It seems that a few Mississippi legislators missed the boat on drafting some drone bills in their 2021 session. We don’t know whether it’s a failure to understand some fundamental Constitutional rights or whether someone conveniently forgot about the concept of Federal Preemption. So all of our friends in Mississippi, let’s get organized, educate the legislators, and make sure the bills introduced into the state legislature find their way into the circular file.
Both the House and the Senate of the Great State of Mississippi currently have two head scratching bills in committee. One (Senate Bill 2262, http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2021/pdf/SB/2200-2299/SB2262IN.pdf) is not likely to make it out of the Judiciary Committee where it currently resides, gathering cobwebs.
However, this doesn’t mean it can be ignored. In our work with many state and local legislative bodies, we’ve seen more than a few committee bills be brought back to life like Count Dracula. So dead doesn’t alway mean dead. As Mark Twain is credited with saying, “The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated.”
SB 2262 would create such things as a law that would allow airspace ownership for landowners. Usage is one thing, but giving landowners a vested interest in the airspace above their land sets some very scary standards. It literally creates “Private Airspace”.
It also allows the Mississippi DOT to lease easements over roads and waterways. And they can then partition separate levels to certain parties for exclusive use. Revenue is to be added to the general fund for the State of Mississippi.
But as mentioned this bill is likely going to wallow in committee and never see the floor of the Senate.
However, and there always seems to be a “however”, there is another bill in the House (HB 291, http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2021/pdf/HB/0200-0299/HB0291IN.pdf) that has a very real chance of at least making it out of the Judiciary Committee. This is the one that all Mississippi drone owners, whether recreational or commercial, must band together and fight.
The intent of this bill is noble for sure. But its breadth and vagueness of definitions leave those in the UAS industry scratching their heads in wonderment. It seriously makes them question if those who wrote the bill have a single clue as to what it is exactly we do with our flying cameras.
The bill was crafted to protect such things as critical infrastructure, DOD facilities, and prisons from incursions and surveillance. But the way they go about it is akin to using a hand grenade to kill a fluffy bunny. Sure it works, but at what cost?
And there are most certainly Federal Preemption and First Amendment issues all over the place in the proposed bill. And they are all so easily addressed with current laws and regulations.
Section 3 (a) of the bill would make it unlawful if someone knowingly uses a drone (UAS) to “conduct surveillance of, collect information or data, or photographically or electronically record a critical infrastructure or correctional facility without the prior written consent of the owner, or his/her designee, of the critical infrastructure or correctional facility…”. Sounds innocuous enough. But let’s put aside the First Amendment aspect of this for now, and take a deeper look at definitions used in HB 291.
HB 291 critical infrastructure includes 13 separate categories. Some make sense like detention centers, chemical and petroleum manufacturing facilities, and even military installations. Again, putting aside the First Amendment issues for much of this (DOD notwithstanding), the main question is why?
Before we get to why, let’s look at some of the other definitions they’ve added to HB 291. We’ll start with “any structure that provides wire or wireless communication services”. How many times have you had a cell tower in a shot you’ve taken for a client, or in an FPV video you shot for fun? Congrats, you are now a scofflaw. “Commercial transport vessel operating on any inland waterway or ocean” is also on that list. All you have to do is search YouTube to find a ton of those. Some people love boats and ships, and make it a point to get video of them to share with other enthusiasts. They’d all now join the ranks of the unlawful operators and subject to whatever penalty this bill would carry.
One of my favorite places to shoot is railroad yards. The texture and patterns from the sky are incredible. They’re almost mesmerizing at times. Yep, “Port, railroad switch yard, trucking terminal or other freight transportation facility” are all on the list. No more shots for Uncle George who used to work on the railroad “back in the day”.
But the list crosses the line from ridiculous to humorous in Sections (xii) & (xiii). There it states, “Any other facility completely enclosed by a fence or physical barrier designed to exclude intrusion… Any other facility marked with a sign or signs that are posed [posted?] on the property.” Now every cow pasture and every cotton or soybean field in the state of Mississippi are “critical infrastructure”. That’s just silly.
So as you can see, it’s imperative that the good drone folks of Mississippi reach out to their Legislators and help them understand that what they’re doing it going to seriously jeopardize not only the commercial side of UAS use, but recreational as well.
So band together and respectfully let them know that what they are proposing is flat out unacceptable to you and your brethren. Mention the absurd definitions. Mention the overarching inclusion that would make a large number of every day photos and videos illegal. Mention that they are trying to control what we are allowed to photograph from a public thoroughfare. And the Supreme Court had said multiple times that is a no-no. If you can see it, you can take a photo of it.
Oh, by the way, a misdemeanor conviction of this law could result in one year in jail and/or a $1,000 fine. Subsequent conviction is five years and/or $10,000. And that is no laughing matter.
Section 3(b) is a good part of the rule for sure. It makes is a felony a use a drone to delivery contraband into “a correctional facility property or adjacent property for the purpose of introducing contraband into a correctional facility.” Why? Is it legal to do so if you don’t use a drone? Why do to the trouble of introducing the vehicle of delivery into this law? Next you’ll have to add slingshots and catapults. Might as well add hang gliders too. We all know how untrustworthy all of those hang gliding enthusiasts are! BTW, that’s a joke.
Every time you add a layer of complexity and definition to an existing law, you add a layer of loopholes. Laws like contraband introduction should remain as technologically agnostic as possible. That way the loopholes are kept to a minimum. Punish the perpetrator, not the machine.
For the House Bill (HB 291), please respectfully reach out to Representative Nick Bain. His page is http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/members/house/bain.xml.
For the Senate Bill (SB 2262), please respectfully reach out to Senator Brice Wiggins. His page is http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/members/senate/wiggins.xml.
If you’re a resident of Mississippi, find your local legislators and contact them expressing (again, respectfully) your displeasure with the bill. And if you’d like to talk it a step further, reach out to the committee members of each chamber where the bills currently live. All of that information is at http://www.legislature.ms.gov/legislators/
Drone Service Providers Alliance is a 501c(6) committed to providing a voice for small and medium sized drone business. We provide “A UNITED VOICE FOR POSITIVE CHANGE”. Check out more at https://dspalliance.org/.
