All they had to do was tweak some wording in 18 U.S.C. § 32 to cover reckless use of drones and other egregious behavior. See https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/32

But drones are hot so why not pass a complex bill with a complex mandate to satisfy regulators itching to pounce on drone hobbyists.

Frankly I assumed the behavior was already criminal under Federal law.[1] Anybody who thought it was okay to buzz airplanes is almost certainly not thinking about consequences.

[1] I'm not completely convinced it's not, FWIW, but I'm satisfied it's not covered by the above, which is the only relevant Federal criminal statute I could find. I'd bet it's already illegal in many states, though.

This is the United States congee we're talking about here their are no simple solutions /s

"Do you know what the difference between 20 years and life in prison are?"

What changes people's habits is the likelihood of punishment, not the severity of it.

Sure... slap on the wrist, prison time, same thing. Of course it makes a difference. Everyone sets an “acceptable” level beyond which it’s no longer worth it to break the rule. This is where the severity makes the difference.

The USA has high punishments for murder but less then 50% of murder investigations are solved.

Germany has much lower punishments for murder, but around 90% of murder investigations are solved.

Which of these do you think is the greater deterrence?

Per local German coverage on reported crime statistics, many crimes go unreported, and a number of crimes that would be included in US crime statistics are exempted from German reporting.

Also, now that Germany has...diversity...the crime rate went up pretty significantly.

So I would say, all in all, that homogenous populations are the greatest deterrence, followed by the magnitude of punishment being significantly more important at a societal level, though the risk of getting caught dominates the thought process for regulatory/low-punishment crimes.

are you saying that murders go unreported in Germany? I have a hard time believing that.

There’s also another aspect: whether it’s one life sentence or 5 consecutive might make very little difference. Since prisons in US are big business nobody deals in short sentences. Rehabilitation or deterrence are not the goals, so of course the strategy won’t have the effect you imagine.

When punishments are so disproportionately high a good chunk of the ofenders will stop caring. The preventative effect is gone, it’s more an incentive to escalate the crime to a level where it matches the punishment.

But without knowing how many murders and the relevant population sizes I'm not sure that your point is made.

If they'd shoot me for speeding I'd do less of it.

if speeding was punishable by death but i were as likely to be caught as to die in a terror attack, i would definitely speed as much as i wanted.

Kid, I used to be a public defender. I'm pretty sure I have a better idea of what motivates people not to commit crime than you do.