Yes, the capabilities of semi-autonomous vehicles are remarkable. I wasn't going into that because it just makes a complicated topic even more complicated, but when you factor in things like birds being able to automatically perform autorotations (so they don't just fall out of the sky even in the event of total engine failure), those kinds of birds can be actually safe for reasonable values of "safe". Certainly safer than delivery cars.
"a drone needs decent weight and power, nut just to be able to carry a load, but also to be able to fly in anything other than dead calm."
Not weight (it needs as little of that as possible), but yes, it needs power. But of a different sort.
"Also if the drone is to fly in a built up area, it had better be maneuverable, so it can deal with disturbed air around buildings."
Also true, but it doesn't need the extreme maneuverability of sport copters. It doesn't need to be able to perform acrobatics, to fly upside down, to fly tail down, to do loops or barrel rolls, etc.
"To be useful as a delivery vehicle, a drone is also going to be dangerous if things go wrong"
I never said otherwise. What I said was such a vehicle can be made much less dangerous than a sport bird. This is clearly true. For example, if you have two birds of similar weight and engine power, but one is a quadracopter and the other isn't, the quadracopter is much less dangerous. The rotor speed is lower (so less kinetic energy per blade), the top speed is lower (so less kinetic energy in power dives), and the drag is larger (so less kinetic energy in free-fall).
I think very few people here believe that "all censorship is bad". I certainly don't. But even if censorship is justified, it is no less censorship, and it does come with a cost. It helps nothing to pretend otherwise.
I do, however, fail to see why this particular censorship is acceptable. A case could have been (and was) made for it shortly after the end of WW2, but not anymore.
"From a quick reading of the translated version of this document it would appear as if the law is directly targeted at groups that would form explicitly for the intend of distributing pro-Nazi propaganda, ie trying to cut off the means of which such groups use to gain popular support."
Yes, I think everybody understands this. But that only reinforces, not negates, PaulT's statement.
Yes. One of my hobbies is flying model helicopters (mid-sized -- 4' long, gas-powered ones). They can indeed by very dangerous. The spinning blades (the tips of which can move at near the speed of sound) can break bones, the lead weights in the blades can be dislodged in an accident (or due to poor maintenance) and become, essentially, bullets. Not to mention the risks of powered dives. Radio interference once caused my bird to power into the ground. The engine of the copter buried itself 6" into the earth.
However, that's a sport copter. It is absolutely possible to make a design which is much safer (you sacrifice extreme maneuverability -- which is unnecessary if you're just delivering things). More rotors mean that they don't have to spin as fast, etc.