Another Drone Downed-This One Closer to Home

[Thor]

Even a park where I fly has people jogging strait through our landing pattern.

I think if someone gets injured you might find that a park would be considered a populated area...but IANAL.

 

[natdscott]

Course, you all seem to be making the assumption that the drone is visible to you. I cannot confirm that the technology exists to put drones in the air that are more or less indistinguishable from your common housefly, but it would not surprise me much.

Good luck with that.

-Nate

 

[tcecil88]

Joe Biden does advocate firing in the air for a warning shot. How do we know that the drone did not inadvertently fly into the warning shot after creeping on the man's daughter's?
I think the homeowner is the victim here. If it was legitimate work, shouldn't the operators of the drone have to ask for permission to fly over your property?

 

[Thor]

Hey now, personal responsibility and respect for others? Where do you think you are?

 

[jamil]

So every person with a camera on a phone needs to be charged. Every person who owns binoculars is a perv. Every person who owns a camera is a perv and should have the camera shot off the tripod because, well, because the person who may or may not be in the video "feels" violated.

Where do you get that? No one's saying that. Your behavior is what determines if you're a perv or need charged.

If you're not on my property, and I see you looking at my house through binoculars, or taking pictures, I'll probably come over and politely ask why. And maybe you have a pretty good reason for it. But if you walk onto my property uninvited, with your camera or binoculars, I'll not be polite at all in inviting you to leave. So why is that any different than if you hover over my property with yer toys?

Mine is about $6000, and any one who shoots mine will be getting some attention from me. You can't just shoot someone's property because you don't like it.

Says the guy who defends hovering over other people's property?

Then of course you'll act like it costs $6000 and be responsible with it, and respectful of other people's property. If you walk into someone's back yard uninvited with your camera and start taking pictures without permission, why would you reasonably expect the property owner's response not to include smashing your camera and emphatically, even physically, removing you and the broken remains?

If you're flying high over my property (rhetorically "you") just to get to some other destination, I have no problem with that. Of course, I'd rather you ask permission first, because, you know, IT"S NEIGHBORLY to respect others' property. But I'm not going to get upset about it.

However, if someone flies his $6000 toy over my house and hovers, especially at lower altitudes, that's like walking onto my property and invading my privacy. If you don't want peril to befall that $6000 toy, then don't do things with it that you know will **** people off. That's it. You shouldn't get to hide behind its expense and do whatever you want with it. Other people have rights too.

You can't shoot the salesman's car because it is parked in your driveway which is actually on your property while he is knocking on your door. Many people put dash cams on their cars now, maybe even the salesman in your driveway or the cop who shows up to answer the call about someone shooting at someone else's property, do they get shot at or their car because it is carrying a camera? People who pick up a gun to solve problems need to be a permanently prohibited person from owning them, hopefully this guy will become permanently prohibited from owning guns in the future, he is not stable enough to own one.

Strawman. I'm not going to shoot the salesman. I'm just going to ask him to leave. If he doesn't. I'll call the cops. I'll only shoot him if he presents a credible threat to my life or my family. That's a pretty well-defined scenario.

Personal drones--yes, I called it a ****ing drone and everyone knows what I mean when I say that, so why care--are a fairly new phenomenon and with the many people using them to spy on their neighbors, don't be surprised if people push for laws to ban them or severely restrict their use. I'm not saying you use yours to spy on people. But since you've put so much jack into yours, it seems you're pretty serious about it. It would be in your best interest to advocate in the "drone community" for responsible droning.

That means you admit when people behave like dickheads with them. That means you don't defend the dickheads spying on people. And there were enough witnesses to reasonably conclude that these guys were just goofing around with it spying on people. I think the guy was foolish for shooting it down like that, especially when there are ordinances against discharging a firearm. I think he should have been charged with that, and left the rest be. The dickheads should just be out the spy toy.

The more people who are "spied on", and the more people who hear about others being "spied on", well, let's say droners don't have a very good reputation with the general public. Yer gonna lose yer toy if **** don't calm down.

Actually, I think that if one uses a drone in a responsible manner, no problems arise. With this drone supposedly being flown 10 feet from the ground and looking under things, I think that the charges might be dropped. There were witnesses (other than the drone operator) saying that thing was this low. The man who was arrested said that his daughters notified him of the thing. While shooting the thing down might not have been the best course of action, I can understand how worked up a person might get when he thinks his children might either be harassed, endangered or be the subject of a peeping tom. As more and more immature people start flying these things and invade personal space (I see trespassing ordinances regarding drones forthcoming) there will be more and more confrontations. I also think that there might be licensing of drone operators and FAA rules come down the pike. After all, there are rules prohibiting aircraft from flying too close to persons and/or property.

As I said above, I have no problem with these things, as long as people use them responsibly and behave respectfully towards other people's property, and privacy.

Honestly, I've been thinking about getting one. I'm just getting too old to climb up on my roof to inspect it periodically. I think a drone would be handy for that. Also, I have a big yard and it would be fun to play with the thing. I'd hate for the dickhead users to ruin it for everyone who doesn't give a **** what their neighbors are doing.

 

[gary1960Pwrcruz]

This homeowner should probably pay a fine for discharging a firearm in a sub-division, but the drone pilot needs to pay all of his leagal fees. This act has to be some form of trespassing.

 

[ruger1800]

What kind of jammer for r/c and drones

 

[ACC]

holy ****....a 40mm Glock??? That's a big SOB

 

[HoughMade]

Google Earth must really **** off some of this thread's contributors.

 

[jamil]

holy ****....a 40mm Glock??? That's a big SOB

IKR? And he said he OC'd that thing!

Google Earth must really **** off some of this thread's contributors.

Why? Google Earth is just static images. It's not a live feed of your 13 year old daughter sunbathing by the pool. It's not a live feed of you and your wife frolicking in the hot tub on a Sunday afternoon while the kids are at their friend's house.

 

[BE Mike]

I followed a quad copter to its home and talked to a real smart aleck 20 something punk. Since it was obvious he was not the homeowner I returned to talk to his dad. At first he started to blow me off, but I persisted. I explained that I regarded taking pictures inside my EIGHT FOOT privacy fence of my wife and grand daughters was the same as a peeping tom. I also added that any pictures that appeared on the internet would result in me exhausting all his resources. I offered to leave everything alone if he would rectify the problem. I have seen the guy with the quad copter flying it since then, but never over my yard. There are still a few people left who understand the importance of being a responsible citizen.

I would give you rep points if I were allowed. Too many hot heads and irresponsible people, including parents around. Kudos for you keeping your cool under difficult circumstances. Glad that the father helped rectify the problem rather than letting it slide or encouraging the bad behavior.

 

[BFP]

There is already case law with covers the OP. The "air" belongs to no one, it's free for all to use. However, as a property owner you are entitled to exclusive use of the "air" above your property for what you can reasonably use. Now I live in the country and with not a lot of "population" around I could be bird hunting off my back deck. So if I drone were to fly over, and it's within the reach of a 12 gauge, it's the drone operators problem because he is trespassing. My guess is in a subdivision, you have a little less distance into the "air" that you reasonably use.

 

[Thor]

holy ****....a 40mm Glock??? That's a big SOB

Yeah, I think they meant Bofors but it was a gun so they called it a Glock...the last gun they saw in a movie.

 

[Thor]

Google Earth must really **** off some of this thread's contributors.

Actually, I'm more upset about our county using GIS to photograph my house and determine what my taxes will be this year...

Satellite imagery only gets updated randomly for most noncritical places...as opposed to the guy who launches his video camera because your daughters hit the pool.

 

[jamil]

Yeah, I think they meant Bofors but it was a gun so they called it a Glock...the last gun they saw in a movie.

Actually HE said it was his "40mm Glock" and that he was open carrying it. The news only printed what he said in the video.

 

[Thor]

D'oH! Okay, last handgun he saw in a movie...or can't tell the difference between .cal and mm.

 

[jamil]

D'oH! Okay, last handgun he saw in a movie...or can't tell the difference between .cal and mm.

Honestly I think it was just nerves for being on TV and his words got jumbled between his brain and his mouth.

 

[BE Mike]

Honestly I think it was just nerves for being on TV and his words got jumbled between his brain and his mouth.

He probably got confused as to whether he was carrying his Glock 19 or 23. Really, I think he did a good job in front of the camera. He did better than most talking heads who get paid to do it day in and day out.

 

[jamil]

He probably got confused as to whether he was carrying his Glock 19 or 23. Really, I think he did a good job in front of the camera. He did better than most talking heads who get paid to do it day in and day out.

Yeah, he did okay. And WDRB did okay reporting it. They pretty much presented all sides and didn't editorialize while reporting.

Of course the story would have been told quite differently if Melissa Swan from WHAS reported it. "A Bullitt county man and avid gun fanatic has been arrested for carelessly spraying bullets towards the sky and endangering neighboring children. All to bring down a neighbor's harmless toy."

 

[dsol]

IF it was really low, hovering and spying on my wife or daughter, I think a paintball gun might be the best way to take it out within city limits. Softball, rock, or hose would be the next best options, you do not discharge a gun in the city without your life being in danger, you are asking to get arrested. Period.

However, if it was just flying around taking pictures for fun and happened to hover for a while at a higher altitude might mean the operator is trying to get his bearings, plan the next photo run, or was talking to someone for a few minutes and had his attention diverted. No reason to over react and shoot it down with a shotgun. I am willing to bet this guy is not the best or friendliest neighbor either... he sounds like he is a little off the deep end to me.