Kentucky Man Shoots Down Drone Hovering Over His Yard

[steveincowtown]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolog ... ?ocid=iehp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The way William Merideth sees it, it’s pretty clear-cut: a drone flying over his backyard was a well-defined invasion of privacy, analogous to a physical trespassing.

Not knowing who owned it, the Kentucky man took out his shotgun and fired three blasts of Number 8 birdshot to take the drone out.

Should set an interesting legal precedent. How much airspace over your house to you own?

[WildBill]

Should set an interesting legal precedent. How much airspace over your house to you own?

Probably none.

[Abraham]

Probably a good idea to put on a ski mask whilst going about wing shooting in your backyard...

[The Annoyed Man]

FAA owns the airspace over your home.

[ShootDontTalk]

According to the FAA, none. How ridiculous is that?

I have a better idea than shooting it down. A large butterfly net made with Kevlar impregnated twine, weighted on the edges like a fishing net. Shoot it from a tennis ball launcher type affair. Catch the rascal and make it yours. You could mount it on the wall like a trophy or just wait for the idio....er....person who owns it to show up at your door.

[Wes]

They should rename this the drone stopper, launching a net is a great idea!

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015 ... rototypes/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Jumping Frog]

This was a court case quote in a different forum that addressed the airspace ownership issue.

"'We own so much of the space above the ground as we can occupy or make use of, in connection with the enjoyment of our land. This right is not fixed. It varies with our varying needs and is coextensive with them. The owner of land owns as much of the space above him as he uses, but only so long as he uses it.'"

A trespass claim in general won't work, so the person will need a better excuse for destroying someone else's property ... and be prepared to prove it.

What may make a difference is the facts being fleshed out. The drone owner claims a "flyover." The shooter, and possibly some neighbors, claim low-altitude hovering, and possibly flying under open structures. One would not be considered trespass, while the other may be a substantial invasion of privacy. Big difference.

[Abraham]

What possible reason would some "droner" have for hovering over someone's back yard?

Casing the joint for a future burglary?

Peeping?

Nothing good, that's for sure.

[rotor]

I guess the FAA owns those clays that I have been shooting too.

[Crossfire]

So, let's say I put up an 8 foot privacy fence to ensure my privacy when in my backyard swimming pool, but you can hover your happy little drone over my pool all day long and I have no right to do anything about that?

Yup. Waiting to see how this turns out.

[TexasCajun]

Could property lines extend into the air above the ground? If not, protection of privacy rights should prevail.

[ShootDontTalk]

What possible reason would some "droner" have for hovering over someone's back yard?

Casing the joint for a future burglary?

Peeping?

Nothing good, that's for sure.

Looking for illegal smoke from your BBQ pit.

[Abraham]

SDT,

Funny you should mention that as I'm currently burning down some briquets to smoke a large quantity of evolved dinosaur critters commonly known as chicken.

[ShootDontTalk]

SDT,

Funny you should mention that as I'm currently burning down some briquets to smoke a large quantity of evolved dinosaur critters commonly known as chicken.

Sounds delicious. I did that to some pork spare ribs two nights ago. They were gooooooood!

If a drone tried to steal my ribs, I would have speared it with a BBQ fork.

[Diesel42]

Slightly off-topic, but y'all are better at technology than me:
What effect would a laser have on a drone? Could someone permanently damage the camera with a laser?
Curious and thanks in advance,
Nick