This paper is a critique of the article â€œFAA's drone registration rule faces legal challenge from think tankâ€ by Kent Hoover. This critique will discuss some of the authorâ€™s main points and will examine the overall effectiveness of the article as well as the authorâ€™s stance in the end.
The article being reviewed today is called â€œFAA's drone registration rule faces legal challenge from think tankâ€ by Kent Hoover. This article briefly describes what the drone registration policy is and uses a company called â€œTech Freedomâ€ as an example of the opposition to the FAA drone policy.
The beginning of this article is fairly ...view middle of the document...
The arguments given by this company seem to be quite vague. An example of this is when the company says that the FAA tried to rush this policy into place prior to the Christmas rush. The author then states that another lawsuit was filed by a lawyer in Maryland who happens to be a drone enthusiast. This was of course against drone registration but there was no specific argument given. The end of the article simply states that there is a separate registration for company operated drones.
The author tends to promote both points of view giving somewhat viable arguments with regards to drone registration. As far as the FAA is concerned, the author gives a clear and concise argument of what they want to regulate, why they want to regulate it, and how theyâ€™re going to regulate it. The benefits of this new policy are also stated by the author and seem to be presented as something needed by general aviation drone operators. On the other hand, the arguments presented by the companies stand point on registration are a little arbitrary in nature. The companyâ€™s argument on rushing this decision without consulting the general public doesnâ€™t seem to present any major contribution to the article. The author seems to side with the FAA in that aspect. His view of this FAA policy is quite clear and...