Do we have the right to technological advancement?

This issue is often forced upon us under the guise of safety, security, or the protection of economic interests. However the question still remains:
Do we have the right to advance, uninhibited, along technological lines? Or are we denied the promise of future advancement by stagnating legislature?

As the knowledge of the human race increases we are faced with the daunting reality of capabilities beyond our wildest dreams.
From nuclear weapons to cloning of humans or extinct animals it seems nothing is beyond our reach, not even the vast expanse of space itself.

We elect to create laws that govern what and how this technology is used in the world around us, but to what end?
We can all agree that average joe shouldn’t have radioactive materials in his garage, but should he be allowed to own and operate a drone?
This decision is being made by many courthouses and even by the FAA, to determine what rights we have or do not have to drone technology.

Wether or not you agree with the particular decisions being made in drone related cases, we all must acknowledge the impact these decisions will have on future technologies and our rights to own or use them.

What we consider “drones” fall into a larger category of remote controlled mobile robotics.
And while many of the devices in this category are currently not being considered, actions taken in drone cases will ultimately affect how we approach all robotic technology from a human rights perspective. Drone technology and similar robotics can be used to create a wide array of manned craft as well, for use in aircraft, aquatic devices, or land based robotics.

As new laws are passed, it becomes more difficult to legally make use of the affected technologies.
Drones for instance, are used in several business sectors. If legislation were passed concerning line-of-sight, these industries would be restricted as to the extent of their use of drone technology.
Being only able to use the drone in locations that are visible to the pilot defeats the purpose and use of that aspect of the technology.

The same laws could later be applied to remote controlled ground-based robotics.
Or remote controlled systems with internet control. Essentially closing the doors to every advancement that could be made in remote controlled personal robotics.

As entrepreneurs we may want to utilize a remote controlled robotic workforce. But do we have the right to do so?

Lasers are another example:
We are legally restricted in terms of the power of laser available.
While the technology has the ability to save money and time, as well as safely perform tasks normally considered dangerous to humans, such as mining, industrial processing, and fire management; we have given up our rights to this technology because it could be weaponized.

We vote to allow our personal airspace above our properties to be under legal restrictions.
Thereby giving up our personal right to access the earth’s upper atmosphere or even outer space.
This may seem silly today, but as space and aeronautic technology becomes more affordable,
this and many other issues will face our children down the road.

New technologies emerge every day, and with them come new abilities, new possibilities, and new innovations that could potentially drive the future of mankind into the next age.
Or we could vote to not allow these things.

To what extent do we assert our technological rights?

Do we continue along this path of volunteered restriction? Or should we vote for our rights to technological advancement and the freedom for mankind to progress?

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.