There are already laws against peeping toms that can be enforced against drones. Drones are not silent nor invisible, and Peeping tom drone operators are unlikely to be difficult to detect or trace.

This is not a threat that requires a scare campaign.

Like all new technology drones have great potential for good but also some very serous potential for harm and therefore require regulation. It is not about freedom it is about protecting people from harm. There are several issues that have already arisen.
A few examples below are:-

1 A drone in the hands of a technically savvy terrorist or even a smart crook has some very scary implications.
http://ideas.time.com/2013/01/31/criminals-and-terrorists-can-fly-drones-too/

2 The issue of airspace use, there have been cases of airliners having to take evasive measures to avoid drones.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/faa-u-s-airliner-nearly-collided-with-drone-in-march-1399659956

3 Use of spying on others
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/04/drone-regulations_n_3704307.html

4 liability in the case of an accident
http://www.fastcompany.com/3028781/what-happens-when-a-drone-crashes

5 Being flown by people with no idea of existing regulations and incompetent in controlling and navigating the machines. As an analogy can you imagine the chaos that would ensue, if large remote cars were allowed on the road with no way of knowing who was controlling them.
http://voiceofsandiego.org/2014/06/06/what-i-learned-flying-a-drone/

6 Inadequate Maintenance, there have been plenty of people killed by out of control model aircraft.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-177139/Teenager-killed-hit-model-plane.html
http://droneflyers.com/2013/03/ar-drone-maintenance/

7 Faulty sofware leading to loss of control.
http://forum.parrot.com/ardrone/en/viewtopic.php?id=8262

The bottom line is that unregulated objects hurtling around the sky are a hazard that must be regulated.

Most drones likely to be used by hobbyists are small, slow moving and have a limited range and are unlikely to create any hazard that you described. larger drones that have the speed and weight to injure or damage people are like model aircraft should comply to those regulations.

warmair,
Move to Russia they love your kind and take your rules with you. Next thing you'll want is registration for kite fliers.

The problem is you can fit what is called First Person View equipment to most model aircraft or even complete autonomous gear. Models are available from the hobby shops on the internet that weigh in at over 15kg and fitted with model turbine engines are capable of speeds of over 300 kph.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvqhLawLXNE

The idea that drowns are just small light electric models is only a tiny part of the possibilities.

Yes I have been a model flyer for many years, it is a lot of fun and is adequately regulated, unfortunately drones are a whole new ball game. Below is a link to the current regulations for drones.

http://rpastraining.com.au/casr-101-uav-drone-legal-or-illegal/

In fact I fear that the whole scene may become regulated out of existence unless steps are taken to curb the cowboys.

Warmair,

That is actually my point, I flew RC planes in my youth more than 3 decades ago and even then the majority were heavy and fast enough to cause serious injury, and this has largely not created panic in the public.

What Joe Bloggs is worried about is that someone will capture him picking his nose and post it on Youtube.

The reality is that with GoPros mobile phones this risk has existed for a while. New legislation for a non existent problem is not what we need.