Is shooting a drone illegal?

[StrikerOne]

Are you serious?

Mate, granted, I haven't read anything more than essentially his side of the story that was described in http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...shoots-down-drone-hovering-over-his-backyard/ - and I am sure there are two sides to the story - but at the end of the day, shooting a drone down isn't illegal and the guy is 100% right about the safety aspect of the projectile he fired. The only thing that may hold up in court is a "willful damage" charge (or whatever the equiv. is in USA) and that would relate to his intentional damage to the drone owners personal property (the drone) - which will only be recognized *if* the drone owner can prove that he was a) not over the boundary lines of the property and b) had not pointed and held the camera for any amount of time towards or over this guys property.

That second point is where it's going to come undone for the case - because I dare say that at some point, this guys drone has been facing the camera toward the property and intentional or not - even for a very short amount of time that might not really justify the feelings of breach of privacy, that's all its going to take to stand up in court, or be thrown out before it even gets there.

Secondly, who the [expletive removed] deals with police anyway?

 

[phantom13flyer]

Are you serious?

Mate, granted, I haven't read anything more than essentially his side of the story that was described in http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...shoots-down-drone-hovering-over-his-backyard/ - and I am sure there are two sides to the story - but at the end of the day, shooting a drone down isn't illegal and the guy is 100% right about the safety aspect of the projectile he fired. The only thing that may hold up in court is a "willful damage" charge (or whatever the equiv. is in USA) and that would relate to his intentional damage to the drone owners personal property (the drone) - which will only be recognized *if* the drone owner can prove that he was a) not over the boundary lines of the property and b) had not pointed and held the camera for any amount of time towards or over this guys property.

That second point is where it's going to come undone for the case - because I dare say that at some point, this guys drone has been facing the camera toward the property and intentional or not - even for a very short amount of time that might not really justify the feelings of breach of privacy, that's all its going to take to stand up in court, or be thrown out before it even gets there.

Secondly, who the heck deals with police anyway?

Obviously you don't live in the united states of america.
http://www.nbcnews.com/video/man-describes-flight-path-of-drone-in-kentucky-dispute-496184387819

 

[phantom13flyer]

Are you serious?

Mate, granted, I haven't read anything more than essentially his side of the story that was described in http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...shoots-down-drone-hovering-over-his-backyard/ - and I am sure there are two sides to the story - but at the end of the day, shooting a drone down isn't illegal and the guy is 100% right about the safety aspect of the projectile he fired. The only thing that may hold up in court is a "willful damage" charge (or whatever the equiv. is in USA) and that would relate to his intentional damage to the drone owners personal property (the drone) - which will only be recognized *if* the drone owner can prove that he was a) not over the boundary lines of the property and b) had not pointed and held the camera for any amount of time towards or over this guys property.

That second point is where it's going to come undone for the case - because I dare say that at some point, this guys drone has been facing the camera toward the property and intentional or not - even for a very short amount of time that might not really justify the feelings of breach of privacy, that's all its going to take to stand up in court, or be thrown out before it even gets there.

Secondly, who the heck deals with police anyway?[/QUOT

Are you serious?

Mate, granted, I haven't read anything more than essentially his side of the story that was described in http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...shoots-down-drone-hovering-over-his-backyard/ - and I am sure there are two sides to the story - but at the end of the day, shooting a drone down isn't illegal and the guy is 100% right about the safety aspect of the projectile he fired. The only thing that may hold up in court is a "willful damage" charge (or whatever the equiv. is in USA) and that would relate to his intentional damage to the drone owners personal property (the drone) - which will only be recognized *if* the drone owner can prove that he was a) not over the boundary lines of the property and b) had not pointed and held the camera for any amount of time towards or over this guys property.

That second point is where it's going to come undone for the case - because I dare say that at some point, this guys drone has been facing the camera toward the property and intentional or not - even for a very short amount of time that might not really justify the feelings of breach of privacy, that's all its going to take to stand up in court, or be thrown out before it even gets there.

Secondly, who the heck deals with police anyway?

If the are any P3P owners in Louisville or fairly close that would like to help the Hillview PD in the prosecution of the guy who shot down the Quad, please contact me and I'll put you in touch with the Chief who will explain to you what he needs.

I live in Lexington,my . I'm about an hour and 15 mins away.

 

[envisionabove]

I read some were on the NET ( ) if the cost of the Drone is over a certain amount it's a felony.. (Correct me if I'm Wrong ) and comes under Government Jurisdiction by the FAA.
Handled just as if shooting at an Airplane...
Then the locals can go after him for discharging a firearm in a residential if that's what it was, Hope is has a permit for the gun as well.
Idiots like this sometimes have priors that will add up too.
San Diego Can't help but would if I could.

Wow Lots on this one in the news...
Excerpt

The police were called and that's when Merideth was arrested for wanton endangerment and criminal mischief. It is against the law to discharge a firearm, within city limits, according to a Hillview ordinance, unless you are a law enforcement officer or the action is in self defense.

 

[skyhighdiver]

Are you serious?

Mate, granted, I haven't read anything more than essentially his side of the story that was described in http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...shoots-down-drone-hovering-over-his-backyard/ - and I am sure there are two sides to the story - but at the end of the day, shooting a drone down isn't illegal and the guy is 100% right about the safety aspect of the projectile he fired. The only thing that may hold up in court is a "willful damage" charge (or whatever the equiv. is in USA) and that would relate to his intentional damage to the drone owners personal property (the drone) - which will only be recognized *if* the drone owner can prove that he was a) not over the boundary lines of the property and b) had not pointed and held the camera for any amount of time towards or over this guys property.

That second point is where it's going to come undone for the case - because I dare say that at some point, this guys drone has been facing the camera toward the property and intentional or not - even for a very short amount of time that might not really justify the feelings of breach of privacy, that's all its going to take to stand up in court, or be thrown out before it even gets there.

Secondly, who the heck deals with police anyway?

Well you are wrong on many counts here MATE
It is illegal to shoot down a drone on many legal issues!
1. reckless discharge of a fire arm
2. intentional damage to property
3.Intentional damage to a aircraft ( as deemed by the FAA in there interpretation of a drone)
4. you have no ownership of airspace in the USA above the actual usage of your structure
even if the intent of the drone was to shoot pictures in your yard ( which I don't think it was in this case)you still may not shoot it down
you may call the police and have him charged with privacy violations but unless you can prove he intended to take said photos or video you will not have a leg to stand on.
As in the USA (execpt Calif the sue me state) you have the freedom from government control to film anything you want as long as not standing on private property. This has been upheld time and time again in court like the outcome or not.

Remember you have no right to privacy at all in any public location either . Its 2015 you are pretty much filmed from the minute you leave your home till your back in it . From street cams to home security cams to gas station cams to store cams to every tom **** and hairy with a cell phone
This is why we have so many tabloids in the US

I had a run in with a loon like this when I shot this posted video. Came over screaming at me he didn't want to be filmed nor his family. I tried the gentle approach l talked, showed what it did, said IM NOT FILMING YOU but the whole area .He started with the privacy thing. Management was called , who oked the shoot and used the footage" for free of course" and complainer was told to get out of the public area if he didn't want to be filmed as the security cams were on. Loved it!!

 

[Deleted member 29014]

As a retired cop of 32 years... You nailed it.

ps- "invasion of privacy" is a civil law concept. I've never seen a state or local criminal statute. But I could be wrong. We have statutes in my state on tresspassing, peeping Tom, stalking , etc. but no law on the books that says "invading my privacy" is illegal. Just saying. Any lawyers here?

 

[StrikerOne]

Well, I think my position on this is pretty clear - I would have shot it down from the version of events that I have read and from the answers that guy has given, I reckon he know's where he stands and he sounds like he is ready to back it up with action...

I guess we'll see how it pans out!

 

[phantom13flyer]

Well, I think my position on this is pretty clear - I would have shot it down from the version of events that I have read and from the answers that guy has given, I reckon he know's where he stands and he sounds like he is ready to back it up with action...

I guess we'll see how it pans out!

Did you watch the video I posted of the flight log? It will change your mind

 

[Hawkeye 1]

As a retired cop of 32 years... You nailed it.

ps- "invasion of privacy" is a civil law concept. I've never seen a state or local criminal statute. But I could be wrong. We have statutes in my state on tresspassing, peeping Tom, stalking , etc. but no law on the books that says "invading my privacy" is illegal. Just saying. Any lawyers here?

30 years for me Luis. I dare say most people on this forum do not agree with the douchebag who made the profane comment about helping the police.

 

[SteveMann]

I read some were on the NET ( ) if the cost of the Drone is over a certain amount it's a felony.. (Correct me if I'm Wrong ) and comes under Government Jurisdiction by the FAA.
Handled just as if shooting at an Airplane...

The dollar amount which determines if the destruction of private property is a state matter. Usually $5,000 or $10,000.
The applicable Federal law - not an FAA rule - is 18 U.S. Code § 32 - "Destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities" [link]. You need to convince the US Attorney to open a case.

18 U.S. Code § 32 - Destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities
(a) Whoever willfully—
(1) sets fire to, damages, destroys, disables, or wrecks any aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States or any civil aircraft used, operated, or employed in interstate, overseas, or foreign air commerce;
...
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years or both.​

 

[StrikerOne]

I'm not going to get into a back and forth argument over this - Firstly, I don't know US law anywhere near as well as I know Australian law and secondly, I'm here to talk drones, not guns and law.

My reasoning for disagreeing with these points as posted - again, I conceed that I am not as familiar with US Federal or State laws as many of you likely are.

Well you are wrong on many counts here MATE
It is illegal to shoot down a drone on many legal issues!
1. reckless discharge of a fire arm - It may not be deemed reckless if he discharged that firearm on a suitably sized rural property that he either owned, or had permission to shoot on.
2. intentional damage to property - He may come unstuck on this one, but if I were him, I would be arguing that the drone was used in a way that it not only presented a genuine breach of personal privacy, but also and most importantly created a potential risk to his, his family's or his property's safety. That argument could be run a million ways and I reckon its very very winnable.
3.Intentional damage to a aircraft ( as deemed by the FAA in there interpretation of a drone) - A post below seems to deem that this fails in meeting that criteria, due to the price.
4. you have no ownership of airspace in the USA above the actual usage of your structure
even if the intent of the drone was to shoot pictures in your yard ( which I don't think it was in this case)you still may not shoot it down. I'm not saying that he has any chance of winning the argument based on breach of airspace over his property - I'm saying that arguing this from a safety and privacy aspect, he has a case.

Again, lets see what happens. My money is on he will beat the charges, if they aren't thrown out prior.

 

[envisionabove]

The dollar amount which determines if the destruction of private property is a state matter. Usually $5,000 or $10,000.
The applicable Federal law - not an FAA rule - is 18 U.S. Code § 32 - "Destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities" [link]. You need to convince the US Attorney to open a case.

18 U.S. Code § 32 - Destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities
(a) Whoever willfully—
(1) sets fire to, damages, destroys, disables, or wrecks any aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States or any civil aircraft used, operated, or employed in interstate, overseas, or foreign air commerce;
...
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years or both.​

Thanks Steve

 

[LuvMyTJ]

Again, lets see what happens. My money is on he will beat the charges, if they aren't thrown out prior.

It has been done recently and the shooter lost. I am waiting for them to charge one of these wackos with the federal crime of shooting down an aircraft.

 

[snerd]

It has been done recently and the shooter lost. I am waiting for them to charge one of these wackos with the federal crime of shooting down an aircraft.

I believe the FAA has already stated that our hobby drones being damaged or destroyed is a matter for local authorities. Which ticks me off, because they're aircraft when it comes to them "regulating" them, but they don't want to afford us all the protections of being an aircraft. Maybe the new, coming rules will address this.

 

[Airborne]

Are you serious?

Mate, granted, I haven't read anything more than essentially his side of the story that was described in http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...shoots-down-drone-hovering-over-his-backyard/ - and I am sure there are two sides to the story - but at the end of the day, shooting a drone down isn't illegal and the guy is 100% right about the safety aspect of the projectile he fired. The only thing that may hold up in court is a "willful damage" charge (or whatever the equiv. is in USA) and that would relate to his intentional damage to the drone owners personal property (the drone) - which will only be recognized *if* the drone owner can prove that he was a) not over the boundary lines of the property and b) had not pointed and held the camera for any amount of time towards or over this guys property.

That second point is where it's going to come undone for the case - because I dare say that at some point, this guys drone has been facing the camera toward the property and intentional or not - even for a very short amount of time that might not really justify the feelings of breach of privacy, that's all its going to take to stand up in court, or be thrown out before it even gets there.

Secondly, who the [expletive removed] deals with police anyway?

giggle....

 

[LuvMyTJ]

The FAA claims that the definition of "aircraft" includes model aircraft. Thus, according to the FAA, shooting down a model aircraft should be a federal crime. Until the FAA provides clarity on that, any discussion of whether a drone can be shot down by a civilian, under any circumstances, is unlikely to be useful.

Here is a good read about why it is a federal crime - http://gizmodo.com/is-it-ok-to-shoot-down-your-neighbors-drone-1718055028

 

[snerd]

It's going to be a real problem until they address it. When we have a sitting Senator saying he'll shoot 'em down, it's way past time to make an example of a few of them.

"............. The destroy-snooping-drones sentiment is somewhat common. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told CNN last month if a drone flew over his house he’d destroy it. “They better beware, because I’ve got a shotgun,” he said..............."

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/02/24/faa-wants-local-cops-to-be-drone-police

 

[skyhighdiver]

Well, I think my position on this is pretty clear - I would have shot it down from the version of events that I have read and from the answers that guy has given, I reckon he know's where he stands and he sounds like he is ready to back it up with action...

I guess we'll see how it pans out!

Well I guess the law saw it different due to his arrest for shooting it

 

[SteveMann]

It has been done recently and the shooter lost. I am waiting for them to charge one of these wackos with the federal crime of shooting down an aircraft.

If it's an Amazon drone, count on it. But I don't think Amazon Air will be flying before 2020, so I don't want to wait that long.

 

[N017RW]

According to the UAV Digest podcast:

The drone operator has supplied data showing he was not hovering and was not over the shooters property at the time.

The shooter is facing criminal mischief charges for the discharge of the weapon and facing civil small claims court for the $800 drone.