Things evolve.....
Were early Ignition free flighters frowned upon by the rubber powered guys as "not true modelers"?
Were the early Control Line flyers not "pure modelers"?
Yes to both, in fact, all major clubs existing at the time banned gas models and gas models caused the first Federal involvement. You may or may not be aware that for many decades, every single gas model was required to be registered with the CAB, and were very close to being made illegal by federal regulation.
Quad flyers (not drone flyers, because 95% or so airmodelers fly drones) are a new and different form of airmodeling.
Quad races are amazing, as are the tricks that they are capable of....
As to the fact that they are not AMA members and don't follow rules, how many of us flew in schoolyards? Or joined the AMA when we got our Cox PT 19's?
We evolve
Who said FPV drones and quadcopters weren't cool and interesting? They are popular for a reason, at least partly precisely *because* they required absolutely no skill to acquire and fly. Is it the AMA charter to sanction and represent, say, facebook, because it is fun, popular and dangerous? Should a guy sticking a Twister kit together with Elmer's glue in his basement have to provide a statement of his privacy policy or have the kit taken away? Or pass a 60-question test about air navigation laws before he can fly it?
The problem is that >>DRONES WERE ALWAYS GOING TO BE REGULATED<<, period. I think, and many others think, that they SHOULD be regulated, because their potential for damage and continual examples if irresponsible use. It is a fair argument what sort of regulation and how onerous it should be, that's a reasonable point of debate, but it WILL CERTAINLY HAPPEN in some form.
The AMA's argument and justification for their position on the Special Rule for Model Aircraft is right and legitimate - for model aviation. Model aviation does have a fairly good record of safety and responsible behavior, although not nearly as good as they like to claim. The caveats are mostly because of the same sort of people currently flying drones infesting the AMA with RTF/ARF buys and fly RC toys in the past. I think most of us figure the current situation is acceptable if you lump FF/CL/RC/RCArf consumers together and are at least willing to accept this inappropriate or deceptive connection for the greater good.
What is not acceptable and will screw us al is AMAs course of connecting drones, which ARE GOING TO BE HEAVILY REGULATED WITH 100% CERTAINTY from the first group with the traditional model aviation that SHOULD NOT AND NEEDS NO REGULATION.
If you do that, you guarantee that the people who have acted responsibly over the years and need no regulation are GOING TO GET REGULATED anyway. And worse, since the "responsible" group who needs no oversight are also the only ones that will pay any attention to the regulation, they are punished for the very same responsibility, while the same drone idiots from the first group will go about their irresponsible ways, leaving the rest of us to pay the price in ever-more-onerous regulations.
This is the objection, since it has catastrophic effects on people who don't deserve it for having done absolutely nothing, aside from letting the AMA run open-loop for years because we accepted a minor falsehood for the sake of unity.
Note the irony that we permitted a falsehood (that FF/CL/traditional RC modeling and RC ARF/RTF consumers are somehow connected and similar things that should be logically lumped together for purposes of definition) to be perpetrated "for the better good" by the AMA, and now the same logic is being used for an even more tenuous connection THAT ARE GOING TO HANG US ALL.
In retrospect, I can see several mistakes made by attempting to "go along" with things that are not true just to be agreeable. Most of us know that it was wrong and disingenuous to permit the RC "consumer" to be lumped with "modelers", but we let it happen anyway. Now the same logic is going to put the rest of us out of business barring some bolt from the blue intervention.
I can only speak for myself, but I have to draw the line at this latest and more absurd pack of lies. Lying or "shading the truth" for the last 40 years or so got us in this mess, and I do not wish to compound it by parroting a blatant falsehood as the AMA wants me to.
Brett