and the FAA has since appealed to a higher court. Now the FAA is back at it, making a new rule and it’s really no better than what was struck down in court. They apparently want to prohibit professional photographers and journalists from capturing aerial images.   The law requires government rules to be subjected to public a comment period that will run out later this month.   The rules carry heavy civil penalties but are not laws per say.    They are of course always subject to court challenge.   My published Comment:      “The FAA wants jurisdiction over a rock thrown into the sky. Criminals can use all sorts of implements to endanger our aircraft and public safety. This is a local police responsibility already. Speaking as a small, multi-rotor and unmanned Phantom 2 came...