be determinedannot by the way it ended, but rather by how they live. tom sullivan served in the marine corps from verse two decades doing tour combat tours in iraq and receiving two purple hats. a marine among marines. living his life by the those of ethos of the court.

david served in iraq, afghanistan, japan, rio. his love for the marine corps exceeded only by his love for his wife and their children. carson, whose decision to serve his country was second nature to him. two -- supported by his wife and the children. randall smith, grandson of a navy veteran peter he had just reenlisted in the navy after marines.rs with

he lived a life of service. he loved his wife in their three girls. wells was in the marine corps for only a year. even in that time he stood out to someone who cared more about his fellow marines than the nation anything about himself. -- and the mission more than himself. a love for family and country. the value in pride laced in serving america in the values that others placed on their

lives. today we remember them. tomorrow they joined so many whosemarine corps heroes lives and deeds shine forever right. in the days and months and years that follow, together we will .emain as they did always courageous. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the secretary of defense, ashton carter.

carter: so the families. of sullivan, staff sergeant wyatt, the officer smith and lance corporal wells, to you it is with heavy hearts that stephanie and i join you this afternoon. words for what you feel today. because tries we may, try as we , but can never fully know we do know that the lives of your loved ones meant to the security of our country. and we will never forget. biden, you honor

the force with your presence today. as you do so often. secretary mavis, admiral greener, general dunford. congresssh numbers of guests, ladies and gentlemen. together today, we cannot erase the pain of our loss, it still with fellowther citizens to honor these five fallen patriots to mourn with , to provideve them comfort and healing as best we can. to remember the lives of the -- these brave men lead, to reflect on the meaning their lives have for us, the duty their deaths in pose upon us. their lives were truly exemplary. many of them served abroad and fought on the front lines in places like iraq and afghanistan. here at home, they were serving among the many men and women in uniform who represent our military communities in communities across the country.

on the front lines of the force of the future. the meaning of their lives is therefore clear. crystal-clear, and we will be forever proud of them. the meaning of their killing is yet unclear. what combination of disturbed mind, violent extremism, and hateful ideology was at work, we don't know. perhaps it will never be fully known. let alone fathomable by all who have the decency and conscience to value their fellow human beings. but we do know this. we know that we will do what it takes to protect the servicemen and women who protect us. this is something all of us, me, president obama, vice president biden, secretary mavis, all the

men and women of the department of defense, this is something we take personally. that is why i directed the military services to fundamentally review their domestic security procedures as well as take immediate steps to improve the security and force protection of our personnel. we will do more if necessary. we also know that we are the many, the just, the noble, and that the few who threaten or insight harm to americans, violent extremists or terrorists, wherever they are, will surely come a very surely, no matter how long it takes, come to feel the long arm and the hard-faced of justice -- hard fist of justice. [applause]

and we know that those who attempt to inspire fear or terror will find no satisfaction, will have no success in the united states of america. instead, we come back from tragedy, stronger and more united. because across america, and reserve facilities and recruiting centers are still open. young men and women are still signing up to serve to defend their country. they will carry forward the legacy of the fallen, and like them, they, too will serve in the finest fighting force the world has ever known. here in this great city, recruits are still lining up to volunteer. in some cases, more of an they were before. in fact, one future sailor named alexis and listed last week.

she had been talking to recruiters in chattanooga before the shooting, but this senseless violence only wanted to make her -- only made her want to serve her country more. it only strengthened her resolve to stand up against fear and hatred. she said, we are not going to let one destroy us. we are all standing strong as a community and as a whole, that this. of chattanooga, the spirit of tennessee, and the spirit of america and its military. that is how we heal, by standing strong together. to the sullivan family, to the wyatt family, the holmquist family, the smith family, the wells family, you are part of our family and you always will be. your strength and sacrifice will continue to guide us, inspire us, and remain with us forever and ever. may god grant peace to the souls of those who are no longer with

us but will live on within us. may god watch over the soldiers, sailors, air men, and marines who continue to defend us and may god continue to bless this great nation, the united states of america. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the vice president of the united states of america, joe biden. [applause] v.p. biden: thank you. thank you. thank you very much.

i am honored to join my colleagues and family members. i wish i were not here. for i have some sense of how hard it is for you to be here. mr. mayor, as i told you earlier, you should be so proud of your city. and, to my good friend, you should be so proud of your state.

congresswoman black, congressman fleischman, i want to say that you have been through a lot. and understand that -- isaiah, chapter six, verse eight, reads, who shall i send and who shall go for us? each man we honor today gave the same response of isaiah: here i am, send me.

send me. gunnery sergeant thomas sullivan, tethered to his irish roots, chastened by his italian mom -- a great combination, mom. a red sox fan, a neighborhood kid, who never really left the neighborhood except to go to iraq twice. two purple hearts to it we irish say, a heart of gold. his hometown paper said, everything, everything a marine should be. staff sergeant david wyatt. iraq, afghanistan, the darkest and most violent days of both of those wars. dave, an eagle scout.

as a camp counselor, pulling a young man trapped in a canoe below the water, saving his life. as his hometown paper said, someone, someone you could always, always count on. sergeant carson holmquist. afghanistan. of a marine, two tors in iran. all waste -- always respectful, always looking out for others. a marine even before he took the oath. randall smith, grandson of a navy veteran -- has been pointed out already -- a baseball star in his hometown, always smiling, always there for his friends.

they say in his town someone, someone you always wanted to be around. lance corporal skip wells. devout. a friend to everyone. always there. always wanted to be a marine. to protect from the time he was a kid. his classmates in his hometown newspaper said, he was always looking out for the other guy. it was no surprise to anyone that knew them, anyone that grew up with them, that they chose the profession they did. it was stamped in their dna.

being a sailor, being a marine, is not what they did, it was who they are. they each said, i will go. i am here. send me. i didn't have the privilege of knowing any of them personally, but i knew them. confident. committed. determined. trustworthy. passionate. and always, always loyal. i knew them. they were my son and so many other sons i know. they were, with the exception of sully, the 9/11 generation, but he was that, too. men of honor, men of faith, men of determination and viewed with

a sense of duty -- it is hard to explain where they got it from. the sense of commitment to their family and friends from the time they were kids. to the moment they died. each of these guys, the best that i know -- had this instinct to protect. just in instinct. you grew up with guys like this. they had that instinct. you knew if you are in trouble, they would be there. they were different. and commitment to family and

friends, again, part of that remarkable 9/11 generation. i would respectfully suggest from being around a long time the finest generation of warriors the world has ever known. that is not a hyperbole. the finest generation of warriors the world has ever known. this generation, 4.2 million of them joined after 9/11. 4.2 million. over 2,200,000 deployed to afghanistan and iraq. everyone of them knew it was probable -- not possible -- probable they would be sent into battle. a battle unlike any in our

history. state actors but many stateless actors. difficult to tell friend from foe. like thousands of men and women in this arena, they went. they raised their hand. they said, send me. what a remarkable generation. a generation, along with their families, have made great sacrifices for this country. every day, complements of the defense department -- my stuff calls early in the morning. i carry a card in my pocket every day for the last nine years, a little box in the

bottom of my car. it lists the number of dead, the number wounded. not a general number, the exact number. the precise number. because every single solitary one of these warriors leaves behind a whole family and community. i can't stand it when i hear the number dead. wounded, 52,321 -- five added since last week in afghanistan.

there are thousands still in harm's way. first, all of the families of all of the fallen future country says, thank you. thank you for raising such incredible men and women. with such a keen sense of duty and honor.

from the time i was a kid, my mother had a saying. she was look from the time i was a kid, my mother had a saying. she was looking you and say, joey, remember, remember you are to find by your courage and you are redeemed by your loyalty. that was my mother's code. that was my mother's code. you are to find by your courage and redeemed by your loyalty. i say to the families here today, your sons, husbands, brothers -- they are the purest example of my mother's standard. they met it and exceeded it. they were defined by their courage and region and by their loyalty. to the families here, as i said when i met you a moment ago -- i

have spoken to you on the phone before that -- thank you for sharing this memorial with us. i know it is hard. it is hard. because it brings back every single -- it brings back that very moment when you got that call. for i know, no memorial, no words, no acts can provide the solace your hearts yearn to acquire. a continues to linger and in some cases grows more intense. i hope it eases your grief knowing that the people of your home towns, the people of chattanooga, and tens of millions of americans really do grieve with you.

i also know what incredible courage it took to be here. it requires you to relive. one of the things i have learned that i want you to know and hope you gain some solace from it. that people never talk about. your courage is an inspiration to hundreds of thousands of people all across this country who are suffering and struggling with their own horrific loss.

maybe not as a consequence of wearing a uniform, but who have lost a husband, a wife, a son, a daughter. and i promise you, as they struggle with their own tragedies, wondering, will i make it? can i survive? they see you. they hear you. they have come to learn about you. i promise you, you give them hope. years from now, he will find people coming up to you you never knew they will say, thank you.

thank you. because they look at you and say, if they can do it, if they can show up, maybe, maybe i can do it. maybe i can overcome. you are literally an inspiration and america owes you just for being here. and always, with the men we honored today. john mellman once wrote, they also serve who only stand. jill and i and the entire biden family have you in our thoughts and our prayers as you have had

us in yours. i also know there is nothing in this moment that can fill that deep, black hole, that open wound, losing your son, your husband, your brother, your father -- nothing can replace the sun as he walked away and turned and smiled at you, let up your life. a husband who knew your fears even before you expressed them. whose gentle hand could soothe them away.

the dad who tucked you in at night, just touched your face, made you feel so secure. the brother who always, always, always had your back. you have lost very much, you have given so very much. please know that he will always be with you in the deepest recesses of your heart. in your every thought. he will be the voice you hear telling you, it is ok. he will be that feeling in your chest that calms you down. that look from the mirror that gives you confidence to move forward and that sunset that says, i see you, i see you.

the day will come when his memory brings a smile to your lips. it takes time. it takes getting through every season at least once. but it will come. it will come. that is when you know you will be all right. my prayer is that it comes sooner rather than later. it will come. hold onto one another tightly. gunnery sergeant tommy sullivan, david wyatt, carson holmquist, randall smith, skip wells. these are the men made of this stuff that makes this the

greatest country on her. they are part of less than 1% of the population that protects 99% of us. they are what makes us who we are. they are the backbone, as these women and men here are. the virtual bone and sinuw of this country. and in the face of dangers and threats, we look out for one another. we stand together. we never, never bow. we never, never bend. our national character is no match for the cowardice and perversion that we face. these perverse ideologues, wapred theocrats. they may be able to inspire a

single loan wall to commit a savage act but they can never, never threaten who we are. these perverse ideologues, wapred theocrats. they may be able to inspire a single loan wall to commit a -- lone wolf to commit a savage act but they can never, never threaten who we are. safety, marines and sailors helping fellow warriors jump the fence away from danger, only to turn back into the fight to save more. marines and sailors grabbing children from nearby

playgrounds, shepherding them out of harm's way. warriors fighting back, getting people to safety, warriors at a recruiting center helping countless people stand up and serve. chattanooga police officers taking shots. first responders, doctors, nurses, saving lives. residents bringing food to the police officers on duty at the shooting site. makeshift memorials, vigils that grew bigger day after day after day. thousands of people lining the streets in your home towns. the funeral routes of tommy sullivan, david wyatt, carson holmquist, randall smith, skip wells.

and every stretch of road and intersection, cars, trucks, football practices stopped and waited and showed their reverence. all for the purpose of reasserting who we are. we are unyielding. chattanooga, the country has and still stands with you. it will remember what you have done. it will remember and remind everyone who we are at our best. and we have a message for those perverted cowards around the world. america never yields, never bends, never cowers, never stands down ,endures, response, and always overcomes. for we are americans.

and never, never underestimate us. it has always been a bad, bad bet to do that. ladies and gentlemen -- [applause] [cheering] ladies and gentlemen, god bless each of the fallen and their families. may god protect our troops wherever they are. and may god continue to bless the united states of america. god love you. [applause]

>> helen taft made several obvious changes in the white house. she led an effort to raise funds to great memorials for victims of the titanic. aten taft, the sunday night "firsteastern on c-span ladies: influence and image." sundays at 8 p.m. eastern on american history tv on c-span3. >> coming up from "washington a look at the use of recreational drugs and others

computing to the debate of airline safety. and a townhall event on race relations. statee on the interesting, carolina. bart jansen covers airline and transportation issues for "usa today." he joins us to discuss recreational drones. he joins us a week after new data was released about how often pilots seat drones in their flight path. what do we know? guest: be federal aviation administration said 650 aircraft reported seeing drones this year through august 9. it is on a pace said quadruple if that pace keeps up.

host: here is the story from yesterday by our guest. come to ahave we drone actually causing and in air disaster? host: up to -- there up to this point, are no collisions. what you tend to hear is that they were several hundred -- several hundred feet away. maybe a quarter mile away. but these reports about 2000 to 3000 feet above the air on the approach to newark airport. butapproach is not close airliners are going be slowest of their flights as they prepared to land. they do not have a lot of maneuverability at that point to that worrisome to pilots they would not be able to dodge them if they needed to. at this point, recent reports have not needed to take evasive

action. we -- host: we have a special line for drone owners. that number is (202) 748-8002. otherwise, if you're in the eastern or central u.s., it is (202) 748-8000. mountain and pacific regions, (202) 748-8001. can you go over what the rules are at this point for recreational use of a drones near the airport in a flight path? developingfaa is rules right now for commercial drones operators. for right now, hobbyists, the folks who want to take a model aircraft into a field and fly it, are supposed to stay below 400 feet in the air, fly only during daylight, and keep aircraft in view of the pilot on the ground. supposed to fly

within five miles of an airport, unless they get special --mission from the aircraft air traffic control tower. some of these clubs like to fly near airports, but they are supposed to let the tower know and they are careful about scheduling their flights in between incoming or outgoing planes. the reason your viewers may have been hearing more about drones in recent years is because in 2012, congress told the faa you need to develop rules for commercial drones. roots of folks -- movie makers farmers, who want to use drones. so they wanted rules developed. they said they wanted drones to share these guys with passenger planes -- the skies with by septembernes 30. those roles are still being finalized. we are still waiting for the final version of what they will

set on commercial drone owners. , they're supposed to be within 500 feet and stay more than five miles away from airports. host: how does the faa and forced that? are there are arrests or prosecutions that have happened to this point? guest: there are civil and criminal possibilities. you could get eight 25,000 dollars fine and criminal penalties if you fly drones recklessly. the difficulty is in tracking down a drone owner. if an airline sees a drone out the window, even if they relayed the complaint to the tower, the faa contacts local police, it is difficult for police to track down who may have in finding the drone. subjectis is a trepidation secretary anthony foxx talked about at a breakfast

last month. here is a bit of what he had to say. [video clip] >> if someone is purchasing a product that could be dangerous, that can go 2500 feet in the air, right now, we do not have a great mechanism to backtrack and find out who the owner is. we probably need one. i will take probably out of it. we need one. but finding out who has the authorities to do something like that is a work we are undertaking now. i say the same thing about these lasers. we are in an era where there are a lot of advantages to

technology and a lot of great things that can happen as a having these unmanned aircraft in the air space, but it has to be done safely. we will look at every single thing we can do to ensure our enforcement mechanisms have teeth. but as far as being able to follow the breadcrumbs to who is using it. host: are we talking about a federal drone registration database? guest: that is a proposal that the union representing airline pilots wants. they want a registration number on every one of these drones and they want a registry so you can track down the drone owner if you got a hold of wreckage for the drone it, if there was a collision. bart we are talking with jansen about drone safety. a special line for drone owners. that number is (202) 748-8002.

eastern and central and ronson and pacific are our other lines. we go to wane. good morning. caller: my problem is with surveillance. these drones, you can attach cameras. that makes it easier for peeping -- cocaine fields. that is a big problem. there are many privacy concerns dealing with the drones. i tended to deal more with safety. so ideal more with the department of transportation and the federal aviation administration. but president obama asked the department of commerce to look into privacy issues. they are in the midst of developing potential rules for drones to ensure privacy of the folks who are flying them. there are members of congress

concerned about the privacy rules. senator dianne feinstein, democrat of california, voiced concerns because she had a drone flying outside her house. she says it was small and crashed, but she would like to for much stricter rules drones for all users, hobbyists and commercial users. she has proposed legislation. host: mike says on twitter the faa will study it for years and only come up with trial rules. take us through what is expected through the end of the obama administration. guest: through february, the faa proposed a rule for commercial drones weighing up to 5500 pounds -- 55 pounds up to 500 feet in the air during daylight hours. have -- owners to

they got 4500 comments. they are still digesting them. says he expected them to finalize that ruled by the end of september or shortly after in passive to the office of management and budget at the white house. look at the economic impact. the financial aspects of having a rule like this. the expectation is the role for commercial drones less than 55 town should be finalized by mid to late next year. host: brian is calling in from florida. caller: good morning. havely comment is when you -- when you talked about farmers, i thought of farmers having drones over their crops or fields. cropped dusters. i see them in southern florida

all the time. i was wondering what your thoughts are on that. guest: farmers were one of the very few examples that congress set that -- said that the faa could grant special commercial permits even while comprehensive rules are being drafted. they have given out over 1000 special permits for commercial operators. many of those have gone to agriculture. 106 out of the first 500. host: what is the use on a farm of a drone? monitor the crops. where more irrigation or fertilizer may be needed. one of those first thousand permits was actually to a drone bigger than 55 pounds. it is to a yamaha drone. it looks like a helicopter. but it is nine feet long. it weighs 140 pounds. the best part of it is it can carry 60 pounds of payload.

it can carry fertilizer. -- it hovers not far above the crops. the operator, the drone pilot, guides it over the crops and it is eccentric a crop duster. they have used this in japan for 20 years. is why the drone industry says this kind of you should be allowed. we are behind. so the faa approved the use of this sort of drones, the thought being that farm fields are rural. the risk during a crash or be minimal. you can afford the loss of a few soybean plants. if it is just over a farm field, this is a use we can allow. to hear are interested from commercial drone operators. that line is (202) 748-8002.

lines are for eastern and central and mountain and pacific. jerry is waiting period good morning. caller: good morning. if a drone comes into my property, private property, and i feel threatened by that drone, do i have a right to shoot it down under the stand your ground law? the short answer is i do not know. what legal advice to give you. i suspect that the law is going to deep end on your local state law. of privacy and in terms of the use of a firearm. you would want to check with state laws. been drafting its rules, which are not final, but drafting rules on how to operate to avoid other planes and crashing into people on the

ground, if it were to fall out of the sky. the privacy standards have not been set at the federal level. so those guidelines for protecting your own property will be local level laws that i am not familiar with. host: clearly, iowa. candy is next. caller: hi. how are you doing? guest: hello. host: go ahead. caller: i have a comment on drones. i have a two-step solution. america loves two-step solutions to a five mile problem. you can use a net. eco-friendly. to take them down. if anyone is going to have her a drone over my place, guess what. i have the federal right to protect my property and i will take them down with a water hose. there is no law against water. candy with her personal

solution what she would do. we are talking with bart jansen ," a transportation reporter there. you can check all of his stories at usatoday.com. senatorioned feinstein's concerns with drones. one of her most recent concerns is disruptions caused during firefighting. in a tweet, she said disruptions delayed efforts to fight the lake fire. wasted thousands dollars in flame retardant. can you talk about the concerns there? was one of the .losest calls reported two firefighting aircraft reported seeing the drone at 10,002 you 11,000 feet from the about 500 feet from the aircraft. they got nervous enough that

they grounded the aircraft. senator feinstein says during the period, the fire jumped highway and was absolutely a hazard. that is part of why she drafted legislation to have strip or rules over no cooperation. in addition, pilots are nervous about this. airliner,th an airliners are designed to fly on one engine. if one engine were knocked out by anything, a bird or drone, they are still supposed to be able to fly. helicopters, however, if they rotor,lose the tail gradually clement a drone may be more likely to damage, they could go out of control entirely. helicopters, whether fighting particularlice, our a word about drones.

that is what senator feinstein is worried about, both for hobbyists and commercial operators. host: firefighters were concerned enough to put out a public service announcement. take a look. [video clip] to fly, bute fun the fun and's when you fly one over a wildfire. there is a lot of air traffic and pilots are worried about the fire. flight or picture is worth it. only authorized aircraft are permitted to fly in your. drones and wildfires do not mix. be smart, be safe, stay away. host: we are talking about these issues with bart jansen of "usa today." travis is next from coal chester, vermont. theer: i was wondering if solution to these concerns is technological.

broadcastone possibly an electronic serial number so the plane or patrol tower could detect that and track it that way? and maybe even -- is there some way it could monitor its gps and not allow itself to go into airspace, despite what the controller is telling it to do? twot: there is actually parts to what you are talking about. they are both issues federal officials and industry advocates are talking about. one is the tracking. one of the most important things the faa is trying to study is detect and avoid or sense and avoid. there is nobody on the drone as it is flying. that is why you should fly them during daylight hours and in couldof the pilot so he steer away from other aircraft. but there is a proposal from the

air line pilots association, the airline union, that they would like the kind of tracking equipment that would send out a signal so that drones could be tracked more easily by radar and other planes. that would be expensive. are general aviation pilots a little resistant to this. they have a requirement they have to have this equipment by 2020. it would be expensive and cumbersome and on some of these smaller drones. that is a dispute not yet resolved. in addition, you could potentially program -- you can program into the software for drones what is called g.o. fencing. , doever there are airports not allow them to fly within five miles of those airports or around specially protect did buildings like the white house and the capital building. set up geo-fencing in the

program that would prevent drones flying where you do not want them. that does not help with firefighting, but that is something that is part of senator feinstein's legislation. that there ought to be geo-fencing programming in every affectold so it would hobbyists and commercial operators. it is not yet something that is ules, buthe roles -- r something the faa is studying to prevent drones from flying where they should not be. host: geo-fencing certainly an issue after a drone crashed on the white house lawn recently. guest: this is another issue called lost link. is also studying this as it develops these comprehensive rules. the problem is sometimes the remote operators on the ground lose contact with the drone, so the question is what should happen when that happens?

lower the drone just itself carefully to the ground, should it have automatic programming to return to the operator? that is something else the faa is looking at. aterson in washington late night, perhaps after having a few drinks in january, was flying a drone outside a balcony and lost contact with it. and it made its way to the white house grounds and crashed, whether into a tree or into the ground. whatever, it crashed onto the white house grounds. that made people quite nervous, because it would not take much to get a drone into the air if you are on the mall or near the capitol building. that raised questions about how you might protect special buildings or other restricted areas from drone flights. geo-fencing is something they are looking at. boeing, there are reports boeing

in the last week tested a laser that, when fired for 10 to 15 seconds at a drone was able to knock it out of the sky. there are couple occasions with pointing that kind of device within city limits, but it is something people are studying. it is an option. we will have to see how that develops in trying to protect these special buildings from drone flights. you'rehe legislation talking about from senator feinstein, the consumer drone safety act. released in mid-june. she said that the reports of dangerous operations and near misses are only increasing in incidents from lax to laguardia to the golden gate ridge. it is time to close the gap and to keep ourority skies safe. we go to joe. caller: good morning.

my uncle used to fly aircraft that were remote controlled in the 1960's. he was part of an association. these people did not go ahead and go around the big airports. they would go to small airports, farms and that stuff. it shows how the mental capacity of the public has diminished so far that these. fools will go ahead and fly their drones to see if they can cause damage. this is such a travesty. these people need to be locked up and possibly, if they get too close, get charged with attempted murder. that is exactly what it is. host: in your mind, is at the mental capacity of today's drone flyers or is it the keep -- cheap, the price of drones coming down and the ability and

ease of flying them? price going down and the sophistication of the drones -- a lot of people have them. the issue of people flying them recklessly is something that has united most of the industry and the folks that talk about this stuff. the commercial operators. the hobbyists all say we do not want anybody flying recklessly. the commercial operators know a collision would be very bad for everybody. that might be cost to ground all drones if there were a collision. hobbyists, there is a group --led the associate association of model aeronautics. they say their members try to fly responsibly. they enjoy flying planes. it is a hobby, it is fun, they try to be safe about it. the have a campaign with

faa, know before you fly, to try to educate people so people know not to break these rules. fly 400 supposed to four hobbyists, 500 for commercial lists. someone flying thousands of feet in the air off the approach of newark is flying in much more dangerous territory. the question is how you prevent that kind of reckless flying. rudy in georgia. good morning. caller: i have a question. due to the potential hazards drones can cause, is there any way that, until faa has the policies and regulations and a way to track who the owners may be, that they can stop the sale or purchasing of the drones? if they do not know could stop all fails. that would be -- stop all sales. that would be a tricky issue.

that is part of why there is such an appetite for drones, both for hobbyists and commercial pilots. saying why everyone is they want rules, just tell us what they are before the skies become as crowded as these guys outside the jedi council on coruscant. and they the rules want to know what they are. commercial operators want them to be more flexible. they want to fly at night, outside the view of the drone pilot. because things like an be soltural field might large that they would like to go all the way be -- all the way to the other side of the field without walking. , you want to fly over it without walking all the miles. commercial operators would also like the prospect of flying over more urban areas.

you're supposed to not fly drones over people who are not associated with the drone ,light, which sounds like rural not crowded places. but if you are going to have drone deliveries, as some have advocated, you will want to fly over cities. so what should the rules be. drones is an unlikely prospect. that is why commercial hobbyists,on -- lawmakers, everyone wants the rules of the road set so that hopefully there will be enforcement of people who break rules. host: there's a p.s.a. on washington, d.c. and the rules of drone usage in and around the city. here's a bit from that p.s.a. >> the region around washington, d.c. is a no-drone zone. flying a drone in this area for any purpose is against the law and violatedtors could face

stiff fines and criminal penalties. enjoy the nation's capital, eave your drone at home. host: the they're particularly concerned about drone flights during the fourth of july festivity, correct? guest: the fourth of july was also following the crash at the white house, and just typically around sporting events. here's the temptation to get great aerial photography around sporting events, and they do not want drones flying over large crowds of people, again, because of the risk of lost limbs and then having the drone fall over people and potentially injure them. host: massachusetts is up next, john is waiting. john, good morning. caller: hello. you were talking about fields earlier, and i'm actually -- you can call me a park suit cal specialist, so to speak, and i help me se drones to

deliver drugs to my patients. host: john talking about his use of drones, on the issue of commercial use of drones. the f.a.a. been more willing to grant these extensions for certain kinds of businesses than others? guest: yes. there have been several categories where they've been granting them primarily movie making, which, of course, has closed sets, pipeline and smoke stack inspections, a lot of permits have also been granted for like bridge inspections. again, the idea that the risk is going to be much smaller than perhaps a helicopter or a fixed wing miles and miles along pipelines. that's the idea, the drones will do the dirty, dangerous work that is even more risky if you have pilots and also much less expensive.

movie making, pipeline inspection, and agriculture were some of the major features, that have been granting permits. real estate agents have actually been the single largest users among the first 500 permits that industry tudies, something were for real estate. again, that's video and presumably just flying around a house or around a property and not 10,000 feet above it. host: about 10 minutes left with bart jansen to answer all your questions about drone safety and what the f.a.a. is doing about drones in airspace. dorothy is in apex, north carolina. dorothy, good morning. caller: good morning. my concern is about if you can register guns, why can't you register drones. it's that simple. it's just a matter of having a number or numbers, and if a

drone crashes or causes damage, go to the honor. host: do drones have serial numbers? guest: not yet, but that is absolutely a proposal that, as i said, the airline pilots would definitely like. wonderful early concerns is that some of the drones are so small that it would be difficult to put the kind of number that you see on the back of a cessna so you can track that plane and know who's flying it. putting those sorts of numbers on what can be very small drones might be difficult, but it's more an issue of setting up the registry. somebody has to collect all that information and, of course, all the drones that have already been sold would either have to be retroactively signed up or figure out something going forward. but yes, that's definitely something that safety advocates are advocating.

host: bob in oklahoma is up next. good morning. you're on the "washington journal." caller: good morning. i would just say in relation to what exactly what you're talking about, the size. drones, and the numbers wouldn't be practical. you can print the numbers very small so that when the drones are caught, captured, otherwise confiscated by homeowners and property owners who don't being spied on, that then the owner could be tracked down or whatever. no, i don't think drones will be tolerated by the general public flying around their houses and on their property, people spying on each other, you know, all kinds of stuff like that. i don't think it's going to be tolerated. i think drones are going to be shot out of the sky and sophisticated and stolen. host: bob in oklahoma with his thoughts. guest: it has been an emotional issue much as you say, people don't want to be spied on, they don't to want think that somebody is flying over their backyard without permission.

but there is great appetite for having drones and having commercial operations that are approved and they're flying by the rules. when you look at the kind of photography that can be had, flights over new york city, which are probably against the rules, but they're circulating on the internet that it's gorgeous photography. there's gorgeous photography after the earthquake in nepal. bob seeing ar wouldn't need to go to kathmandu anymore if he can see this video over the internet from these drones that they capture. that's just, you know, commercial photography, because the cameras have gotten so good. there's great use for the inspections. here are many great uses for drones that there's going to be an appear future for commercial operators and the folks that would use them. you're right, there's going to be a lot of resistance. and if senator feinstein and

other skeptics approve their rules, you know, swreel to see what will shake out in the final analysis. host: let's get to one of those folks who do use them. ray controls planes in new hampshire. ray, thanks for calling "washington journal." caller: thanks. good morning. yeah, i've been flying remote-control planes now 16-plus years, and when i tarted, you had to fly a designated field that was approved by the academy of aeronautics, and maybe you could bring up their website, which is modelaircraft.org, and they go through and have all the stuff about, you know, where you're supposed to fly and how high you can supply things like that. so i've flown, you know, other copters before, not my thing, but i like the airplanes. but again, those are flying at designated fields. you stay within line of sight.

you can't go above 400 feet. you can't be -- these fields aren't within five miles of airports. but you see it all the time, people are getting these things, and people they're inexpensive, under $1,000 for something that can -- something that has g.p.s., you can apply more than a mile. like my airplane, i can fly it more than a mile away. i can't see it, but, you know, i think the big thing is people should just educate themselves. i think if they go to this website, they'd be able to find the rules and, you know, if they can abide by them, people do what they do, and that's unfortunate. i think it's going hurt the obvious. thank you. host: is this typical? guest: the f.a.a. is going to be very pleased he's following the rules, and that's what they want basically from everybody. this isn't really the issue in

many of these cases. the rules, the dispute that you're hearing in congress is about commercial operators and the concerns about them sharing the skies basically much more flexible, almost as plentifully as passenger planes, and, you know, there's advocates inside the industry who say, you know, let us fly. you know, we will be confident, we will pay attention to the planes, you should trust us. we can fly them confidently and we can program them to fly automatic paths so we can potentially have delivery somewhere down the road. but the reason the f.a.a. has been so careful about this is that the united states airspace is some of the most complicated in the world. if we have something like 28,000 passenger airline flights a day, 2,000 cargo flights a day, those 30,000 flights are out of perhaps 100,000 commercial flights worldwide. we have almost 1/3 of the

commercial flights daily of everyone in the world, plus there may be as many general aviation flights each day as the commercial flights. and blending drones into those skies is something the f.a.a. wants to be very careful about, and so they're flying to balance the risks against the interests, just trying to fly themselves in remote areas, not bother anybody else, and the commercial operators that want to definitely fly in much more ared airspace where more planes would fly. host: roger said, if our intelligence agencies are not looking at drones as instruments of terrors, they're fools. our enemies are not. this concern about terror drones? guest: well, clearly drones can arry things. they already carry cameras. the agriculture drone could

carry fertilizer by definition. so drones can carry pay loads. the threat would be if they carry something bad to attack people, and i'm sure it is something that many agencies and federal gorts are studying that has not been the problem so much of the f.a.a. they have been much more safety-oriented, just how you fly these things and keep them from colliding and hurting people on the ground. host: guy from maryland is up next. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: good. go ahead. caller: this is my question t. seems like when someone comes up with a good idea, such as these drones, it seems to me that nobody -- nobody in the room is thinking about the consequences. everybody thinks about, you know, the hobbyists enjoying themselves, but there's another side of the coin. the same instrument can be used for something a whole lot worse than nobody anticipated.

what are your thoughts about hat? guest: well, clearly if somebody were to intentionally collide with a plane near an airport, that would be a very dangerous thing, a very risky thing, and so that is absolutely something that federal officials will be studying. again, the difficulty is how would you prevent that. one person suggested trying to ground them all. i suspect that sounds unrealistic. there's the prospect for geo fencing, but you need the programming to be effective. you need it to be tamper-proof so that somebody has a drone that will not fly in washington, d.c., and yet they figure out a way to reprogram it so that it can. you know, federal officials are definitely concerned about drones on the white house

grounds, but they're looking at it, it's just a very complicated question as they try to resolve that. host: time for just a few more calls with bart jansen of "usa today." mike is in rockford, illinois. mike, good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. yeah, my question has to do with the new f.a.a. rules that hey're trying to impose. originally 500 feet above the house you control the airspace. now they want to control the 500 foot all the way to the ground. so my question is, is that a air grant, and can they fly literally through your business and your house if that's a fact? that's the first question. the second is the same thing. if you take out a government drone, let's say you swat it t of the air, it's torblee a

commercial airliner. you know what i'm saying. those are my two questions. thank you. guest: for the first question, the f.a.a. contends that they want to regulate all these objects flying anywhere above the ground, and there was actually a case involving a guy who flew a drone. it was argued it was a commercial flight flying around the university of virginia. fairly low to the ground, and, you know, he argued that that should not be regulated or he should not be fined for that. and on appeal to the national transportation safety board, they upheld the f.a.a.'s ability to fine the operator in that case, and so the ability for the f.a.a. to enforce these egulations has been confirmed.

it would be fairly chaotic if the f.a.a. weren't allowed to regulate them. so then the question is, you know, do they have enough inspectors? do they have enough people to follow all the reckless flights? they don't have that many people. and so they need to try to encourage people through educational programs to enforce the rules. they wouldn't regulate flights through your house. once the drones would go inside, then that wouldn't be f.a.a. purview anymore, and so that's part of the -- they've been doing the research, amazon has done some of the research inside enormous warehouses, but to see how these drones are going to operate, you really to want see them outdoors. you've got to see them in wind and weather in addition to just indoors. but the f.a.a. is regulating stuff outdoors. host: the other question was, damage to drones, is it compareable in f.a.a. rules to damage to commercial airlines or government property?

guest: well, i would think the liability of somebody damaging a drone would be the same, whether it was a manned or unmanned aircraft. but then you'd have to look at whether there was mitigation, such as you were justified for knocking the drone out of the sky because it was over your own house. again, those are laws i'm not familiar with. host: richard is waiting from florida. you're on with bart jansen. caller: yes. good morning, c-span. my point is this -- i think -- in s is simply such the old years ago, the airplanes used to fly in certain areas where they have air fields for model airlines. so if you have these drones, i think they're quite dangerous.

two points. privacy, going into somebody else's neighborhood, house, and commercially with the planes. you have people who are operating these drones who aren't necessarily professional. why don't they just have parks where they can just keep them without having these kind of problems? sooner or later there's going to be an incident based on the free flying of these drones. host: on the commercial use of drones, isn't there designated spaces where the testing can occur around this country? guest: there are. the f.a.a. designated six testing areas across the country, and they're doing work on those major issues we talked bout, geofencing, the sensor

actually had ch an spernt. they had a company actually deliver some medication as an experiment to see how deliveries might work. and nasa had deliveries in north dakota. they are dipping their toe in the water of night flights. so there are designated testing areas, but as the caller says, the concern with passenger planes is for collisions. if the comparison is to birds, bird strikes have gone up dramatically from something like 1,800 in 1990 to 11,000 in 2013. the f.a.a. worries about birds weighing as little as eight pounds striking the tail. again, don't to want lose your tail on an aircraft for steering and control, or four pounds for the rest of the plane, and while many drones are smaller than that, that's

not that large. the threat is that have a flock of birds, such as in the miracle on the hudson incident in january of 2009, it knocked out both engines of an air bus and had to land on the hudson. now, there were no serious injuries in that incident, but a single bald eagle, a 10-pound bald eagle, 7,500 feet above the denver airport severely damaged an engine of a boeing 757, and it made an emergency landing in november of 2011, 3,300 feet above the minneapolis airport, a 15-pound tundra swan did substantial damage to the nose of an engine of an air bus, and it also landed. so single birds can damage planes. as i said, airliners are supposed to continue to fly with a single engine, but perforating the skin, knocking out the instruments in the nose

area, and one plane that was struck by birds, they had to land by an emergency backup radio, these raise concerns much smaller than the 55-pound limit that the f.a.a. is now studying. host: you mentioned the miracle on the hudson. yesterday, there was a story in what the celebrated pilot in that case, captain sullenberger, thinks about the danger posed by drones. that story appeared in "usa today" yesterday. last call goes to peter in houston, texas. peter, good morning. caller: hi, good morning. i hope my question comes out coherently enough so you can understand what i'm trying to ask. so in regards to the hand-held device that the f.a.a. has a single specific register that goes from a hand held device to he actual unit that flies,

they have a specific band width that they have to light in sight of, so the question would be, is there a way that somebody can just come out with like a focused signal jammer for that specific band width that can be used around airports or say the white house or any other specific building and maybe they can aim at it? host: did you get that? guest: yes, and that is one of the prospects that they were studying, particularly after he white house incident. presumably you can crash, wherever it was in the sky, it would presumably go straight down, which is one concern, because you don't want them just raining down on people. but as i understand it, the difficulty with that is not knowing the variety of the different signals and being

able to jam the people you want to jam and not jam everybody else. now, of course, they can jam wide areas during public events, you know, block cell phone calls, and certainly these radio frequencies, but the idea is how you balance, you know, protection against perhaps the single drone against, you know, others. host: bart jansen from "usa today." check out his w >> on the next washington journal, christopher farrell talks about the controversy over hillary clinton's e-mails while serving as secretary of state they also an officer with jewish-american group talks about the organization and its support for the iran nuclear agreement. it was 50 years ago that riots broke out in los angeles following a roadside problem with police. he joins us to talk about the events surrounding that moment

in history. we will open our fomite and look for your comments on facebook and twitter. washington journal's live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> this sunday night on q and a, the institute for policy studies fellow and antiwar activist, phyllis bennis on u.s. foreign-policy since 9/11, the recent negotiations with iran, and the war on terrorism. >> who is isis? what are their origins? all of those questions are important. i think that what is more important in some ways because it is something we can do something about, is, what is the u.s. policy regarding isis? why isn't it working? are we just doing the war wrong or is it wrong to say that there should be a war against terrorism at all? those are the questions that in some ways are the most important

and would be the most useful. >> sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern and pacific on c-span q and a. the town hall event of the state of race relations in america. policing, thed black lives matter movement, and the recent debate over the confederate flag. tv ands hosted by wsa the washington post. it is almost one hour. >> we need to talk about this. >> i do not feel safe in america anymore. >> i feel like we spend a lot of time, money, and resources on the folks that are not trying to help themselves. when itit talks -- comes to race relations, we are not there yet.

>>? why the looting why the violence? >> the way we are being viewed as not people. 50% of whites feel this way. >> where we go from here, i do not know. part of this great experiment in the united states of america. incrediblebeen things on many fronts. dramaticwe still see and dangerous incidents of racist discord. >> even hatred. causes.ain that this >> it is beyond my

comprehension. shows 60% of white people are uncomfortable discussing race relations with a person of another race. we need to talk about this, race, and honest conversation. >> hello, i am bruce johnson. inc. you for joining us. why are we not talking about race? why do --why are black people afraid of this? people are think afraid of this, they are misinformed. you can go all the way back to black people, you can go back to asian americans, if people were more informed about the realities of their generational history, i do not think they would be afraid to talk about things very it is a matter of

discussing how we have come along. >> a lot of people out there --why am i being blamed? being blamed. all of these injustices and in discrimination is coiled into our present day. you cannot talk about our present day without the context of our history. we have been the 51st state of america in america, the state of denial. it is time we talk about these issues that have a real impact on people's lives. >> a lot of people talk about this around the kitchen table but they will not talk about it with someone that does not look like them. >> it is hard. it is hard to talk about race. we should remember that it is hard and we are overcoming generations of the ways that we have been taught not to do something.

remember thato race is not a single topic. it is made up of many topics. one of its big subdivisions is gender. race and gender do go together in my mind. >> let's look at this graphic. ,bs news, new york times poll has president obama brought whites and blacks together. 50% of americans say yes. 47% say there has been no different. 34% say that we are further apart. what is the problem? you are a former democratic congressman from the state of georgia. why are we further apart? >> i think it has to do with inculcated, urban tensions which are in fact part of the history of segregation in the south and defectors segregation in the

north. which is something we do not talk about a lot. presidentent -- the is a victim of circumstances. i do not think he has led on race. brought people together. he has a lot of other things to worry about. recently, in these past few -- hs, he has provided you do not think the president has led on race. >> in 2009, 97% of the african-americans that went to the polls voted for barack obama. were they expecting too much? >> i think they wanted unification, leadership, and they wanted a better community in their community. the reality is that barack obama's election was powerful

and a opportunity to address the race question. --e folks and white folks they stopped working on it were working towards it. african-americans get comfortable thinking life would be better on its own and white listen, we are-- getting rid of the guilds because we have a black president. >> barack obama had portrayed himself as the amount for -- as -- african-american >> i would agree with you. i think barack obama did a good job of positioning himself in the middle on race issues. that has caused some problems. it has allowed race riots and race issues to rise. we have not been having the necessary conversation. it is true.

barack obama does not have to have a language or a speech to support black causes. i am more concerned about his actions. what is his legacy of leadership in connection to black communities across this country question mark that is what we should judge them upon. and that is where i think he has had his challenges. barack obama got 43% of the white vote in the general election which means an awful lot. how are white people viewing barack obama right now? >> i can hardly speak for white folks. democrats are going to tend to vote for the democrat running for office. the republican party faces a great dilemma here right now.

the party is still -- is trying to do outreach to different communities. some do not care because they do not think this communities can be won over. art of the reason why barack -- we live in a very partisan society right now. >> i think we are over analyzing this. same problems with females having glass feelings as you do with race and having glass feelings. tois because we are afraid lose power. whoever is afraid to lose power will create things where it is difficult. barack obama has been a good president and that is why this has come out. aey want to see he has been -- he has not been a good job.

as the white man continues to lose power, they will entrench themselves now. my name is brandon cooper. a law student at the university of maryland. a false stories whether obama has done good things are bad things. more than one person. >> who was writing all of those articles that it is the end of racism --the election of barack obama? who wrote that? all that we are talking about tonight was behind us? a show of fans. -- a show of hands. it and iot buy into voted for barack obama but i think the question and

discussion should not only be about race relations, but it should be about racial justice. too often we talk about racism in this country as a conversational discussion. the issue we have from decades parallelummer of 1967, to the summer of 2015, is that there is not enough justice. i went to see that type of accountability. >> we will take that up in the next segment. barack obama is past the halfway point. we have people in the streets live matter.ack does that offend anyone? my name is dan b q and i am for montgomery county, maryland. all lives matter. not just black life. if you cannot have an honest

conversation about black live smattering when over 1600 people this year have been shot in of the, and over 50% shooting victims are african-american males. just yesterday, 12 people were shot in chicago. that does not make national headlines. >> can someone respond to him why black live slogan is relevant. >> black lives matter because when you look at what is happening -- there has not been blacked of this. black folks are under attack. while you may have six children, and you love your children equally but you have to love them adequately. we have to put adequate attention to the issues that are in our lack community. >> black lives matter. i would agree that all lives

matter. however, you have to understand the source that that sentiment comes from. it is a source of frustration ad anger that goes back to point in history and time where if you had a drop of blood not to be equal. racism was condoned. this is woven into the fabric of who we are as a country. that is something we need to we need to come to grips with. >> it is understood that white lives matter. they were trying to draw attention to the fact that black lives matter also. >> there is a certain amount of privilege that comes with all lives matter over black lives matter. -- there was an image of a black child saying lack lives matter and a white hand over the mouth saying all

lives matter. they are not mutually exclusive. if it were not necessary to say it is much -- as much to begin with, it would not be an issue at all. to equally glass feelings for black people and women. black men were allowed to vote in this country before any woman was. it is a tough comparison there. deals with the -- not of this nation the propaganda we get in schools, but the real history has been no that from the beginning black lives were commoditized. black lives did not matter. they have mattered only inasmuch as they have produced wealth for those who owned the black people. it has blood -- it has been only a generation, america has only tried to remedy this in the law,

one generation ago. two separate from the true history of this to separate from the true history, these are the united states of amnesia. we are not willing to do with the true history that got us to where we are. >> thank you for there are a couple of things. the point you are making, the point where we see the break with frederick douglass, with liberal whites in the north, it is precisely over this issue where white women in particular say we want the vote. if we do not have the vote, certainly black men cannot have the vote. i think it is very important.