Connecticut Legislators Attempt to Stop Municipalities from Operating DJI Drones
The push to prohibit DJI drones in the United States has taken a bizarre turn in Connecticut. State legislators in Connecticut are allegedly making an absurd attempt to prevent municipalities from using these unmanned aerial vehicles. This move, which can only be described as both comical and ill-informed, adds to the ongoing debate surrounding the use of DJI drones.
According to a report by CTInsider, two Democratic legislators in Connecticut are following the legal actions taken by several U.S. states and Congress to ban the use of DJI drones. Adam Welsh, the head of global policy at DJI, expressed concerns that this blacklisting could potentially harm around $116 billion in economic activity.
The General Assembly Committee Bill No. 3 takes a broad approach in targeting the company by prohibiting municipal agencies from using any UAVs manufactured in China and Russia, as well as any governmental subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities associated with these countries.
Russian-made drones are being widely used by consumers, public services, and companies. It is only sensible to pay attention to their prevalence. Did you witness the Orlan-10 conducting an inspection of the nuclear plant last week?
The supporters of the Connecticut text exhibit a perplexing level of amateurism in their attempt to disguise a targeted ban on DJI drones as broader policy. State Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff’s explanation of the initiative to CTInsider only reinforces the notion that politicians pushing for bills to effectively prohibit the use of all DJI drones in the US are ill-informed and spouting nonsensical statements. Duff’s assertion that “at some point the software gets uploaded” in reference to DJI Avata and Mavic drones, as if they were uploading software like Microsoft Office, Adobe Acrobat, or iPhone operating systems while flying, is misguided. Despite any claims to the contrary, this is not the case.
We admit our mistake.
Duff continued his drone-like babbling.
“This revolves around the scenario of China invading Taiwan, which may sound like a conspiracy theory,” he expressed, his last remark standing out as a clear and rational thought amidst a sea of nonsense. “It almost seems absurd.”
Do you really think so?
CTInsider reported that Duff and his legislative co-sponsor have reached out to municipal leaders across the state, explaining the rationale behind the de facto DJI drone ban. In their letter, they specifically mention the brand name, emphasizing the security concerns associated with it. This initiative has already garnered attention, prompting a public statement from Michael Shabenas, Chief of the Dayville Fire Company.
“Our drones have a wide range of applications in public safety, including but not limited to structural fires, wildland/forest fires, and search and rescue operations,” Shabenas emphasized. He pointed out that if DJI drones were to be banned, his organization, along with many others across the nation that have been affected by similar restrictions, would be forced to purchase fewer, pricier, and less efficient alternatives available on the market. “It is important to note that the majority of missions carried out by fire department UASs are aimed at providing tactical support in emergency operations, posing minimal risk in terms of exposing infrastructure information. In fact, most of the information obtained through these missions can also be acquired from satellite imagery.”
In an interview with CTInsider, Duff, a knowledgeable politician and avid tech enthusiast, emphasized that his proposed bill to prohibit DJI drones would not result in sudden and costly changes. Instead, it would bring about a measured response to address the undeniable threat posed to local, state, and national security.
