Home
Sure hope he gets off...

From--http://madworldnews.com/father-drone-little-girls-arrest/


A Hillview, Kentucky man was arrested Sunday night for doing something many other Americans would do and not think twice about. In this day and age of constant government surveillance of our every move, it is certainly easy to see why he took action. Privacy is of a concern, and one man sought to protect his family from another prying person.

William H. Merideth had a complaint levied against him for a firearm, and the police were responding to that particular issue when they showed up at his home. Merideth didn’t lie, nor did he mince words. He immediately admitted to shooting down a drone that was flying over his property. Once shot, the drone crashed in a field near Merideth’s house. Meredith recounted his story:

“Sunday afternoon, the kids – my girls – were out on the back deck, and the neighbors were out in their yard,” Merideth said. “And they come in and said, ‘Dad, there’s a drone out here, flying over everybody’s yard. Well, I came out and it was down by the neighbor’s house, about 10 feet off the ground, looking under their canopy that they’ve got under their back yard,” Merideth said. ”I went and got my shotgun and I said, ‘I’m not going to do anything unless it’s directly over my property.’”

“He didn’t just fly over,” he said. “If he had been moving and just kept moving, that would have been one thing — but when he come directly over our heads, and just hovered there, I felt like I had the right. You know, when you’re in your own property, within a six-foot privacy fence, you have the expectation of privacy,” he said. “We don’t know if he was looking at the girls. We don’t know if he was looking for something to steal. To me, it was the same as trespassing.”
Sounds like someone is about to find out the deed doesn't have the "from the bowels of the earth to the heavens above" wording any more. Gonna go double if it was owned by an LE agency.
Originally Posted by bcolorado
Sure hope he gets off...

From--http://madworldnews.com/father-drone-little-girls-arrest/


A Hillview, Kentucky man was arrested Sunday night for doing something many other Americans would do and not think twice about. In this day and age of constant government surveillance of our every move, it is certainly easy to see why he took action. Privacy is of a concern, and one man sought to protect his family from another prying person.

William H. Merideth had a complaint levied against him for a firearm, and the police were responding to that particular issue when they showed up at his home. Merideth didn’t lie, nor did he mince words. He immediately admitted to shooting down a drone that was flying over his property. Once shot, the drone crashed in a field near Merideth’s house. Meredith recounted his story:

“Sunday afternoon, the kids – my girls – were out on the back deck, and the neighbors were out in their yard,” Merideth said. “And they come in and said, ‘Dad, there’s a drone out here, flying over everybody’s yard. Well, I came out and it was down by the neighbor’s house, about 10 feet off the ground, looking under their canopy that they’ve got under their back yard,” Merideth said. ”I went and got my shotgun and I said, ‘I’m not going to do anything unless it’s directly over my property.’”

“He didn’t just fly over,” he said. “If he had been moving and just kept moving, that would have been one thing — but when he come directly over our heads, and just hovered there, I felt like I had the right. You know, when you’re in your own property, within a six-foot privacy fence, you have the expectation of privacy,” he said. “We don’t know if he was looking at the girls. We don’t know if he was looking for something to steal. To me, it was the same as trespassing.”


Sounds like self defence to me. Protecting my girls is a priority with me and my youngest is 41.
I would have done the same
Ordinance where he lived against firing a firearm inside the city limits is still a law he broke by downing the drone.

Suspect that charge will not go away.
Originally Posted by DwnRange
Ordinance where he lived against firing a firearm inside the city limits is still a law he broke by downing the drone.

Suspect that charge will not go away.



So it was a government owned property?

http://www.gunlaws101.com/state/law/kentucky/state-preemption-of-local-restrictions
Every time I see you post it is always the same thing. Is this all you know?

Quote
*** You are ignoring this user ***
Toggle the display of this post
As far as I'm concerned I own the airspace over my property at least within shotgun range.
Originally Posted by bcolorado
Merideth didn’t lie, nor did he mince words. He immediately admitted to shooting down a drone


Shoot. Shovel. Shut up.

DON'T give the cops an easy arrest. Don't answer the door when they come snooping around. They have speed-traps and donut shops to attend to, they won't stick around long.....

Hillview ain't that far from me, maybe 35 miles. I hadn't heard about it, but I've been out of town for the last few days.... laugh


Yeah, it's inside city limits, and he discharged a firearm, but I'd have done the same, under the same circumstances. That's probably a misdemeanor, in any event, in KY, outside Louisville and Lexington.
If you have a hunting bow there is a neighborhood friendly way to dispose of unwanted drones.

[Linked Image]

If my family or house was been scoped out via a drone, I'd do everything possible to make sure it would be the last flight of that drone.
It was an invasion of privacy.
Do not see how he did wrong.
I'd rather have spent birdshot land on me than that thing. Shotgun may be louder but that arrow would be more dangerous/likely to cause injury than falling 7.5 shot.
Those things can be armed as well. I don't think he has a worry in the world if he stands on self defense.
it's a shame if it turns into a discharge violation,Person flying should be charged with something as well
don't want your drone shot down, don't hover it over my family

no way to know who was controlling nor what their intent was from child pornography to casing the joint out, or intent to bodily harm.


property rights are what this nation was founded upon.


hope he gets off

but anymore, justice is a hard thing to find in a court of law in this country
Careful application of the netting used to keep birds off of fruits and veggies could solve that problem too. Just have to figure out the guys pattern with the RC POS. Snare it and smash the schitt out of it.
I would have love to have witnessed that. I bet that was funny as hail, I would have done the same thing let the smoke out of that sombich.
An attack drone is sounding more & more worthwhile...

grin
"So it was a government owned property?"

The link you provided has nothing to do with the comment you made.

And you're not stupid.

So................ .?
RE the city ordinance, you would not be charged, or at least convicted in most cities if using for self defense.

Cut and dried no issue then in my mind.

Out back joy shooting, yep you break a rule then.
Wonder if drone taste like chicken?

Hope the gentleman is not charged.
Originally Posted by 458 Lott
If you have a hunting bow there is a neighborhood friendly way to dispose of unwanted drones.

[Linked Image]

If my family or house was been scoped out via a drone, I'd do everything possible to make sure it would be the last flight of that drone.



THAT is a great idea! I love shooting aerials with my longbow.
Or at least shooting at aerials...
Drones are the tool of the pedophile.
No report of the drone owner showing up to complain...?

DF
"Officer, that thing was just an airborne peeping Tom. I only shot at it in an attempt to preserve it for evidence."

And then STFU.
Well, have they figured out who owned the thing? And, good on him, I would have done the same in his situation.
Same here, they do not belong over my property.
Since it didn't come to earth on his property, he should have answered the cops' every question;"Sorry, but I can't help you."

The neighbor where it landed can just say, over and over;" I didn't shoot it".
My blind, gimp azz would have done the same thing. And I'd dared the owner to set foot on the place!!!!
Yep .. turn the tables.

I want to press charges against the owner. The pervert was using it to peer in my daughter's window when she was changing.

Thing is .. they might have been doing exactly that.
I agree; he did right by getting rid of the damned thing in his yard.

I was real leary when I learned any high tech idiot could own and use

one. Have no problems with toys, but drones, especially when introduced

to the general public have too many fools who think they have no

responsibility to use common sense while using (probably new drone

owners are sadly lacking in that anyway). My God, the gov. has issues

with people carrying guns, but how much more damage can a drone do?
Originally Posted by Mannlicher
I would have done the same


Same here.
I wonder if there are any you tube vids out on how to make a frequency jammer, for scientific purposes only of course.
Originally Posted by kaywoodie
My blind, gimp azz would have done the same thing. And I'd dared the owner to set foot on the place!!!!

According to the article four guys came over to confront him. He was packing a .40 and made it clear that if they made a move on him there would be another shooting.
"Officer, the drone was flying erratically, and I thought he was aiming to hit my girls.......

My attorney's name is Mr. W. E. Cheatum, Esq. I wish to speak to him before answering any questions."

Originally Posted by Tracks
[quote=kaywoodie]
According to the article four guys came over to confront him. He was packing a .40 and made it clear that if they made a move on him there would be another shooting.


I really like that part.
smile


Originally Posted by Blackheart
I'd rather have spent birdshot land on me than that thing. Shotgun may be louder but that arrow would be more dangerous/likely to cause injury than falling 7.5 shot.


Clearly you're no archer and never encountered one.

You need stick to squirt guns and rubber bands.

That's just fuggin dumb.
At that close of range a bow, a slingshot, or a brick is the best tool in hand.

Originally Posted by Tracks
Originally Posted by kaywoodie
My blind, gimp azz would have done the same thing. And I'd dared the owner to set foot on the place!!!!

According to the article four guys came over to confront him. He was packing a .40 and made it clear that if they made a move on him there would be another shooting.


So????? Sounds like he had a plan. wink
Toss cast net. Drone down. Drone done. End of story.
Originally Posted by DwnRange
Ordinance where he lived against firing a firearm inside the city limits is still a law he broke by downing the drone.

Suspect that charge will not go away.


How much time does one have to spend in the pen for shooting a home invader?
So. What do you all recommend for drones? Steel or lead 4's 2's or double 00 buckshot? Pretty sure I'd do the same if I were to find some perve checking out my place or family. Could be burglars casing ones home.
Originally Posted by elkhunternm
Wonder if drone taste like chicken?

Hope the gentleman is not charged.





grin grin when I started reading this, I knew what somebody was gonna say. You beat me too it..
Originally Posted by Archerhunter
Originally Posted by Blackheart
I'd rather have spent birdshot land on me than that thing. Shotgun may be louder but that arrow would be more dangerous/likely to cause injury than falling 7.5 shot.


Clearly you're no archer and never encountered one.

You need stick to squirt guns and rubber bands.

That's just fuggin dumb.
At that close of range a bow, a slingshot, or a brick is the best tool in hand.



Really? Are you saying a falling arrow or flying arrow can't do much damage?

Even I know a good arrow is about 600ish grains IIRC, its been years since I did any tech stuff with bows, I just simply shoot em now, no biggy.

600 grains hitting you, is going to smart worse than a few grain pellets....
You have to know he's going to be charged with discharging a firearm in the city limits. Sometimes the law figures if they have to come out they need to charge someone.
Originally Posted by local_dirt
Toss cast net. Drone down. Drone done. End of story.


Football, rock, lawn chair, or bbq lid works too.

It was 10 feet off the ground!
Originally Posted by Mannlicher
I would have done the same


I would have as well.
surprised and disappointed that the man was charged for shooting a drone out of the sky over his yard.

I guess no good can come from living in a city of any size to speak of.

Hopefully, there are some clear thinking folks on a jury who are willing to say, "Not Guilty, by God, and I've got all day."

Oh, and if you are stupid enough to come confront me for shooting your drone down over my yard, I'll be happy to repeat myself.

No way in billy hell I'd have written that ticket.

This world is completely upside down.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that flying a drone 10 feet over someone's property could be considered trespass.
The owner should answer for that.
Originally Posted by Tracks
Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems that flying a drone 10 feet over someone's property could be considered trespass.
The owner should answer for that.


Yep, this is the drone owners fault.
" I was in fear for my life ".....nuff said
I'd buy that guy a beer, but here in Cali that is enough to have your CCW revoked.
All drones should have serial numbers and owners should be recorded.
That'll fix it.
Originally Posted by Blackheart
As far as I'm concerned I own the airspace over my property at least within shotgun range.
Very reasonable.
Originally Posted by Archerhunter
Originally Posted by Blackheart
I'd rather have spent birdshot land on me than that thing. Shotgun may be louder but that arrow would be more dangerous/likely to cause injury than falling 7.5 shot.


Clearly you're no archer and never encountered one.

You need stick to squirt guns and rubber bands.

That's just fuggin dumb.
At that close of range a bow, a slingshot, or a brick is the best tool in hand.

Geezus, are you really that fuggin dumb ? If so you should go hang out at the elementary school playground with people of similar intellect. You have NO BUSINESS posting on an adult forum. Stupid son of a bytch.
Originally Posted by g5m
All drones should have serial numbers and owners should be recorded.
That'll fix it.


Along with a background check, a permit, a thousand dollar tax, limited capacity battery pack, and locked in a safe when not in use.


.....no KY jury will convict that guy if his lawyer is worth a salt.
Forget the trespass charges, the 'copter owner/operator was in violation of FAA regs. That's who should be notified. Let them deal with the feds. All the property owner has to say is that at some point, the drone flew over someone's head, or over a structure. Full stop, finito, end of story...

As for the property owner, well maybe he gets off on the discharge rap. But I'm sure there were ways to take it down that wouldn't have involved him having to hire a lawyer.

Seriously folks, if you're within city limits, DON'T SHOOT AT RC AIRCRAFT. You may be morally right if it's in your backyard, but remember, moral doesn't equal legal. Save yourself the legal fees and take it down without using a weapon. Or just document it, and follow it back to the owner. Get information (address, license plate, etc...) that will tie an ID to the person flying the aircraft. If it was flying over structure or people along the way, make sure that's captured as evidence, then present that to the authorities, letting them know that operating in that manner violates federal law.

Remember, a cheap quadcopter can be replaced or rebuilt for just a few hundred bucks and a couple of clicks. What's ducking potential local and FAA charges going to cost in time and money???

I suspect that Hevi-Shot Dead Coyote doubles as a decent drone load.
Originally Posted by gonehuntin
Originally Posted by bcolorado
Merideth didn’t lie, nor did he mince words. He immediately admitted to shooting down a drone


Shoot. Shovel. Shut up.

DON'T give the cops an easy arrest. Don't answer the door when they come snooping around. They have speed-traps and donut shops to attend to, they won't stick around long.....



This video sadly is THE ONLY WAY TOO GO. In this day and age. The litigious society............ Everyone Should watch it.
If there is any justice in the world, the charges should be dropped and the drones owner should be charged via the FAA instead..

That said, for all the guys who recommend the three S's remember the owner of the drone may well have footage of exactly what happened, up to the point of the drones "serious malfunction" anyway..

From a legal perspective, I am not sure what the best way for the home owner be to deal to with the situation would be, which is a very sad thing in and of itself..
[Linked Image]
My next door neighbor was having a birthday party in his backyard, having gotten a drone as a birthday present he was playing around with it. Next thing you know, bang he flew it into the side of my house. I was inside at the time unaware of him flying the drone, the noise startled me and when I went to investigate. I was less than pleased to put it mildly when I found the drone in my yard, it had not caused any damage to my house and the neighbor was pretty embarassed. The look I gave him when I handed his drone back to him was sufficient to get my message across. Don't know where he flies his drone nowadays but it damn sure is not over my backyard.
Use a flu-flu fletched arrow. It has extra fletching, only flies about 40/50 yards and then floats softly to the ground. Designed for bird hunting with a bow. Wont lose arrow and wont come down and cause damage.
Originally Posted by bcolorado
To me, it was the same as trespassing.”
Yep. Just like attaching a camera to a pole and sticking it over your neighbor's fence. No way destroying that would be legally or morally wrong. Same here.
Originally Posted by The_Real_Hawkeye
Originally Posted by bcolorado
To me, it was the same as trespassing.”
Yep. Just like attaching a camera to a pole and sticking it over your neighbor's fence. No way destroying that would be legally or morally wrong. Same here.


So if someone drives onto your property, you are legally allowed to destroy their vehicle?
Originally Posted by Blackheart
As far as I'm concerned I own the airspace over my property at least within shotgun range.
If you can't protect your air space, a home invader is safe as long as he keeps jumping.
Originally Posted by Pete E
So if someone drives onto your property, you are legally allowed to destroy their vehicle?


It is not about the vehicle it as all about the camera.

If someone parked a camera on a tripod on my driveway it would not last long.
Originally Posted by bcolorado
Originally Posted by Pete E
So if someone drives onto your property, you are legally allowed to destroy their vehicle?


It is not about the vehicle it as all about the camera.

If someone parked a camera on a tripod on my driveway it would not last long.


Morally, I agree with you, but legally, I am not sure you can destroy other peoples stuff just for tresspass?? Plus, in this case, you have the issue of discharging a firearm within the city limits..

And besides the criminal aspect, you then have to factor in the possibility the drone owner may take out a civil suit to recover the cost of the damaged drone..

Again, I have no idea whether that is likely to succeed or not, but even if it doesn't, its likely to be an expensive exercise for the home owner once lawyers get involved.

My hunch is that “self defence” aspect might be the best way forward for the home owner, rather than trying to argue straight trespass and/or invasion of privacy..
Originally Posted by Pete E
Originally Posted by The_Real_Hawkeye
Originally Posted by bcolorado
To me, it was the same as trespassing.”
Yep. Just like attaching a camera to a pole and sticking it over your neighbor's fence. No way destroying that would be legally or morally wrong. Same here.


So if someone drives onto your property, you are legally allowed to destroy their vehicle?
How is that analogous to my example?? crazy
On Sunday, police arrested Merideth on two felony charges: wanton endangerment and criminal mischief. The drone's owner, who told police the device cost $1,800, had the wreckage returned to him. Merideth, however, maintains that he was within his rights. In an interview with Ars Technica, he said the matter came down to issues of privacy and good manners.
Originally Posted by Pete E
Originally Posted by bcolorado
Originally Posted by Pete E
So if someone drives onto your property, you are legally allowed to destroy their vehicle?


It is not about the vehicle it as all about the camera.

If someone parked a camera on a tripod on my driveway it would not last long.


Morally, I agree with you, but legally, I am not sure you can destroy other peoples stuff just for tresspass?? Plus, in this case, you have the issue of discharging a firearm within the city limits..

And besides the criminal aspect, you then have to factor in the possibility the drone owner may take out a civil suit to recover the cost of the damaged drone..

Again, I have no idea whether that is likely to succeed or not, but even if it doesn't, its likely to be an expensive exercise for the home owner once lawyers get involved.

My hunch is that “self defence” aspect might be the best way forward for the home owner, rather than trying to argue straight trespass and/or invasion of privacy..


If the vehicle that comes onto my property is threatening me, yes I feel I have the right to disable it. Every time.

As to discharge in city limits, really normal people would not care about this, and I certainly don't, but there are things that go along with defense, that eliminate, or should in all states, the liability to other penal code issues.

IE if I"m legal in defending myself, others or my property in a self defense issue, then I cannot or should not be charged with the issue of discharge.

If I am charged with that, then every time an LEO fires their weapon inside the city, they should also be charged. And I'm not against LEO at all if you know me.

Here in the US a lot of us tend to take our private property rights very seriously, much more so than other countries do. I"m glad we do. Blood, sweat, tears etc... into buying and keeping it, its mine, you are not welcome unless invited.

Drones will be an issue until its all sorted out, and I hope they quickly understand that yep, don't ban drones, but they can only overfly public property or property that you own or have permission to be on, and if other happens, destruction is fine.

Firefighting, EMS and LEO have had serious issues with drones already, so much so that if they do ban em, I'm almost ok with that.... A good friend had such a close call in an Air Evac Helo a while back that he quit the service and went back to ground EMS.
Originally Posted by KRAKMT
On Sunday, police arrested Merideth on two felony charges: wanton endangerment and criminal mischief. The drone's owner, who told police the device cost $1,800, had the wreckage returned to him. Merideth, however, maintains that he was within his rights. In an interview with Ars Technica, he said the matter came down to issues of privacy and good manners.


What a phuggin crock...
That's why I'm glad I live where I live. First off most people around here wouldn't know the first thing about a drone, much less how to fly one or spell it.

A turret and a ballistic tip would solve the problem and they would never know where it came from.
Originally Posted by rost495
If the vehicle that comes onto my property is threatening me, yes I feel I have the right to disable it. Every time.


Which why i said perhaps the homeowners best course of action might be to claim self defence..

However, I don't think the law supports the destruction of property on the grounds of simple trespass or invasion of privacy..

At this point it would seem the home owner has not claimed "self defence" and is simply arguing he has a legal right to destroy the drone essentially for trespass/invasion of privacy.

It would also seem the Police have taken the opposite view and charged him..

I don't agree with this, but the law these days is pretty fugged up in a lot of cases..
Originally Posted by Steelhead
A turret and a ballistic tip would solve the problem and they would never know where it came from.


Unless they were filming you and recording the drones position via the GPS ect?
That's the ever loving point, they wouldn't know.
Would be interesting to see the effect of firing up a "noisy" unsuppressed motor (or similar) in the vicinity of one of these drones?
If it were flying low enough I would think a good high pressure garden hose would do the trick. A couple good soaks aughta make a point.
How the hell could you claim self defense?

Afraid of serious injury... from a toy drone?
http://www.droneinjurieslawyer.com/drone-injury-lawsuit/
Originally Posted by AJ300MAG
How the hell could you claim self defense?

Afraid of serious injury... from a toy drone?
Reasonable fear of serious injury is the standard for lethal action in self defense. Destroying a device isn't lethal action, thus a much lesser standard satisfies justification.
why can't this drone owner guy be charged with trespassing and invasion of privacy, by be being a peeping tom?
If the drone had a camera or remote video transmitter, the "pilot" may be violating a state anti-voyeurism law.
It's nothing more than common sense. You keep your crap in your yard and I'll keep my crap in my yard. Hover some mechanized hunk of metal over the top of my kids and you can kiss its ass goodbye. Simple...
"Hell Fire, I figgered it for one of them UFO thangs, come here to drain us of our precious bodily fluids, so I taken my shotgun to it".

That would be my claim.
Originally Posted by AJ300MAG
How the hell could you claim self defense?

Afraid of serious injury... from a toy drone?


You've not see what a spinning prop from a 350mm or larger class 'copter can do to flesh, have you?

Do an image search for "quadcopter prop injury"...
Originally Posted by AJ300MAG
How the hell could you claim self defense?

Afraid of serious injury... from a toy drone?


Yep; those rotors could do some damage.

http://nypost.com/2013/09/05/man-decapitated-by-remote-controlled-toy-helicopter/
If it is illegal to fly these dam things over the White House then it is illegal to fly over my house as far as I'm concerned
Quote
Here in the US a lot of us tend to take our private property rights very seriously, much more so than other countries do. I"m glad we do. Blood, sweat, tears etc... into buying and keeping it, its mine, you are not welcome unless invited.


Mornin', Pedro !

I'd like to supplement Jeff's comments above.

Dunno' about how they do it in other countries, the N.Eastern U.S., and don't CARE.

Under the law here in Az. failure to remove oneself IMMEDIATELY from private property when advised of trespass constitutes an ASSAULT.

Waving that creepy thing off a time or two, giving it a chance to get gone, and than blowing it away would stand as reasonable and acceptable behavior in ANY court in this state.

GTC
Originally Posted by Scott_Thornley
Originally Posted by AJ300MAG
How the hell could you claim self defense?

Afraid of serious injury... from a toy drone?


You've not see what a spinning prop from a 350mm or larger class 'copter can do to flesh, have you?

Do an image search for "quadcopter prop injury"...


So I shoot at it to make sure it goes out of control... crazy



http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/drones-california-fire/



Consumer drones interfere with CA firefighting efforts



BY Kenzi Abou-Sabe July 19, 2015 at 5:22 PM EDT
Los Angeles county firefighters battle a wildfire in Wrightwood, California, July 17, 2015. The wildfire is one of several in California over the past month where firefighting efforts have been partially disrupted by people flying private drones. Photo by Gene Blevins/Reuters

Los Angeles county firefighters battle a wildfire in Wrightwood, California, July 17, 2015. The blaze is one of several recent California wildfires in which firefighting efforts have been disrupted by people flying private drones. Photo by Gene Blevins/Reuters

When a fire that started in the hills northeast of Los Angeles spread to Interstate 15 Saturday, drivers were forced to flee their cars because of flames that eventually destroyed 20 vehicles.

A rare rainstorm helped to control the wildfire, which is now about 60 percent contained, but not before private drones flying over the wildfire grounded firefighting aircraft for almost half an hour.
RELATED CONTENT

Feds OK Amazon's delivery drone tests (for real, this time)

Saturday’s incident marks the fifth time in a month that firefighting operations have been temporarily grounded by a private citizen flying a drone.

In the past month, drones have gotten in the way of firefighters in San Bernadino County, the Plumas National Forest and, most recently, Interstate 15, which connects Los Angeles and Las Vegas.

A July 12 incident at the edge of the San Bernadino National Forest grounded firefighters’ air tankers for eight minutes.

“That may not seem like a huge amount of time, but in a fire emergency every minute counts,” U.S. Forest Service spokeswoman Carol Underhill told the Associated Press.

Part of the conflict between private drones and public safety is a lack of clear, legislated regulation around what drone owners can and cannot do, partly because the tecnology is relatively new.

State lawmakers in California are currently drafting a bill that would impose heavy fines and potential jail time on anyone whose personal drone interferes with firefighting efforts.

California law currently states that interfering with firefighters is a misdemeanor, but the proposed legislation would severely heighten that punishment.
Originally Posted by AJ300MAG
How the hell could you claim self defense?

Afraid of serious injury... from a toy drone?


People have already rigged pistols to them and then there is the question of just why are the invading your privacy...casing your property maybe?

Originally Posted by Scott_Thornley
Originally Posted by AJ300MAG
How the hell could you claim self defense?

Afraid of serious injury... from a toy drone?


You've not see what a spinning prop from a 350mm or larger class 'copter can do to flesh, have you?

Do an image search for "quadcopter prop injury"...


I think they could play hell with an eyeball.
I am not sure its too much a problem here in the UK yet, but one area I see these drones being used and abused is by the Press..

There are laws that supposedly prevent them being flown near people or private property, but with todays cameras and zoom lens, that's not going to provide much protection from snooping..

The other area of concern is there use by terrorists. Even moderately low end models have GPS guidance, which means low cost off-the-shelf auto-pilot technology is now easily within their grasp..

While many consumer grade drones have very limited payload/range, I predict that the auto-pilot technology alone will end being used in other terrorist related applications..
Originally Posted by eyeball
Originally Posted by Scott_Thornley
Originally Posted by AJ300MAG
How the hell could you claim self defense?

Afraid of serious injury... from a toy drone?


You've not see what a spinning prop from a 350mm or larger class 'copter can do to flesh, have you?

Do an image search for "quadcopter prop injury"...


I think they could play hell with an eyeball.


They can cut the schidt out of you.

Ask Enrique Iglesias...

It wouldn't take much payload for an air burst anthrax dispersal over an outdoor cafe or the like.
There was never a drone in this story. It's called a quadcopter, or perhaps an RC helecopter if it has 1 main rotor, and they've been around for 50 years. The drama with the media over the term "drone" makes me laugh. It's like "assault weapon" - they simply cannot use it enough.

It's like calling a magazine a clip - makes us all look stupid.
I can see an upcoming market for potato cannon with chain shot. Couple of golf balls with braided fishing line between them to wrap up propellers.
Originally Posted by Paradiddle
There was never a drone in this story. It's called a quadcopter, or perhaps an RC helecopter if it has 1 main rotor, and they've been around for 50 years.


I think the difference is that todays consumer level "drones" carry camera's, data links, auto pilots, and can essentially fly them selves..

I'm not sure where you draw the line between old fashioned RC models and todays modern "drones" but I think most people would regard them as "different"..

That said, I had a relative who was into RC models and Ham radio ect and he had a RC plane rigged up with a basic TV camera about 25 years ago, so I do get what you are saying..
Originally Posted by Pete E
Originally Posted by Paradiddle
There was never a drone in this story. It's called a quadcopter, or perhaps an RC helecopter if it has 1 main rotor, and they've been around for 50 years.


I think the difference is that todays consumer level "drones" carry camera's, data links, auto pilots, and can essentially fly them selves..

I'm not sure where you draw the line between old fashioned RC models and todays modern "drones" but I think most people would regard them as "different"..

That said, I had a relative who was into RC models and Ham radio ect and he had a RC plane rigged up with a basic TV camera about 25 years ago, so I do get what you are saying..


It's the overuse of the word drone that kills me. And only because I used to fly RC. Those are all quadcopters. Period. It comes from the media wanting to fool the sheep of this national into believe your neighbor has one of these....

[img]https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=JN.Wl1uZKURB0bJ9JZzV0WD3g&pid=15.1&P=0[/img]
Originally Posted by Paradiddle
Originally Posted by Pete E
Originally Posted by Paradiddle
There was never a drone in this story. It's called a quadcopter, or perhaps an RC helecopter if it has 1 main rotor, and they've been around for 50 years.


I think the difference is that todays consumer level "drones" carry camera's, data links, auto pilots, and can essentially fly them selves..

I'm not sure where you draw the line between old fashioned RC models and todays modern "drones" but I think most people would regard them as "different"..

That said, I had a relative who was into RC models and Ham radio ect and he had a RC plane rigged up with a basic TV camera about 25 years ago, so I do get what you are saying..


It's the overuse of the word drone that kills me. And only because I used to fly RC. Those are all quadcopters. Period. It comes from the media wanting to fool the sheep of this national into believe your neighbor has one of these....

[img]https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=JN.Wl1uZKURB0bJ9JZzV0WD3g&pid=15.1&P=0[/img]


Everything to the liberals is a forking armed preditor...

Wait until some dumbaze shoots down one that belongs to a LE agency. Then they can brag about their felony conviction.
Originally Posted by Paradiddle
Originally Posted by Pete E
Originally Posted by Paradiddle
There was never a drone in this story. It's called a quadcopter, or perhaps an RC helecopter if it has 1 main rotor, and they've been around for 50 years.


I think the difference is that todays consumer level "drones" carry camera's, data links, auto pilots, and can essentially fly them selves..

I'm not sure where you draw the line between old fashioned RC models and todays modern "drones" but I think most people would regard them as "different"..

That said, I had a relative who was into RC models and Ham radio ect and he had a RC plane rigged up with a basic TV camera about 25 years ago, so I do get what you are saying..


It's the overuse of the word drone that kills me. And only because I used to fly RC. Those are all quadcopters. Period. It comes from the media wanting to fool the sheep of this national into believe your neighbor has one of these....

[img]https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=JN.Wl1uZKURB0bJ9JZzV0WD3g&pid=15.1&P=0[/img]


Just because they are smaller doesn't change a thing.

If you're flying your r/c copter, park flier etc in your yard, a park or r/c field no big deal.

You start flying it over property you have no right to fly over and are taking video or pictures of them and their family, you have a problem.

Personally I find the small drones right outside your window much more invasive than a military or LE drone flying 1000's of feet AGL.

Originally Posted by Paradiddle
There was never a drone in this story. It's called a quadcopter, or perhaps an RC helecopter if it has 1 main rotor, and they've been around for 50 years. The drama with the media over the term "drone" makes me laugh. It's like "assault weapon" - they simply cannot use it enough.

It's like calling a magazine a clip - makes us all look stupid.


Pretty sensitive on this subject, eh ?

.....what sorta' trouble have YOU been in, with WTF you call them ?

GTC
Originally Posted by 458 Lott
Originally Posted by Paradiddle
Originally Posted by Pete E
Originally Posted by Paradiddle
There was never a drone in this story. It's called a quadcopter, or perhaps an RC helecopter if it has 1 main rotor, and they've been around for 50 years.


I think the difference is that todays consumer level "drones" carry camera's, data links, auto pilots, and can essentially fly them selves..

I'm not sure where you draw the line between old fashioned RC models and todays modern "drones" but I think most people would regard them as "different"..

That said, I had a relative who was into RC models and Ham radio ect and he had a RC plane rigged up with a basic TV camera about 25 years ago, so I do get what you are saying..


It's the overuse of the word drone that kills me. And only because I used to fly RC. Those are all quadcopters. Period. It comes from the media wanting to fool the sheep of this national into believe your neighbor has one of these....

[img]https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=JN.Wl1uZKURB0bJ9JZzV0WD3g&pid=15.1&P=0[/img]


Just because they are smaller doesn't change a thing.

If you're flying your r/c copter, park flier etc in your yard, a park or r/c field no big deal.

You start flying it over property you have no right to fly over and are taking video or pictures of them and their family, you have a problem.

Personally I find the small drones right outside your window much more invasive than a military or LE drone flying 1000's of feet AGL.



this
I agree with PD. It's damn near comical the way the media can get some people scared of their own shadow with a new catchword.

Hell, I'd like to have a "drone" just for some of the flat damn amazing landscape shots I've seen from them. Gotta be cheaper than renting a chopper.

That said, trespassing is trespassing. Start acting like a fool with the thing and you're bound to win stupid prizes.
I have no problem with drones and don't want them banned. A friend of kids used one to make an awesome documentary and some really cool shorts:



The issue isn't technology or a buzzword, it's invasion of privacy and trespass.
Originally Posted by stevelyn
I suspect that Hevi-Shot Dead Coyote doubles as a decent drone load.


lead #4s through a turkey choke, cheaper and effective.
Awesome video.

I get what you are saying. Doesn't discount the fact that the term "drone" is a word appropriated by the media to sensationalize RC aircraft.
To me rc aircraft are controlled via line of sight. If the craft is controlled autonomously or via video feed then it's a drone.

The media has to craft stories to a stupid public and the term drone seems an appropriate term for such craft, IMHO.
IMHO an RC aircraft is just an RC aircraft until you put surveillance equipment on it, or arm it, then it would classify as a drone.
Did the one in the OP have a camera ?

GTC
Originally Posted by crossfireoops
Did the one in the OP have a camera ?

GTC


From another source...

The owner of the drone told police he was using the machine, valued at more than $1,800, to take pictures of a friend's home.
OK, but it have a camera? wink
Should of done a better job of making sure he had the right house!
I want to see pictures of the daughter before I decide on how big an idiot the 'chopper pilot is...
I'm not saying I wouldn't do what the Dad in this incident did.
But unfortantley he committed at least a class A Misc. by discharging a firearm in the city limits. Which means if he had a CHL, he's gonna lose it. Wouldn't be worth it to me.

Personally, I'd opt for a wrist rocket or an old fashioned sling shot loaded with ball bearings. Then keep your mouth shut when the Cops arrive and play dumb. Problem solved and no crime committed or jail time.
Pete, I totally agree laws here are messed up.

Private property owners should have rights. Others shoudl be responsible.

Here in TX I suspect not many drones would survive thankfully, and not many folks other than in big cities, would be charged.

Far as I'm concerned the thing could have a gun.....

OTOH... WHAT ? Drone are you talking about ? None here...
Originally Posted by 2legit2quit
don't want your drone shot down, don't hover it over my family

no way to know who was controlling nor what their intent was from child pornography to casing the joint out, or intent to bodily harm.


property rights are what this nation was founded upon.


hope he gets off

but anymore, justice is a hard thing to find in a court of law in this country


Really? The nation was NOT founded on property rights.
Originally Posted by kaywoodie
My blind, gimp azz would have done the same thing. And I'd dared the owner to set foot on the place!!!!


Yep...!
Kudos to the owner, I'd like to be on that jury.
Originally Posted by Gun_Geezer
Originally Posted by 2legit2quit
don't want your drone shot down, don't hover it over my family

no way to know who was controlling nor what their intent was from child pornography to casing the joint out, or intent to bodily harm.


property rights are what this nation was founded upon.


hope he gets off

but anymore, justice is a hard thing to find in a court of law in this country


Really? The nation was NOT founded on property rights.


Honestly don't give a rats azz whether it was or not, bring that chit into my backyard and hover around, and it's coming down. I may live in a city, but my neighborhood is full of rednecks, coonazzes, etc.... Nope, we didn't hear anything officer...

Wish I was on the jury when he goes to trial, no way he'd be found guilty! Given a civic award maybe...
Local News story with a few words from the shooter.



http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0ed_1438311214
[bleep] that Drone.
And the judge told him not to shoot down anymore drones while the case is pending.


Seriously?
Originally Posted by 458 Lott
If you have a hunting bow there is a neighborhood friendly way to dispose of unwanted drones.

[Linked Image]

If my family or house was been scoped out via a drone, I'd do everything possible to make sure it would be the last flight of that drone.
...with a version of these on the other end.

[Linked Image]

Originally Posted by 458 Lott
Just because they are smaller doesn't change a thing.

If you're flying your r/c copter, park flier etc in your yard, a park or r/c field no big deal.

You start flying it over property you have no right to fly over and are taking video or pictures of them and their family, you have a problem.

Personally I find the small drones right outside your window much more invasive than a military or LE drone flying 1000's of feet AGL.

Exactly.
A few years back the SCOTUS somehow found a right to privacy in the constitution. Regardless of whether its there or not, it's now the law and everything about us is now sealed. So how does flying a camera over our backyard get around the court's ruling?
In my almost septuagenarian mind, hovering a camera a few feet over two young sunbathing girls has only one purpose. If a cop fails to grasp that, he's a damn poor cop. If a prosecutor fails to grasp that, he ought to be fired immediately.

It was a very bad idea to shoot at the thing, but he had every right to "confiscate" it by any other means available to him. As I said in my first post pages ago, the need to preserve evidence such as the copter owner's fingerprints justifies knocking the thing out of the air.

Were I a judge there, I'd be happy to sign a search warrant to see if the copter owner has child porn on his computer. Because I'd agree that there's probable cause based on this event.
Originally Posted by RWE
And the judge told him not to shoot down anymore drones while the case is pending.


Seriously?



It's Bullitt County, KY, whaddya expect? laugh That's Louisville's Redneck Bedroom, where those who COULD afford to move, did, when busing took effect in Jefferson County Schools.
It's within commuting distance of Louisville, but outside Jeff County, where all the badder things happen. Minorities are just that, in Bullitt County, and family still means something. It's REAL America. He just might get off there.
They'll have a heckuva time finding a jury to convict him, if the charges aren't dropped altogether, and that MIGHT happen. You never know in Bullitt.
These things are a problem:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/01/us/drone-airliner-jfk/index.html
Bullitt County Kentucky

The shooter is facing felony charges for "criminal mischief" and "wanton endangerment"

http://www.opb.org/news/article/npr-dispute-emerges-over-drone-shot-down-by-kentucky-man/

Quote
“Within a minute or so, here it came,” he said. “It was hovering over top of my property, and I shot it out of the sky.”

Police were called to the scene; Meredith now faces felony charges of wanton endangerment and criminal mischief, with a court date set for September.


It also appears he lied about how close the drone was to his home.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...shot-down-drone-was-higher-than-alleged/

Quote
The pilot of the drone shot down Sunday evening over a Kentucky property has now come forward with video provided to Ars, seemingly showing that the drone wasn’t nearly as close as the property owner made it out to be. However, the federal legal standard for how far into the air a person’s private property extends remains in dispute.

According to the telemetry provided by David Boggs, the drone pilot, his aircraft was only in flight for barely two minutes before it was shot down. The data also shows that it was well over 200 feet above the ground before the fatal shots fired by William Merideth.


There has been no evidence shown that any pictures were being taken of his daughter nor his property.

For a crowd that talks so much about "rights" and "obeying laws", some seem quick to jump to conclusions with very few real facts.





Quote
One shot, one kill........ It saves a lot of ammo!


yawn
Lets see.

If I remember what was said.
His daughter saw if first went in and told dad.

Then dad came out and saw it for him self.

Dad went to get shot gun.

Got shot gun went out side and it was still with in the area.

He took aim and it was with in the shotguns kill range and shot it out of the sky.

I do not think that it was just buzzing threw the area.

And the police gave it back to the perps. with out taking the chip out of the camera.

How do they know what the thing was taking pictures of.
I've not fired a weapon in the city limits in anger for several years now. My neighbors dog used to yap like a sumbeach at all hours of the night. When I'd approach the fence and yell at it the dog would viciously yap several inches away.

One night at 2 AM I walked out the door....coaked the yapping sumbeach to within 3 inches away and fired 3 fire breathing shots into the ground. The yapping sumbeach hit its owners back door running so fast it broke down the screen door. When Larry come running out I yelled across the fence......what in the helll was that explosion back here, sounded like it was in my back yard. After that night I'd tap on my back window if I heard a yap and it would go dead silent for the night.



Shod
Originally Posted by crossfireoops
Quote
One shot, one kill........ It saves a lot of ammo!


yawn

That's the most intelligent thing I've ever known you to say
States need to pass laws prohibiting flying of anything below 1000ft agl over private property except in a flight path w/o written permission. Don't want a Cessna over my roof low level either. Fines and jail time for "drone peeping" need to be instituted as well.



Exactly. Just this weekend there was another incident of a drone interfering with a private plane.

Nothing will be done UNTIL a plane or two actually goes down and lives are lost.
Originally Posted by 86thecat
States need to pass laws prohibiting flying of anything below 1000ft agl over private property except in a flight path w/o written permission. Don't want a Cessna over my roof low level either. Fines and jail time for "drone peeping" need to be instituted as well.


So...

If you or one of your kin is critically injured in a vehicle accident you're willing to wait until the medi-vac chopper pilot has written permission from all of the land owners who's property said chopper will overfly.

I'm good with that!
Guess you don't understand 1000ft agl.... and easy to write in exceptions for emergency aircraft. FAA regs already state 500 or 1000ft agl above people or residential. Would just like to see those regs specifically adressing drones/snooping/peeping.
http://www.risingup.com/fars/info/part91-119-FAR.shtml
Quote
Originally Posted By 86thecat
States need to pass laws prohibiting flying of anything below 1000ft agl over private property except in a flight path w/o written permission. Don't want a Cessna over my roof low level either. Fines and jail time for "drone peeping" need to be instituted as well.

It would be easier to just outlaw the possession of drones altogether.

There's no need for a lot of complicated regulations that would be nearly impossible to enforce
© 24hourcampfire