YouTube etc. - Double edged sword?

[doofer]

Hey all, as I';m sure many of you are; I';m a big fan of watching all things Multi-Rotor on YouTube but I';m also quite fanatically anti-Social Media due to the Privacy issues and the way the Police and the Powers that Be are increasingly using what people are posting to use as evidence against them, add to this the increasing anti-anonimity on the Internet agenda that seems to have cropped up lately I can see a lot more prosecutions for what people have posted/uploaded online, you';re making their job of prosecuting you should they so wish extremely easy by effectively providing them their evidence to be used against you.

And you don';t have to watch many YouTube FPV/Multi-Rotor Vids to find someone doing something illegal, be it flying over people, flying above 400';, flying within 50M of a road etc. Now, don';t get me wrong, I enjoy these Video';s as much as the next guy and I';m definitely not trying to be a kill-joy in any shape or form (It';s only illegal if they catch you...Right?), but I';m just wondering how many others are aware of the risks of posting what could be ';incriminating'; video of themselves online? Is it an issue for you? Or don';t you care? I';m interested to hear others thoughts on this or am I just being a stick-in-the-mud?

[Biffa]

If you fly legally and responsibly then you have no reason to worry.

I am sure that unless you kill/maim/injure someone you are unlikely to get any attention from the authorities.

[Jumpy07]

I know of one pending case at the moment where YouTube video is being used as evidence..

The CAA don';t have the many enforcement officers.. so unless there are complaints from the public, or someone gets injured.. or someone reports you...  then I don';t think they will chap your door...

That said.. if you did have an accident.. I am pretty sure they would use any videos as evidence against you.

Then again, you should be aware of the law and fly responsibly at all times, ignorance of the law is not a defence btw.

There are some pretty stupid videos on Youtube...with some very irresponsible flying.. personally these people deserve all they get.

[flybywire]

Yes, all true, but any decent lawyer worth his/her salt could ridicule all but the most watertight stuff.  Innocent until proven guilty and all that.  Why do so few hooligans get prosecuted on the terraces, or caught blatantly on tv/cctv?  I often wonder myself..

[Hands0n]

I can see and understand where @doofer is coming from. The modern day phenomenon of, not only, social media is a ticking timebomb where one may be concerned about the surveillance society. Already there have been examples of travellers being turned away at US Immigration for comments posted up on Facebook, Twitter and other social media.  Every time we use the Internet we leave behind electronic fingerprints that may be recalled by certain "agencies" at will.

My view on YouTube FPV videos is that the information there has the potential to be used as supporting evidence against the pilot in the event of any prosecution being raised.  Even if not the event itself it will show the disposition of the pilot to fly where they in fact do. That may be ignoring some or all of the CAA regulations relative to flying these model aircraft.

But unless the CAA embark on a wholesale clamp down on such behaviours the actual chances of finding yourself in that position is relatively slim. I guess its all a case of "how lucky do you feel?". 

Later in time, perhaps in some police state, we may find much of this come back to haunt us.  But I';m absolutely certain that we';ll have a lot more to worry about than being nabbed for some dodgy flying captured on YouTube videos.  We';ve seen people fall prey to their own tweets on Twitter, a far more likely trap.

[doofer]

Yes, all true, but any decent lawyer worth his/her salt could ridicule all but the most watertight stuff.  Innocent until proven guilty and all that.  Why do so few hooligans get prosecuted on the terraces, or caught blatantly on tv/cctv?  I often wonder myself..

Personally, I';d rather not line the pockets of some Legalise spewing parasite. The point is: You ARE guilty, you uploaded a video of you doing something illegal, this is what I';m getting at..  Also, few hooligans get caught because they probably don';t post their activities to easily traceable YouTube with captions like ';Here';s me hitting X four times and kicking Y in the head';, it';s all about incriminating footage.

It could be as simple as posting a video with a caption saying or OSD footage showing 1000M AGL, you';ve just posted video evidence of you going over 400';. You';ve effectively made it easy for The Powers that Be to prosecute you should they so wish.. Unlike the same video where there';s no OSD or added caption which would be much harder for them to prove (They could still do it but it';s a lot more difficult than someone admitting they';ve done it..)

I really believe people should be a lot more careful about what they post to the Internet, you never know when it can come back to haunt you is all...

[Biffa]

So what about all the videos of people FPVing in very close proximity around objects/vessels/structures not in their control? That is still ';against'; the rules and yet there are literally 1000';s of these videos around and many get posted on this forum.

Some of these videos are done by members of/people who have BMFA/FPVUK/BNUC and clearly flout the rules. Is there a rule for them and one for everyone else? Is it a case of do as I say not as I do?

Why should Joe public give two hoots about rules when seemingly the people who should have more understanding of them don';t even bother?

[tony]

all i can say is with video editing  and hey i got a move of me in space and since nearly 90 % of people uploading to you tube use some sort of basic video editing 

there all just spoff moves to make them look good in front of there Friends so you prove it 1 it is not edited and 2 its real look what i found flying last night its on youtube must be real   

The Pig Song (Flying Pig) (Nyan Cat inspiration)

[Friskle]

Personally, I';d rather not line the pockets of some Legalise spewing parasite. The point is: You ARE guilty, you uploaded a video of you doing something illegal, this is what I';m getting at..  Also, few hooligans get caught because they probably don';t post their activities to easily traceable YouTube with captions like ';Here';s me hitting X four times and kicking Y in the head';, it';s all about incriminating footage.

It could be as simple as posting a video with a caption saying or OSD footage showing 1000M AGL, you';ve just posted video evidence of you going over 400';. You';ve effectively made it easy for The Powers that Be to prosecute you should they so wish.. Unlike the same video where there';s no OSD or added caption which would be much harder for them to prove (They could still do it but it';s a lot more difficult than someone admitting they';ve done it..)

I really believe people should be a lot more careful about what they post to the Internet, you never know when it can come back to haunt you is all...

The bottom line is, people will do what they want, whether right or wrong, if you personally fly within the realms of the law, then what are you worried about?  The only time someone will get "involved" to take legal action etc, would be if an accident occured, lets be honest here, accidents concerning property or people are still in a very small minority , be it Planes, Helis or any RC related sport/hobby.

[jwl940]

I fly ';within the realms of the law'; but am worried about those that don';t and the ultimate repercussions of that. We have to fly responsibly and be seen to fly responsibly and not post videos of illegal activities on this forum (against its T&Cs actually) or any other media bringing our activities to the attention of the ';authorities';.  In the wrong hands a multi could become a very useful tool and the ';authorities'; could outlaw their ownership in a heartbeat.  Fanciful?  Hand guns disappeared very quickly as did knives longer than 3" and you can no longer take any old bottle of water on a commercial aircraft.  For similar reasons the same fate could befall multis.  Legislation hasn';t removed the use of guns or knives for nefarious uses but it has prevented their ownership by law abiding individuals.

I am reluctant to spell out the risks in more detail on an open forum but I am willing to discuss further with a moderator via PM should they feel necessary.

[dyls]

Fanciful?  Hand guns disappeared very quickly as did knives longer than 3" and you can no longer take any old bottle of water on a commercial aircraft.  For similar reasons the same fate could befall multis.  Legislation hasn';t removed the use of guns or knives for nefarious uses but it has prevented their ownership by law abiding individuals.

[teslahed]

Legislation hasn';t removed the use of guns or knives for nefarious uses but it has prevented their ownership by law abiding individuals.

Most criminals in this country don';t carry guns as a matter of course. Nor do most police officers.

I would say the gun legislation has been very successful as a result. Criminals can still get them but it';s cost and effort that is likely to bring a lot of police attention down on you - not worth it for most petty criminals in the UK.

I have never been threatened by anyone carrying a loaded gun.

As opposed to america where it seems like everyone has to be armed, because everyone else is.

I think the UK has the balance on firearms legislation down pretty well.

And i own lots of knives that are longer than 3". Bread knives, carving knives - it';s very easy to buy a large knife. That';s because they are commonly used tools that we all require on a daily basis. I think the rules are that you can';t go into a high street shop and buy a large hunting knife, and you need to be over 18. But that doesn';t prevent a sensible adult from buying one and i can';t imagine that will ever change.

I can';t see FPV ever being totally banned but i can see restrictions and licencing being placed on it. Fortunately the most recent discussion on the subject looks promising;

http://www.multi-rotor.co.uk/index.php?topic=5289.0

[jwl940]

Can';t argue with any of that Teslahed. I manage to break the law regarding knives every time I take my van out of my drive, I should have introduced the term Every Day Carry into my argument ;D

Hopefully however we are in agreement; we must fly responsibly, be seen to fly responsibly and post here iaw the forum';s T&Cs.

[Hands0n]

Gun law has done nothing to remove them from the hands of criminals. It was never intended to. It was a direct response to Dunblane incident. And what it has done is drive public ownership of firearms underground, now unrecorded and invisible. A resounding success if you want to disarm the public. An abject failure in preventing criminal gun ownership.

As much bad law as the Dangerous Dogs Act and the criminalisation of Fox Hunting. And lots more beside.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[flybywire]

I think this topic is always going to divide folk, and of course it';s a loaded question anyhow.  There are a lot of ways it could go, for instance, my ezosd device does it';s best to assess altitude, but unfortunately, as it uses GPS to do this, it';s wildly inaccurate, and as such, could not really be used as credible evidence in a court of law. 
You could film yourself doing 165 mph in a Vauxhall Viva estate, but hey, I don';t think even Judge Jeffreys would convict on that alone!
What I';m saying is, let';s be sensible here, I haven';t seen any videos posted on this forum that have clearly and directly endangered life & limb or maybe property either, although they may well ';exhibit'; some infringements of rule.  Maybe you know differently @doofer? 
I actually care very little for the ';jackass'; style antics of Joe public recorded on sites like youtube etc, people will do what people will do, but they can, and often do, provide a worthwhile and necessary outlet for expression & creativity, which to stifle, would be a sad thing. 
I think if you find yourself watching these clips with the rulebook in your hand, you';ve already missed the point.

[powerlord]

However since the majority of gun related fatalities are by non criminals (eg in the usa)  it has arguably been a sucess

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[Hands0n]

In the UK [officially recorded] gun-related crime persists, still at alarming levels seeing as the general public are no longer allowed to legitimately own such.  It means, instead, that every single gun crime is related to activity by common criminals as opposed to the man in the street (ie. Dunblane and others). 

Citation: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/crime-stats/crime-statistics/period-ending-march-2013/stb-crime--period-ending-march-2013.html#tab-Offences-involving-firearms

[powerlord]

Sure,  but it';s 10 per year per 100k people in USA.  In the UK it';s 0.25.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[Hands0n]

Sure,  but it';s 10 per year per 100k people in USA.  In the UK it';s 0.25.

In terms of raw numbers and ratios the USA, as with some south American and other countries (ie. Somalia) have statistics that make the UK';s look like a garden tea party ::)   But it is inescapable that the UK gun law has not been successful in solving gun crime.  At the very best it has solved the non-problem of gun ownership.   

Anecdote:  A work friend of mine was a keen gun owner, had some impressive hardware, manufactured his own ammunition. Come the gun law he very sadly but completely dutifully and lawfully destroyed the guns, the ammunition and the tooling to making these.  I do not believe that a single criminal in the UK did likewise.  So what exactly was the point?

[teslahed]

in the UK [officially recorded] gun-related crime persists, still at alarming levels seeing as the general public are no longer allowed to legitimately own such.  It means, instead, that every single gun crime is related to activity by common criminals as opposed to the man in the street (ie. Dunblane and others).

In terms of raw numbers and ratios the USA, as with some south American and other countries (ie. Somalia) have statistics that make the UK';s look like a garden tea party ::)   But it is inescapable that the UK gun law has not been successful in solving gun crime.  At the very best it has solved the non-problem of gun ownership.

The law hasn';t been successful in taking guns away from all criminals but it has been very successful at making it more trouble than it';s worth for common criminals in this country to carry firearms as a matter of course. Firearms are only used by dedicated organised criminals rather than petty thugs in this country - it';s just not worth the risk or cost otherwise.

So i am much less likely to encouter a gun if i';m mugged or a victim of some other form of petty crime. I am only likely to get threatened by a gun in this country if i have a job working for securicor.

The United Kingdom has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world.[6] There were 0.04 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in 2010. Gun homicides accounted for 2.4% of all homicides in the year 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_Kingdom

I';d call that a pretty good success rate - if not 100% then damned close.

[Hands0n]

The 5,000 gun crimes reported in official UK statistics are not insignificant.

In terms of gun ownership - you may have head of Moss Side in Manchester where, frequently reported, kids of as young as 12 have firearms in their possession.  The London gang culture also sees gun ownership, and use, frequently reported.  It was only a few weeks ago that there were a number of fatal shootings in the UK related to gangs.

I';m sorry, but I do disagree entirely that the inept law enacted by Parliament has had any practical impact on the criminal community.  Bear in mind that before the UK gun law it was illegal to hold an unlicensed firearm.  The UK gun law only removed guns from legitimate and legal ownership.  It did absolutely zip to remove guns from criminal hands.  The successes (or otherwise) of gun removal by the Police has zero to do with the new UK gun law than the Police acting on powers that they have held since world war one!  We should not interpret those successes with the UK gun law change.

I am only likely to get threatened by a gun in this country if i have a job working for securicor.

Bear in mind that UK stats include "fake" guns as legitimate firearms ... Here are a few Gun stories from the past month or so.
http://news.sky.com/story/1169223/robber-died-of-heart-failure-in-botched-raid
http://news.sky.com/story/1165417/lewes-rounds-fired-as-armed-police-stop-car
http://news.sky.com/story/1164149/essex-child-shooting-eight-year-old-fired-gun
http://news.sky.com/story/1158046/schoolboy-bank-robber-sentenced-to-40-months
http://news.sky.com/story/1153998/battersea-murder-two-charged-over-teen-death
http://news.sky.com/story/1151548/shopkeeper-with-machete-chases-armed-robber

So the above are the reported crime. But gang on gang crime is not reported, and so the above may represent the tip of an iceberg.

[teslahed]

Gun crime is worst in London but even there the situation is odd by international standards;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-12764039

There are so few guns available that most criminals have to rent them.

5,000 gun crimes is not insignificant - you are right. But the roughly 10 gun based homocides we get a year is pretty good going by any sensible civilised standard.

I am glad that guns have been taken out of the hands of the general public. I don';t need a gun to feel safe and i feel safer knowing that none of my friends or neighbours own them either. Most murdered people knew their murderer.

[Biffa]

I don';t need a gun to feel safe and i feel safer knowing that none of my friends or neighbours own them either.

I am a little old fashioned, I have a Hickory pick axe handle should I need to defend myself 

[Hands0n]

The ownership of guns was never about feeling safe. It was a whole lot more about pleasure in owning fine machines and using them in very safe conditions. Being a former member of a gun club in 1970-72 I well remember the awe, excitement and total respect we all had for what we used. It never entered our minds that we owned or used these funds for protection or assault. Yet we had that little freedom taken away by a panicking government of the day that even the police said over reacted. And valuable links with guns were lost as they all went truly underground.

London is by no means unique. Think Moss Side for example. Children with firearms. Police no go areas which are completely wild West. Criminal gun ownership and use is quite widespread across the major UK cities.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Billy]

In the UK [officially recorded] gun-related crime persists, still at alarming levels seeing as the general public are no longer allowed to legitimately own such.  It means, instead, that every single gun crime is related to activity by common criminals as opposed to the man in the street (ie. Dunblane and others). 

Citation: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/crime-stats/crime-statistics/period-ending-march-2013/stb-crime--period-ending-march-2013.html#tab-Offences-involving-firearms

Much of the gun related crime nowadays is due to "toy" BB guns, you know the ones that sell for £5 - £30 in corner shops and market stalls. These things are required to be painted in bright colours, kids often paint them black and get caught with them. It can be a firearms offence to misuse even the brightly coloured ones and it';s always an offence to have one painted black.