• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Man Shoots Down Drone with a Shotgun

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Markbnj said:
Yes, you should absolutely be able to shoot at aircraft that pass over your property.

😵

Actually, in all seriousness, are "air rights" like mineral rights? I'm pretty sure I don't own a column of air over my acre.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure you do. You own to the radius point of the earth, and out to the sky. Aircraft has RoW, and you can't do something that restricts normal flight. Otherwise, there's numerous regulations that restrict what you do do above, and below ground(you may not even own below ground(mineral rights)), so that fact has little practical value.
 
Paratus said:
You'd think so but shooting down any aircraft can land you in jail.

Forbes Article

I'd also point out you'd be criminally liable for whatever your round hit if you'd miss.
Click to expand...

The law referred to in that Forbes article does not apply to privately owned remote aircraft.

"any civil aircraft used, operated, or employed in interstate, overseas, or foreign air commerce"

Maybe if it were an Amazon drone because of the interstate business part.

I live in GA. Outside of city limits a person can discharge any weapon they can legally own. But, if the projectile crosses over or comes to rest on someone else’s property. Your toast.

If someone I'm responsible for (say a child) fires a firearm onto someone's property without permission. They will be happy when the police arrive. It will provide them with some much needed relief....

.
 
Tsavo said:
Murloc said:
why is a guy who shot 3 times in an inhabited area without proper safety, as shown by the bullet hole in the garage door, putting the life of others at risk, allowed to own guns?

I mean I'm all for gun ownership but this is retarded.
Click to expand...

I would assume that someone is making that part up.
Click to expand...

I don't see any reason to assume that. It's pretty easy for bullets to end up where you don't want them to if you're an idiot, and then there's the possibility it was intentional. Given that shot has landed in their yard and they've had their property shot at in two different occasions, either scenario is definitely plausible.
 
Kwatt said:
The law referred to in that Forbes article does not apply to privately owned remote aircraft.

"any civil aircraft used, operated, or employed in interstate, overseas, or foreign air commerce"

Maybe if it were an Amazon drone because of the interstate business part.

I live in GA. Outside of city limits a person can discharge any weapon they can legally own. But, if the projectile crosses over or comes to rest on someone else’s property. Your toast.

If someone I'm responsible for (say a child) fires a firearm onto someone's property without permission. They will be happy when the police arrive. It will provide them with some much needed relief....

.
Click to expand...

The FAA regulates navigable airspace down to 500ft. Below 500FT they also control for takeoff/ landings and helicopter operations.

The neighbor thought he was shooting at a government aircraft. In reality he was shooting at a civilian aircraft. While it may not have fallen under one of those items you listed, the neighbors had no actual idea what they were shooting at.

I don't think the FAA would appreciate someone firing at any aircraft. Do you?
 
I believe a pilot (like a CropDuster) needs a low-level endorsement to fly below 500ft above the ground except when landing or taking off.. I believe helicopters are limited to 300 feet above the ground. I believe if the intruding drone is privately owned (not FBI Survelance or those rendured exempt (Forbes Arctiled discussed here) then if the laws (Cities often have laws perhibitting the distarge of any firearm) location of your private property you can blast the snoopy drone out of the sky but having your steel shot, lead shot, slug, (from a shotgun), bullet or a cannonball fall on other private property without explicit permission can get you in trouble (Lots in some states, not so much in others). I know my 10 gauge magnum goose gun could take out a average drone at well over 200 feet and with the correct load (double ought buck) maybe over 300 vertical which might be questionable since a helicopter (isn't a drone a miniture helicopter) I believe can fly at 300 feet over your house and lower if my a government enity (Dang police helicopter for example). The problem is I'd rather throw a rock than risk the possibility that what I believe is incorrect. Laws in Nevada are not as Dracoenean as say the laws in New York or California but common sense should dictate firing a weopon around other people or other's property is tupid. If the facts, as presented, are correct then the trigger happy redneck nieghbor is in the wrong and liable (IMHO).
 
FAA Links and Regs for UAS (drones)

FAA said:
Model aircraft operations are for hobby or recreational purposes only.
The FAA has partnered with several industry associations to promote Know Before You Fly, a campaign to educate the public about using unmanned aircraft safely and responsibly. Individuals flying for hobby or recreation are strongly encouraged to follow safety guidelines, which include:

  • Fly below 400 feet and remain clear of surrounding obstacles
  • Keep the aircraft within visual line of sight at all times
  • Remain well clear of and do not interfere with manned aircraft operations
  • Don't fly within 5 miles of an airport unless you contact the airport and control tower before flying
  • Don't fly near people or stadiums
  • Don't fly an aircraft that weighs more than 55 lbs
  • Don't be careless or reckless with your unmanned aircraft – you could be fined for endangering people or other aircraft

The statutory parameters of a model aircraft operation are outlined in Section 336 of Public Law 112-95 (the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012) (PDF).

Individuals who fly within the scope of these parameters do not require permission to operate their UAS; any flight outside these parameters (including any non-hobby, non-recreational operation) requires FAA authorization. For example, using a UAS to take photos for your personal use is recreational; using the same device to take photographs or videos for compensation or sale to another individual would be considered a non-recreational operation.
More about the Know Before You Fly campaign
Read the FAA's Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (PDF)
Read the Do's and Don'ts of Model Aircraft Operations
View FAA YouTube videos on safe model aircraft operations.
The "Model Aircraft Do's and Don'ts" (PDF)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
He should of told them, "apparently I was flying my shotgun shells at the same time you were flying your drone over my property and the two collided."
 
Tsavo said:
Drones are rapidly becoming the new green laser of the idiot world.
Click to expand...


This.

I own a quad (not considered a drone) and fly it indoors to avoid these types of issues. As the planet gets more crowded and privacy becomes more of a luxury I can foresee drones becoming a much larger problem.

I'd like to meet the guy who hit this thing at over 200 feet away. Davey Crockett ...
 
dud said:
This.

I own a quad (not considered a drone) and fly it indoors to avoid these types of issues. As the planet gets more crowded and privacy becomes more of a luxury I can foresee drones becoming a much larger problem.

I'd like to meet the guy who hit this thing at over 200 feet away. Davey Crockett ...
Click to expand...

I own a quad which is considered a drone, (Phantom 1) and by flying responsibly I haven't run into any issues.

More than the idiots with green lasers I see people on both sides being idiots.

You got the irresponsible pilots crashing them into the White House lawn or blocking other commercial aircraft.

On the other hand you got idiots like this guys neighbor who thinks it's just fine to shoot any RC craft out of the air.
 
Paratus said:
I own a quad which is considered a drone, (Phantom 1) and by flying responsibly I haven't run into any issues.

More than the idiots with green lasers I see people on both sides being idiots.

You got the irresponsible pilots crashing them into the White House lawn or blocking other commercial aircraft.

On the other hand you got idiots like this guys neighbor who thinks it's just fine to shoot any RC craft out of the air.
Click to expand...

That guy was drunk out of his mind, allegedly.
 
Imp said:
That guy was drunk out of his mind, allegedly.
Click to expand...

Yes he was.

You've also got idiots doing max altitude videos and posting them to YouTube. Others are slamming them into buildings over crowds. The idiots are going to ruin it for the rest of us.
 
Paratus said:
The drone owner needs to call the cops on this guy for reckless discharge of a firearm.
Click to expand...
Yep, how this is plainly obvious.

I've read many blowhards online saying they'll shoot down drones with their shotguns. I'm surprised this guy did.

But it was still illegal and reckless and I wouldn't stand for it. I'd also let the neighbor know I am installing surveillance equipment to monitor the property.
 
lxskllr said:
I'm pretty sure you do. You own to the radius point of the earth, and out to the sky. Aircraft has RoW, and you can't do something that restricts normal flight. Otherwise, there's numerous regulations that restrict what you do do above, and below ground(you may not even own below ground(mineral rights)), so that fact has little practical value.
Click to expand...
It appears you own nothing above the top of your house or a blade of grass; none of the air.

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2428940
 
Paratus said:
I don't think the FAA would appreciate someone firing at any aircraft. Do you?
Click to expand...

No I don't think they would. Just because they wouldn't like it doesn't mean they should charge someone.

I don't know which law or rules covers it. The person who did this needs to be charged. I would want them charged with the applicable law to make sure it sticks.

.
 
Paratus said:
Yes he was.

You've also got idiots doing max altitude videos and posting them to YouTube. Others are slamming them into buildings over crowds. The idiots are going to ruin it for the rest of us.
Click to expand...

I'm more shocked at how people can afford to crash these things... then again, people dunk or drop their $500 cell phones all the day. Heard of one extended family member who broke her iPhone twice in the span of less than a year.
 
Imp said:
I'm more shocked at how people can afford to crash these things... then again, people dunk or drop their $500 cell phones all the day. Heard of one extended family member who broke her iPhone twice in the span of less than a year.
Click to expand...
Still cheaper than many hobbies, from an expensive car to rounds of golf or whatever else. I'm sure it sucks to lose a drone, but a lot of the people losing them deserve it for having no damn idea what they were doing at all!
 
So, dude thinks the CIA is flying a drone over his property and his first impulse is to shoot it down?

Dude should be nominated for a Nobel.
 
United States v. Causby 1946

Airspace is not owned by land owner.
Even if it were above shooter's land, he had no right to shoot it down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top