Have you ever seen the blimp on television when you’re watching a football or baseball game and think to yourself, “Hey, they must have an amazing view of the game.”
Now say you don’t have a blimp anchored outside your home, but you happen to own a personal drone equipped with a video camera. What sporting event would you fly over? Game seven of the World Series? The Super Bowl?
For Nigel Wilson of Nottingham, England, it was English Premier League soccer games, and as a result of his actions, Wilson ended up behind bars.
Wilson is scheduled to appear in Westminster Magistrates Court on April 16 to answer to 17 counts in connection with his purported flight activity. Metropolitan Police charged Wilson with violating the United Kingdom’s Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) Air Navigation Order 2009, which banned operators from flying their drones in London’s eight royal parks, according to Engadget. The police report mentions Wilson flying near the Queen Victoria Memorial, which is close to one of the Queen’s favored London residences, according to the report.
The Air Navigation Order also mandates that pilots remain within 400 vertical feet and roughly 1,500 horizontal feet of the aircraft and cannot fly drones in areas with more than 1,000 people, which Wilson was also violating when he flew over some seven soccer stadiums. Soccer stadiums can hold up to 60,000.
(Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Saturday March 21 2015, @05:06PM
Even if there is no malicious intent, the potential tragedy that could happen is enough reason for banning amateur remote overflight. At least for the Super Bowl, there is a blimp overhead. If that goes down into the stadium it would make the Hillsborough disaster look quaint.
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Monday March 23 2015, @08:24AM
Oh, the humanity!
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Saturday March 21 2015, @05:41PM
and as a result of his actions, Wilson ended up behind bars.
Doesn't the phrase "behind bars" usually refer to someone after they've been found guilty and convicted?
Okay, this guy may have been placed on remand (though that doesn't seem likely to me), but even then strictly speaking that wouldn't have been "a result of his actions." His actions and culpability for those actions have not yet been determined by a court.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Saturday March 21 2015, @11:57PM
No -- behind bars is more generic. You can be behind bars after arrest, but before trial. Maybe there is some idiomatic use that means "convicted" but it hasn't penetrated my consciousness and so nothing about the description confused or mislead me.
(Score: 2) by mrcoolbp on Sunday March 22 2015, @05:24AM
I considered this on 2nd-checking the story, but decided to leave the wording in the quote. One is often literally behind bars when in holding. *shrug*
(Score:1^½, Radical)