Privately owned drone shot down in KY?

[Glider-Rider]

I dont want to stir up any trouble here, but I am following a thread on another site. It appears that a drone was shot down in KY and alledgedly the drone owner confronted the shooter and was told that if he stepped on shooters property there would be "another shooting". It seems the alledged shooter is now facing two felony charges.

I had a drone come in over my head the other day, right in the middle of my (3 acre) yard, at least 1000' from where it took off. I live in the country, closest house is 800' away. I felt my space was violated, although I dont think the law would agree with me. I admit, I was inclined to attempt a shoot down.

I also read that CA firefighters and police choppers increasingly cant do their work due to drone traffic.

I am curious what others think about all this and what if anything should be done.

If this goes south please delete the thread. Thank you

[Mayhemxpc]

IF it goes to court it will be an interesting case. My guess is that the charge will be reduced to discharging a firearm in city limits. The local TV station is running a poll and right now, 90 pct of respondents say the homeowner did the right thing. (The prosecutor will probably NOT want a jury trial.) Complicating the matter is that the police did not retain the quadcopter as evidence, but returned it to its owners. Therefore, anything information about the path or activity of the UAV presented by the UAV operator is suspect. The other witnesses in the area seem to support the homeowners contention of trespass (operations well below curtilage) and invasion of privacy. The homeowner is exploring charges to press against the UAV operator.I do have one question. IF the contention of the UAV operator is correct that he was not looking at Mr. Meredith's girls or over his property, then how did the operator know that Mr. Meredith was the one who shot the quadcopter down? Right now the operators are claiming the UAV was not over his property and 272' AGL when it was hit. Anyone ever do any skeet shooting? On shot -- one kill at a hundred yards UP and who knows how many laterally? 65 yards is typical maximum effective range (not saying longer shots aren't possible, but don't bet on it.)

[Glider-Rider]

I have read that the alledged shooter admitted that he shot it down, doesnt seem to be any dispute on that.

Shooter has overwhelming support in all the posts I saw.

Jury nullification seems quite possible IMO. Edit: Prosecutor would be wise to drop it or else offer a plea bargain. If accused, I think I would roll the dice with a jury. I say that now, but I dont know what the charges are. This will be a very interesting case. I always felt it was a bad idea to allow just anyone to basically become an untrained pilot. Too many real pilots (and passengers etc) at risk IMO. End edit.

I hope that if people do shoot them down they wont use rifles, they carry too far, dont know who or what one might hit.

[WLIU]

This is where state privacy laws come into play. Whip out your video camera and file a complaint with the local police, government, and if the errant drone appears to be above 400', with the FAA. Let them sort it out with the owner.

The owner of an RC ship or a consumer quad-copter is clearly OK to fly above their own property below 400'. Or above property that is used, under some sort of ownership or lease, by a club that the drone owner participates in. Everywhere else land owners and governments get involved. Historically, model airplane builders and flyers have lived within boundaries of geography and behavior that has been accepted by the surrounding communities and governmental bodies. Life has been good.

We now have folks flying these craft that have no understanding of how their extended behavior runs into other folks rights and boundaries. Some of this is ignorance and some of it is an extension of how these folks think day to day anyway. This is likely to get uglier before it gets better. Every governmental jurisdiction is going to handle this differently until some sort of consensus emerges.

So your own video of the problem flight is the best evidence against a drone owner who gets offside. Flying around your house looking in windows is certainly actionable. Flying low over sun bathers is also something you can take to the authorities. Destroying someone else's drone just muddies the waters. Not worth doing. But if the battery runs low and it lands in your yard you can hold it as evidence until the police arrive....

Best of luck,

Wes
N78PS

[martymayes]

lol, I think it's great! And they should allow drones to be armed so they can defend themselves!!

[Byron J. Covey]

I dont want to stir up any trouble here, but I am following a thread on another site. It appears that a drone was shot down in KY and alledgedly the drone owner confronted the shooter and was told that if he stepped on shooters property there would be "another shooting". It seems the alledged shooter is now facing two felony charges.

I had a drone come in over my head the other day, right in the middle of my (3 acre) yard, at least 1000' from where it took off. I live in the country, closest house is 800' away. I felt my space was violated, although I dont think the law would agree with me. I admit, I was inclined to attempt a shoot down.

I also read that CA firefighters and police choppers increasingly cant do their work due to drone traffic.

I am curious what others think about all this and what if anything should be done.

If this goes south please delete the thread. Thank you

I think that I have the right to shoot them down. Were I on a jury, jury nullification definitely would come into play.


BJC

[Mayhemxpc]

According to reports from the Louisville area, the copter operators "lost" the memory card so the video cannot be reviewed. Draw your own conclusions.

Voyeur filming of minor daughters. Filming the copter in the act will not prevent the video of your daughters from being posted on the internet. This is not a case of "innocent passage" or reasonable accommodation. Having lived in that area for some time, I think that a good Kentucky lawyer (the home of the Kentucky long rifle) could make a good argument for "reasonable and necessary." Prosecutors do not like to "roll the dice" with a jury.

[Mike M]

...file a complaint with the local police, government, and if the errant drone appears to be above 400', with the FAA. Let them sort it out with the owner. The owner of an RC ship or a consumer quad-copter is clearly OK to fly above their own property below 400'....

Isn't that 400' thing non-regulatory? An FAA AC? Class G goes to 1200'AGL most places, right? That's regulatory. Clarification, I'm the guy who thinks errant operators should suffer the same fate as their victims after a midair with a manned aircraft. And that ALL these things should be required to have ADSB if they're going to fly other than at AMA hobby sites. Those AMA folks have been good neighbors in the airspace for decades. They DON'T need to be smeared by the rogues and scofflaws.

[Frank Giger]

And that ALL these things should be required to have ADSB if they're going to fly other than at AMA hobby sites.

No, no, no, no.....a thousand times no!

If ADSB is required on little quad copters it will be required on all aircraft.

[FlyingRon]

Note, he's not been charged with shooting down the drone. He's being charged with the fact that shooting skyward in the area was reckless (no matter why he was doing so). First rule of hunting is to assure yourself that what's beyond your target (i.e., where the shot that didn't get embedded in the target is going to go).