Absolute drivel
Nonetheless it links usefully to the CPNI assessment (https://www.cpni.gov.uk/countering-threats-unmanned-aerial-systems-0). It does say: “It should be noted that UAVs being flown across sites that do not have airspace restrictions and where the pilot is operating within the limits laid down in the drone code may be operating lawfully.”
But goes on: “It may be appropriate to erect “no drone zone” signage prohibiting the use of UAS at points of access to identified likely launch sites and nearby transport links.”
Hmm: “prohibiting”?
In their world, what we see as a completely legal recreational drone flight may become “a UAS incident”.
One of the proposed “counter-UAS” strategies is raising community awareness and encouraging people to report . . . in other words, stoking local paranoia. I think it’s important for the drone community therefore to (a) promote good use of drones and (b) challenge alleged “nefarious” use . . . which is very likely based on out-of-date (mis)information and negative PR from these people.
Also discusses counter-UAS technology, and links to a handy Catalogue of Security Equipment. Worth a look.