Skip to content

Gov. Landry signs new drone defense law; first in nation

Technology
30 24 126
  • Since nobody has mentioned it, all of this is turbo illegal and the federal courts will absolutely nuke this from orbit. State governments do not control airspace, full stop. The courts have been very clear on this. Manned vs unmanned doesn't matter to the FAA, it's still one hell of a PP slap from the feds for encroaching on their turf. Additionally, any form of jamming (desense, deauth, noise, location spoofing, fraudulent signals etc) is illegal and regulated by the FCC, and doing it with intent to take down an aircraft means you get strung up by both the FCC and FAA simultaneously. In particular doing literally anything to the GPS band will pose a massive and immediate risk to manned passenger aircraft and the feds aren't going to look kindly on that.

    Things can change very quickly if there's an "attack" on U.S. soil they totally didn't know about in advance or anything when they signed this.

    Federal regulations and protections can get pushed aside real fast in the name of security, especially when you have states like Louisiana already working so closely with DHS.

  • Things can change very quickly if there's an "attack" on U.S. soil they totally didn't know about in advance or anything when they signed this.

    Federal regulations and protections can get pushed aside real fast in the name of security, especially when you have states like Louisiana already working so closely with DHS.

    Or if you just ignore federal courts, which seems to be the current fashion.

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    Hmm, if laws do pass preventing states from making laws against AI, then we may have legal conflicts regarding laws against drones. They use AI.

  • Yes, absolutely, 100%.

    FAA has from the beginning been very forceful in asserting that it is the sole authority for things attempting to defy gravity.

    On the flip side though, the GOP stopped caring about anything courts say.

    So. Guess we'll see how this plays out for the next few years at least.

    they have also shown willingness to dismantle federal agencies for whatever agenda they want to accomplish.

  • Conveniently will cover any drone taking aerial footage of protests or police state suppression tactics

    For people who supposedly hate China and big government these MAGA fascist are trying to be a whole lot like the worst part of the Chinese Communist Party.

  • For people who supposedly hate China and big government these MAGA fascist are trying to be a whole lot like the worst part of the Chinese Communist Party.

    The US govt has always been worse, lol, what. Now they're just bringing it home at full force, that's all.

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    leave it to the southern red states to try to pass laws that are completely illegal over and over and over again

  • Since nobody has mentioned it, all of this is turbo illegal and the federal courts will absolutely nuke this from orbit. State governments do not control airspace, full stop. The courts have been very clear on this. Manned vs unmanned doesn't matter to the FAA, it's still one hell of a PP slap from the feds for encroaching on their turf. Additionally, any form of jamming (desense, deauth, noise, location spoofing, fraudulent signals etc) is illegal and regulated by the FCC, and doing it with intent to take down an aircraft means you get strung up by both the FCC and FAA simultaneously. In particular doing literally anything to the GPS band will pose a massive and immediate risk to manned passenger aircraft and the feds aren't going to look kindly on that.

    With the federal government gutting funding of it's own agencies, we may see more of this.

    Federal laws are effective if they're effectively enforced. If states lose confidence in federal enforcement, it makes sense that they will try to do their own thing, and see if the federal courts are understaffed and lethargic or able to act.

    And if the federal government succeeds in using AI instead of human staff, then all each state will need to do is pass the same law a few different times with slightly different wording to hit the right gap in the AI.

    There's interesting times ahead.

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    We Will Act law

    What is it with Americans and their dumb innate need to give everything some weirdo name....

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    Why do I get the feeling that this will end up like Chief Wiggum releasing the dogs?

  • We Will Act law

    What is it with Americans and their dumb innate need to give everything some weirdo name....

    Easier for the gullible maga base to remember and parrot as if the title actually means anything. You know they don't actually read the bills, they only know what fox tells them.

  • Yes, absolutely, 100%.

    FAA has from the beginning been very forceful in asserting that it is the sole authority for things attempting to defy gravity.

    On the flip side though, the GOP stopped caring about anything courts say.

    So. Guess we'll see how this plays out for the next few years at least.

    FAA: I don’t like what Louisiana is doing.

    Donald: we’re going to dismantle FAA.

  • Louisiana has become the first state to allow law enforcement to intercept and disable drones posing threats to public safety. Gov. Jeff Landry signed the groundbreaking "We Will Act" Act into law on Wednesday, June 18.

    Well this is certainly odd timing... 😅

    HB261 by Rep. Jack "Jay" Gallé Jr., R-District 104 (St. Tammany Parish) grants specially trained officers the authority to use both kinetic and non-kinetic methods to neutralize drones operating unlawfully near sensitive areas like schools and public events.

    ??? What that means??

    "This law puts Louisiana on the front lines of drone defense," Gov. Landry said. "We are taking bold steps now to protect our people and our skies before tragedy strikes."

    Violators face strict penalties, including fines up to $5,000, up to one year in jail, and mandatory forfeiture of the drone. The legislation comes amid growing concerns over unauthorized drone activities near sensitive locations.

    Gov. Landry noted this move places Louisiana at the forefront of state-level drone policy, setting a precedent that may influence future legislation across the country.

    This weird video of Landry signing the bill specifically mentions Louisiana's nuclear power facilities, then Landry tries to make light of everything by saying "They tell me the president is getting ready to do an executive order on some of this stuff... I didn't say that."

    ... This is fine.

    I'm sure the 2 iq police in Louisiana will be able to figure any of this out. That equipment will be rotting in some storage unit in 3 months.

  • Telegram, the FSB, and the Man in the Middle

    Technology technology
    8
    1
    52 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    R
    You can be seen from a kilometer away, pots ))
  • China's Electric Vehicle Factories Have Become Tourist Hotspots

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    33 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    16 Aufrufe
    W
    I'd go to one. I went to Qatar and tried to find out if they did LPG tours. They don't. well at least not easily.
  • 75 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • AJWIN — A Revolução do Entretenimento Online em Suas Mãos

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 1k Stimmen
    95 Beiträge
    17 Aufrufe
    G
    Obviously the law must be simple enough to follow so that for Jim’s furniture shop is not a problem nor a too high cost to respect it, but it must be clear that if you break it you can cease to exist as company. I think this may be the root of our disagreement, I do not believe that there is any law making body today that is capable of an elegantly simple law. I could be too naive, but I think it is possible. We also definitely have a difference on opinion when it comes to the severity of the infraction, in my mind, while privacy is important, it should not have the same level of punishments associated with it when compared to something on the level of poisoning water ways; I think that a privacy law should hurt but be able to be learned from while in the poison case it should result in the bankruptcy of a company. The severity is directly proportional to the number of people affected. If you violate the privacy of 200 million people is the same that you poison the water of 10 people. And while with the poisoning scenario it could be better to jail the responsible people (for a very, very long time) and let the company survive to clean the water, once your privacy is violated there is no way back, a company could not fix it. The issue we find ourselves with today is that the aggregate of all privacy breaches makes it harmful to the people, but with a sizeable enough fine, I find it hard to believe that there would be major or lasting damage. So how much money your privacy it's worth ? 6 For this reason I don’t think it is wise to write laws that will bankrupt a company off of one infraction which was not directly or indirectly harmful to the physical well being of the people: and I am using indirectly a little bit more strict than I would like to since as I said before, the aggregate of all the information is harmful. The point is that the goal is not to bankrupt companies but to have them behave right. The penalty associated to every law IS the tool that make you respect the law. And it must be so high that you don't want to break the law. I would have to look into the laws in question, but on a surface level I think that any company should be subjected to the same baseline privacy laws, so if there isn’t anything screwy within the law that apple, Google, and Facebook are ignoring, I think it should apply to them. Trust me on this one, direct experience payment processors have a lot more rules to follow to be able to work. I do not want jail time for the CEO by default but he need to know that he will pay personally if the company break the law, it is the only way to make him run the company being sure that it follow the laws. For some reason I don’t have my usual cynicism when it comes to this issue. I think that the magnitude of loses that vested interests have in these companies would make it so that companies would police themselves for fear of losing profits. That being said I wouldn’t be opposed to some form of personal accountability on corporate leadership, but I fear that they will just end up finding a way to create a scapegoat everytime. It is not cynicism. I simply think that a huge fine to a single person (the CEO for example) is useless since it too easy to avoid and if it really huge realistically it would be never paid anyway so nothing usefull since the net worth of this kind of people is only on the paper. So if you slap a 100 billion file to Musk he will never pay because he has not the money to pay even if technically he is worth way more than that. Jail time instead is something that even Musk can experience. In general I like laws that are as objective as possible, I think that a privacy law should be written so that it is very objectively overbearing, but that has a smaller fine associated with it. This way the law is very clear on right and wrong, while also giving the businesses time and incentive to change their practices without having to sink large amount of expenses into lawyers to review every minute detail, which is the logical conclusion of the one infraction bankrupt system that you seem to be supporting. Then you write a law that explicitally state what you can do and what is not allowed is forbidden by default.
  • 82 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    20 Aufrufe
    sfxrlz@lemmy.dbzer0.comS
    As a Star Wars yellowtext: „In the final days of the senate, senator organa…“
  • 4 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    friendbesto@lemmy.mlF
    For future readers: Freetube currently works. Using it right now. Invidious works too, granted some instance do not. One needs to look for ones that are currently active.
  • 0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    31 Aufrufe
    P
    I applaud this, but I still say it's not far enough. Adjusted, the amount might match, but 121.000 is still easier to cough up for a billionaire than 50 is for a single mother of two who can barely make ends meet