Yeah, that all makes sense. I wasn't so much referring to people operating their vehicles responsibly, so much as them not using the vehicles for something irresponsible (like intentionally doing harm). That said, just as someone doesn't want to crash their car, I'd imagine most people wouldn't want to crash their remote controlled helicopters/cameras. Also, people are allowed to drive (if it's on private property, you may not even require a licence), but I was under the impression the FAA is trying to restrict who can operate those remote controlled helicopters more actively/aggressively, implying they're more deadly than a car, bike, tractor, lawnmower, or any other vehicle (when really, they'd be less deadly, since no one is in them).
I dunno, the only scenario where I see UAVs being used for our purposes would be really low altitude (slightly above trees, over houses, and things) which could be achieved on private property (assuming it isn't downtown). Anything broader/higher than that, and it'd probably make more sense renting a helicopter anyway (assuming it's within budget).