I do. Seriously. For all of the following reasons:
1. Why should I accept an unnecessary risk of getting injured - on top of all existing risks - without any fault of mine and without getting any benefit from the activity myself? Even if the risk may be small, it is a risk. It can easily and totally be avoided if the activity causing the risk is outlawed = ban to fly over any people.
2. If it is directly or near overhead my own property - house, apartement, garden, private land - why should I accept any risks of damage from falling debris? Why should I accept the disturbance and noise? These things mostly fly low and emit extremely annoying, hi-pitch distrubing noise. Basically akin to flying pests. Only disadvantages to non-flyers, zero benefits = not acceptable. legal ban please.
3. potential and real privacy invasion - in public and even more so on private ground. Spying of me, my family, my property from any angle, not normally accessible to humans with their eyes or cameras. Zero benefit for me = not acceptable. Legal ban please.
Anything that does not touch on any of the 3 areas nor on any of the other security concerns (air trafiic etc.) may be permissible, but only under the most restrictive and stringent rules and only for very good reasons = definitely NOT "for recreational use". If they put drones to work as the most effective, best or only feasible method - eg. inspection of bridges, power lines, construction, law enforcement [within narrow limits!] and [commercial] aerial photography [within very narrow limits!] then fine with me. But not anything more.