Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Welcome DJI Spark Pilot!
Jump in and join our free Spark community today!
Sign up
Forums
Photos & Videos
Photos and Videos
Derbyshire / Nottinghamshire U.K
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Lastrexking" data-source="post: 15593" data-attributes="member: 175"><p>See Post #7</p><p></p><p>It’s not ignorance when one can quote verbatim the guidance note provided by the regulator. </p><p></p><p>I speak from experience when I say this. If a guidance note is provided by the regulator, and a person quotes it when accused of breaking regulations said regulator enforces, then any law that may or may not have been broken would be irrelevant as the proposed prosecution wouldn’t even get as far as the CPS.</p><p></p><p>For clarity - I personally abide by the regs covering the flying of drones, and would hope all members of this board do. It’s a hobby I enjoy and mindless idiots putting it at risk frustrates me. However, in this case I don’t think the poster of the video above has violated the laws if we use the code as published by the regulator. If they were to be prosecuted I would happily offer myself, my experience as a warrant card holding member of staff for a government regulator, and my time in their defence - as the guidance note provided does not offer clarity sufficient for its intended audience.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lastrexking, post: 15593, member: 175"] See Post #7 It’s not ignorance when one can quote verbatim the guidance note provided by the regulator. I speak from experience when I say this. If a guidance note is provided by the regulator, and a person quotes it when accused of breaking regulations said regulator enforces, then any law that may or may not have been broken would be irrelevant as the proposed prosecution wouldn’t even get as far as the CPS. For clarity - I personally abide by the regs covering the flying of drones, and would hope all members of this board do. It’s a hobby I enjoy and mindless idiots putting it at risk frustrates me. However, in this case I don’t think the poster of the video above has violated the laws if we use the code as published by the regulator. If they were to be prosecuted I would happily offer myself, my experience as a warrant card holding member of staff for a government regulator, and my time in their defence - as the guidance note provided does not offer clarity sufficient for its intended audience. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Photos & Videos
Photos and Videos
Derbyshire / Nottinghamshire U.K