Hillview man shoots down drone. . .

[yagreg]

I just saw this on MSN.com

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolog ... ar-AAdGg2x

[Toddstang]

I don't blame him.

[PDM]

That guy gets it.

[Dave1965]

interesting predicament
I would hope the homeowner charges the drone operator with harassment and with voyeurism or whatever you can charge them with for invading your privacy. The drone owner is self admitted to having invaded his privacy by filing charges.

[Geno]

I had wondered what size shot would be effective. If 8 works, 6 in a 12 gauge should be just fine!

[WLJ]

[jackalo626]

I don't blame him.

Me either and the Comments on the msnbc website seem to all agree.

[Rem700]

http://www.wdrb.com/story/29670583/upda ... light-path

Update. Seems the drone operator may have proof the drone was 270 ft up at the time it was shot down

[Dave1965]

Can't get the video to work but from the story it seems that the owner of the drone is recreating the flight path, not showing video from the original (which would be excellent to see if it was) and that's a damn good shotgun and shooter that could shoot almost 100 yards straight up and hit that drone. Not to mention, if its that high up, someone really can't even tell if its over his property or not. So I call bullshit on him.

I imagine this would lead to the Air Rights discussion and just what do you own on your property. Obviously planes fly over but someone is not allowed to come and build a bridge over your property without consultation and payment....so just how far up does your property right go?

[guncrank1]

Good question Dave

I have a question, if your neighbor shoots a drone and it falls on your house. Who pays for damage?
The shooter or pilot?

[guncrank1]

Found out he is a FB friend.

[Rem700]

Can't get the video to work but from the story it seems that the owner of the drone is recreating the flight path, not showing video from the original (which would be excellent to see if it was) and that's a damn good shotgun and shooter that could shoot almost 100 yards straight up and hit that drone. Not to mention, if its that high up, someone really can't even tell if its over his property or not. So I call bullshit on him.

I imagine this would lead to the Air Rights discussion and just what do you own on your property. Obviously planes fly over but someone is not allowed to come and build a bridge over your property without consultation and payment....so just how far up does your property right go?

Didn't the FAA post something a while back that said 100 ft up is your air space? I could be wrong but i thought i remembered reading that in one of the many drone cases that has come to light lately.

[guncrank1]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rights

[Rem700]

According to that aircraft must saty at east 1000 ft up other than take off and landing. So do drones count as aircraft?

[Dave1965]

No, small toy drones would not meet the aircraft criteria by the FAA air rights requirements that cranky posted. The heights appear to be for correction of errant aircraft recovery.

------
In congested areas, airplanes must stay 1,000 feet (300 m) higher than any obstacle (building, antenna, etc.) within a 2,000 feet (610 m) radius of the aircraft. In non congested, sparsely populated areas, or over bodies of water, the pilot must remain at least 500 feet (150 m) from any person, vehicle, vessel, or structure.[2] Private landowners retain their right to exclusive use of the airspace for the reasonable enjoyment of their property up to 500 feet above their lands.[3]

[BIGC]

This happened 1 street over from me

[Frailer]

I wish someone would fly a drone over my house. Some folks have all the fun.

All I get are UH-60s, AH-64s, and the occasional C-130.

[Mike]

This makes me mad.

First off, the charge of wanton endangerment is complete bullshit. Shooting birdshot(or even buckshot for that matter) up into the air does NOT put anyone in grave danger of serious physical injury or death. If their argument is that it "could" possibly hit someone and hurt them, well....there are all kinds of things that "could" happen to hurt people. Falling sand from the sky(the equivalent of birdshot after it is shot upwards and then starts to fall back to the earth) is not a threat to anyone.

Also, by the victim's own account, he states it was 270 feet in the air. I'm sorry, but no birdshot is shooting out a drone at 270 feet.

You want to charge him with criminal mischief? Sure I am okay with that. Take a report and let the victim take him to court. I'm not making an arrest based on the "questionable" facts in this case.

Everyone has a right to privacy. If I own a home over in the East end with a fancy bathroom on the third floor of my 10 acre lot that is plain clear glass, I expect it to not have someone peeping in. Now all the sudden there are drones with hi def cameras that can fly right up to my window and pep in on my wife taking a shower??? Of course the voyeurism laws can come into play here, but the point is still the same. If I have a pool(I think the "suspect" guy does), and my wife is laying out in a bathing suit, I don't want a damn drone floating around above my property!

I hope the case is thrown out of court!

[WLJ]

I wish someone would fly a drone over my house. Some folks have all the fun.

All I get are UH-60s, AH-64s, and the occasional C-130.

Some of those have a tendency to shoot back

[Eireguy]

http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.c ... mmer/34089
Diy jammer

[WLJ]

And now the Drone guy's POV

Drone owner calls shooter 'drone slayer'
http://www.wave3.com/story/29671585/dro ... one-slayer

[Robert Paulson]

Get one of these and a full auto bb gun and make a game of it. Also need loud speakers playing flight of the Valkyries.




So if he would have used a bb gun instead of a Firearm would he not have been charged?

[Mike]

Get one of these and a full auto bb gun and make a game of it. Also need loud speakers playing flight of the Valkyries.




So if he would have used a bb gun instead of a Firearm would he not have been charged?

From what I am gathering, it might not be the gun itself that brought on a wanton endangerment charge, more so the idea that a drone is falling out of control from the sky to the ground.

Okay I can somewhat buy that. Depending on where the "victims" are when the thing comes crashing down. There may be more to this than we will ever know. I do know a drone has the capability to do some serious damage depending on the size etc.

[Mike]

http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.c ... mmer/34089
Diy jammer

The legalities of this might be worse than shooting them down.

[Toddstang]

And now the Drone guy's POV

Drone owner calls shooter 'drone slayer'
http://www.wave3.com/story/29671585/dro ... one-slayer

I think Boggs is lying.
Good shot Willie!


I myself want to get a drone, but I sure as Hell would never fly it over peoples homes, even at 200 feet.
I don't drive our RC trucks through neighbors yards either. To me there is no difference except one takes pictures.