Brian,
I'm going to try to put this in perspective for you. I have a feeling that I won't be successful at it but here it goes anyway.
A little history: In 2013, many recreational drone operators were shooting aerial drone footage to enhance their ground videos (including me).
Example: In 2013, I was making virtual tour videos for a local Parks and Recreation Department. These videos did not directly or indirectly produce any revenue for the Parks and Recreations Department and no, this wasn't in a National or State Park and I had full permission from the Parks and Recreation Department as well as the FAA (FSDO in particular).
It was stipulated by FSDO that I cannot charge for the aerial portion or the editing of the aerial portion of the video.
It was further stipulated that any aerial footage that I shot had to comply with any and all safety regulations including staying at least 500 feet away from people, vehicles and structures (hereinafter referred to as "Objects"), the second stipulation wasn't easy to do at all. In most cases, I had to take off in an open area at least 500 feet away from objects, then climb to 400 feet altitude, and stay away from those objects by 300 feet horizontally.
If your know anything about trigonometry (and you should if you fly a drone), it takes 400 feet vertical and 300 feet horizontal to give you a diagonal distance of 500 feet (the hypotenuse).
The formula is 400 feet vertically (squared or times itself) + 300 feet horizontally (squared or times itself) = 25,000 feet, then find the square root of 25,000 to get the answer of 500 feet diagonally which is the minimum "legal" distance from an object.
Now let's take the Field of View of an X3 Inspire camera (which is 94°), you will see 1.66 feet horizontally in the frame for every 1 foot of distance away from the object. At 500 feet away from the object, you will see 830 feet across the ground (horizontally in frame) which is a little over 1/6th of a mile.
Now take a person that is say 2 feet wide at the shoulders, that person is going to look mighty small as that person is a mere 1/415th of what you see in the frame of the photo or video, that's nothing more that a dot in the frame.
Split the frame up into 415 segments and realize that a person is only 1 of those 415 segments. There is no way that you can tell what that person is doing in that photo or video, it's simply too far away!
Most GoPro Cameras in 2013 had a field of view (FOV) that ranged from about 90° to 120°.
For this reason, most drone operators were filming their subjects from 100 feet or less which was clearly in direct violation.
This practice became very common (to the point of being out of control) so the FAA was forced to make it illegal to use, sell or give away any aerial media even if they didn't charge for it in any way. Even if nobody profits from it in any way, it's still in violation of the clearance rule.
I was selected to be part of a real world study that the FAA was conducting and I had to report to the FAA on a weekly basis (I can't reveal my contact's name).
The FAA felt certain that I would follow the rules because I had been in touch with the FAA on several occasions about aerial filming so they contacted me to ask if I would be willing to help gather real world data for the purpose of writing the rules.
My assignment was to find 1 location per week, then fill out a form to submit via email. The information on the form included the date, the time, the location including lat and lon and whether or not the aerial filming could be done legally or not legally based on population, street traffic and structures.
BTW, only 1 out of 19 locations could be filmed legally, the rest were just too close to people, traffic and/or property. All legal locations were all in rural areas but not all rural areas were legal.
Also, that real world data collection process involving a non FAA person (like me) was not advertised or solicited publically. I have no idea how many were selected, I didn't ask.
I was asked to keep it quiet during the time of the data collection. The only people that were allowed to know about it was local law enforcement and I was given a number and name for law enforcement to use to verify that I was in fact gathering data for the FAA.
The fact that so many drone operators were and still are conducting flights in violation of the regulations is what made them close the loophole!
To date, nobody has been prosecuted for the profit of drone aerial media. In all 23 cases of prosecutions, reckless flying was what they were charged with!!
If you fly within 500 feet of an object (person, vehicle or structure) or if you fly in controlled NAS without notifying ATC, flying recreationally or commercially, it is considered "Reckless Flying!!!!"
It is considered reckless if you fly in places that endanger people or property including close to manned aircraft and not being able to "See and Avoid" other aircraft including other drones.
You don't have to fly like a wild person to be charged with reckless flying.
The camera cannot see in all directions and even if you do have a 360° FOV, the small screen won't show other aircraft well enough, they are just dots until they are too close, then there is not enough time to react. Manned aircraft will have a hard time seeing the drone until it's too late because of it's size and the airspeed of the manned aircraft.
That's why they have the rule to keep your drone within line of sight, it's so you can see aircraft with a 1:1 viewing ratio.
People who wish to get a waiver for BLOS, they will have to either have VOs daisy chained along a predetermined route or have a camera system that can see 360° and have a multi-monitor system that is large enough to see other aircraft and the focal length has to be closer to 50mm or higher. That one hasn't been fully figured out yet.
I didn't actually get off track with the above statements and info, it was to emphasize that you "cannot" get any clear and distinguishable footage at a legal distance during recreational operations!
The only exception to that is if you use a 70mm or longer lens and that kind of lens is certainly very difficult if not nearly impossible to use considering the instability of the gimbal at that focal length.
In your hypothetical "Capturing on video, a police officer shooting a young black kid who isn't armed" would clearly be in violation of the rules and regulations because you would "Have" to be closer than 500 feet to be able to clearly tell what is going on!
I'm bothered by your hypothetical scenario of a young unarmed black kid, why does it have to be a black kid in your hypothetical? As someone else stated "All" lives matter!
I can only assume that you seriously want it to be as sensational and as controversial as you can get it.
Next, why would you be concerned about capturing an unlawful shooting and sharing it with the news? I mean really, what are the chances that you will have your drone in the air and close to a cop when he or she shoots someone? I'd say the chances are at least 1 in a billion!
Are you hoping to catch something like that on film with your drone, then share it with the news (rather than the district attorney as someone else suggested)? My guess is that you have a burning desire to be recognized by the news and the public as "The Hero" that captured something bad with your magic drone so you can say "Yeah!, That was caught on film by ME and MY DRONE!"
Even if you actually did happen to capture something like that with your drone, you wouldn't be prosecuted for the monetary side of it, you would be prosecuted for "Reckless" endangerment of people and/or property.
And........ if the cop shot someone unarmed (black or white), that would be considered murder and what's to stop the cop from hunting you down and murdering you too for giving that magic video to the news?
Why do you need all of this attention? You're trying to get as much attention as you can even by posting all these hypotheticals which in reality would never happen.
I guess I'm feeding your need for attention just by writing this but I'd like to say that a "Lawyer" isn't the professional that you should seek advice from.
How about going out and shooting an awesome showreel video to satisfy your need for attention? I guess that's not sensational enough for you though.
This is the first and last time I'm saying anything about this topic and I recommend that everyone else quit responding to this because that's exactly he wants and even strives for!!
If nobody else comments, he will give up.
