illegal shooting of drone?

[june03dr]

Alright 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?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Wetstone]

Alright 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?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The property owner was obviously the target of surveillance. The drone was hovering at some height... was it less than 100 feet? But what’s worse... invading someone’s personal air space (if there is such a thing) or shooting a shotgun in a residential area?

 

[allen_993]

I never saw the shooter. Are there laws that constitute "illegal violation of personal airspace"? If so, what are the criteria?

 

[Pedals2Paddles]

If the drone was shot down, there doesn't appear to evidence of it on the video. Can't see a shooter anywhere, just the loss of control and crash. Maybe he's hiding, or I just didn't see it. The video has no description or other facts. And it lacks sound. So this is purely an assumptions that it was shot down. For the sake of discussion, lets say it was indeed shot down:

• There are no circumstances where shooting down a drone is legal, period. Shooting at an aircraft is a violation of federal law, and most states have similar laws of their own. It doesn't matter if you think the drone is up to no good. Shooting it down is not legal.
• There are numerous other laws unrelated to aircraft that apply such as reckless endangerment, unlawful discharge of a firearm, etc etc. There are almost always state and local laws prohibiting discharge of firearms within X feet of homes or roads. He violated numerous.
• The shooter can and should be arrested by local/state/county police for violation of local/state/county laws related to aircraft and/or firearms
• The shooter can and should be charged by federal authorities for violation of laws related to aircraft, but may simply defer to the state/local/county.
  
• No, there is no such thing as personal airspace to be violated.
• Privacy laws vary by state/county/city. Some have none that would apply. The most strict ones I've seen would also not apply, since the done isn't seeing anything that you can't see from the public street, public sidewalk, or neighboring property anyway. As such, the drone operator likely did not violate any laws.
• The homeowner is likely also in violation of many state/county/local regulations related to personal property, building codes, trash, etc. Which is undoubtedly what the drone operator was taking pictures of. The homeowner should be held accountable for that too.

 

[IrishmanPDX]

As above, the shooter (if there is one) broke so many laws. If he had a problem with the drone he should have "reported it". The operator could be found at fault for harassment or a noise complaint at the very least (some states do have nuisance laws that while minor, could be applied). Also if the operator was conducting surveillance of the property and wasn't authorized to do so, then there's another one he/she could be dinged for. Either way both parties are total twats and need a slap around the head.

 

[Pedals2Paddles]

It's highly unlikely that that would fit withing the bounds of harassment or noise ordinances. There's also not really any such thing as a civilian conducting unauthorized surveillance. Existing state/local laws on privacy are what can be applied. And most states have not caught their laws up to this technology. Some have, and those that have would probably not apply here since it's all in public view to begin with.

 

[just_bruce]

(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".

So, in this case nothing serves as a screen to that visibility. Had there been a 6' high SOLID fence blocking view, it could be argued that taking to the skies for observation was a violation of a reasonable expectation of privacy the fence creates. However, there are cases where the court has held that neighboring homes' second floors are reasonable observation points, so it's still a grey area especially if the drone remains outside the property lines of the observed parcel.

Just my .02, but the standard is actually quite high and pretty established in most locales in these United States.

 

[so low still grounded]

? ok so before he shot the drone down did he shoot down a flying dump truck? Or is this just a dedicated used part drone dealer? Give me his contact details looking for a few solo batteries and props.


Judging from the trash in this fellows yard this is most likely how he shoots the drones down

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[june03dr]

Hahaha, that drone took so many shots before it went down as if it was wrapped in Kevlar lol. When I first saw this video I Yelled at the screen “ dude now it’s your chance! OK now bank left!“ Crash and burn

? ok so before he shot the drone down did he shoot down a flying dump truck? Or is this just a dedicated used part drone dealer? Give me his contact details looking for a few solo batteries and props.

 

[CAMXPOSURE]

I can see that the person flying was actively seeking to view the property by his hiding as the camper covered black truck drove by - that said truck roams the area if you watch... regardless there is nothing that can draw evidence aside from assumption- which can be prevalent in cases without representation

 

[brianuc4]

Property is trashed. It's obvious the drone was getting footage of it.

 

[User Name]

I'm absolutely not one to defend people shooting down drones, and if that's what happened here (definitely not certain), then the shooter should face some repercussions.

But wow, I'd honestly have to say the pilot was bordering heavily on harassment/invasion of privacy. The drone wasn't very high and when the (presumable) property owner was clearly displeased with it's presence... he should have left.

The pilot got all the footage he needed to prove whatever point he had in the first minute to maybe a minute and a half. After that, it was just pure pushing his luck... and his luck ran out. I hope what he got was worth the loss of his Mavic. I don't suspect the guy had the balls to go ask for it back!

 

[brianuc4]

Agreed ^

 

[Pedals2Paddles]

I agree. While what the operator was doing doesn't appear to illegal or unsafe, there does come a point where you bear some personal responsibility to not poke a sleeping bear. For that reason, I have little sympathy for the loss of the drone. The operator chose to stay on station over a known disgruntled neighbor and the results were not unsurprising or unexpected. It doesn't make it ok or justify the homeowner's actions. Just saying the operator needs to be smarter.

 

[David Boulanger]

This is a perfect example of why a Solo with a Gopro is better than a Mavic. Imagine a Solo with MAS props, at 400 feet, with a Peau 5.4mm equipped Gopro set a medium FOV, at 2.7 K. This angry property owner would never have heard or saw it.

 

[skyhax]

painted sky blue

 

[Craig L. Johnson - USMC]

I agree, with solo and a go pro, you could have shot the video at a greater distance from the property.

man! that's a lot of trash. I would also bet in the area that he is in...I would not be surprise if he would not have other small animals like rats, mice, snake, etc.

 

[solofurlan]

The operator has his drone over the property for five minutes plus could have gotten what he needed in under a minute. You can see the property owner throw
a rock at the drone at the start of video. My thinking he is just trying to irk the property owner. Nothing showing a gun being fired so that said the drone operator
was asking for trouble. Don't forget the old saying "Dead Right"

 

[jeffbanke]

Technically the drone operator is in violation for flying over people isn't he?
FAA requires special dispensation for that if my memory serves right

 

[just_bruce]

You have to actually be over an unprotected portion of a person's body. Not just in the vicinity of a live human. At no point does he appear to my eye to anywhere near directly overhead of an unprotected human.

Protection in this case is any structure capable of preventing injury due to a falling vehicle. Also included are stationary motor vehicles.