I appreciate all you do for the hobby and would love to see your take on what are the actual accident statistics justifying regulatory action? Prompted by a recent article by Allianz insurance focusing on commercial drone benefits and risks, I tried to get a feeling from published sources for how much of a risk our hobby may be to others.
For example, injuries per year in the U.S. related to
Automobiles: 2,338,000 DOT (2014)
Bicycles: 530,000 CPSC estimate (2013)
Toys: 252,000 CPSC estimate (2014)
TV tipovers: 15,400 CPSC estimtate (2013)
Radio control toys: none reported (CPSC)
although in their hobby product category they list recalls related to hobby (RC-related) and model airplane.
Could it be in light of real-world results these upcoming rigorous rules (or ridiculous rulemaking) are justified by out of proportion projections by the media we consume and support? Or as with all novel technology, is there an irrational agenda other than reducing risk of injury and loss of lives?
For example, injuries per year in the U.S. related to
Automobiles: 2,338,000 DOT (2014)
Bicycles: 530,000 CPSC estimate (2013)
Toys: 252,000 CPSC estimate (2014)
TV tipovers: 15,400 CPSC estimtate (2013)
Radio control toys: none reported (CPSC)
although in their hobby product category they list recalls related to hobby (RC-related) and model airplane.
Could it be in light of real-world results these upcoming rigorous rules (or ridiculous rulemaking) are justified by out of proportion projections by the media we consume and support? Or as with all novel technology, is there an irrational agenda other than reducing risk of injury and loss of lives?
Last edited: