- Joined
- Aug 5, 2015
- Messages
- 270
- Reaction score
- 42
- Location
- Mccordsville, Indiana
- Website
- www.ebay.com
If it was indeed shot down, it was outside the property line when it was shot at, so that will be another problem for the shooter.
The conditions of the property gave the drone pilot a pretty reasonable reason to be flying the drone over the property, but as others have said, he should have been more efficient, rather then linger.
I see nothing that indicates there was a reasonable expectation of privacy, and the "airspace over my property" claim that is often made is pretty laughable.
Sorry disa
I disagree and I hope your opinion is the minority on the topic. That type of flight behavior over/next to somebody’s property that you don’t know is what makes all drone pilots look like peeping toms. Not relevant whatsoever the property is a shi___t hole. If this type of behavior becomes more prevalent then I believe in near future local cities will find ways to enact some type of ordinance based on some clever law writing as to allow Joe Sheriff to come out to your house and write you a ticket based on safety or noise crap.
My little suburbia city has laws on the books about what type of material you must have to be considered a “driveway” to allow you to park cars on your own property. Yep if I had 15grand I could take them to court and most likely win based on my rights as a property owner however I don’t have 15G’s to gamble with. Even if I did win they would simply find new wording/approach to go at it a different way thus the game would start all over again. Think about this law for a second and connect the dots. What are they attempting to control with this law and how are they getting away with it? What type of neighbors are they mandating by this ordinance more importantly what “type” neighbors are they removing?
If you are using your drone to “learn” about your neighbors new hot tub, new garden, new shed, new boat, their messy back yard etc… Please stop if for anything your fellow hobbyist. I would care less if you were scanning my back yard because you wanted to learn about my new pool however most don’t feel that way. Majority rules brother.
Illegal in the US to shoot at any man made object in the airAlright guys just came across this video of a drone shot down. What’s your take on this video, was the drone pilot wrong for hovering over the property? Does this qualify for the peeping Tom law? Or was the other person wrong for illegally shooting down the drone?
What if a woman made it?Illegal in the US to shoot at any man made object in the air
You'll note that I specifically said "pretty reasonable." Meaning that by viewing the video I could pretty easily see what his intentions were although he was pretty stupid in his execution.
You're disagreement stems from your view of the drone as something that's only used by hobbyists.
The drone is a tool and the growth of it's use really won't be able to be regulated as technology quickly and repeatedly outpaces any legislation. Drone users do not have to adapt to the public, the public has to adapt to drone users.
If a next door or nearby neighbor poses a health/safety/fire risk or is clearly affecting the value of my property by violating local code, I'm going to use all available tools to document that.
I'll take photos with an SLR from public spaces, and if I have one, I'll launch a drone to get aerial shots.
For sure, I would do so in a much more professional and less intrusive manner then the guy that shot the video. But as stupid as he was, he did nothing illegal.
There is nothing in that yard that could not be viewed from a neighboring second story, so there is no expectation of privacy.
(IANAL)
The key phrase to privacy laws has been and continues to be "reasonable expectation of privacy". Courts have held many times that if is is visible to an average height human going about their daily activities, it cannot be considered a "reasonable expectation of privacy".
Somewhat apples and oranges. Many drone pilots believe that they are only subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the FAA. That’s not true. Local governments can still pass laws with respect to drone interaction with the ground. So hovering a drone outside a window will probably violate a peeping Tom statute; chasing water fowl on a lake with a drone can (and has) yield a wildlife harassment citation; drone use for surveillance can be banned or regulated by local government. The section you cited simply states an FAA certified pilot may use a drone to take a picture, nothing more. Section 423.003 says if those pictures are for surveillance purposes it is a class C misdemeanor. And if the person distributes the pictures it’s a class B misdemeanor. Texas is totally screwed up regarding drones, and it’s causing major issues with news reporters in the state.Note that the previous section of the statute specifically notes as non applicable in 21(B) the operator of the unmanned aircraft is authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration to conduct operations within the airspace from which the image is captured.
Take that for what you will. But since the FAA is the sole body of government allowed to regulate the National Air Space, and they have issued specifics on when drone use is allowed.....
You may wish to consult a lawyer on those statements. I am not one. However the section I quoted is entitled 'NON-APPLICABILITY'. Which has a fairly strong legal recognition and definition as I understand it.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.