Spying drone shot down in Hillview - shooter arrested

[plantmanky]

Dont you own the airspace above your property for like 500 feet or something like that.

[Clyde]

Dont you own the airspace above your property for like 500 feet or something like that.

 

They use 500 as a general guideline but I think it's up to each locality.

[Habib]

They would have to have a warrant to fly below a certain elevation over your yard. People have a right to privacy in their yard, but only their yard. They have NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY outside of the area around their home. If you have a farm...it will be considered open and obvious. I know that it makes no sense. The same goes for elevation. You only have a right to privacy to a certain height. I believe that the point is to create an easement for planes to fly. I don't know enough about drones, but I would have to think that an advancement in technology coupled with the ability of drones to hover will cause a revamp in these laws. I'd say that that would be sooner rather than later, particularly where the pilot is a private citizen basically spying on people for an assortment of reasons.

 

It's a pretty interesting subject and this story gets at the heart of it. From what I gather, most laws about this sort of thing are fairly murky. The FAA regulates that a plane can't be flown lower than 500 feet (takeoff and landing excepted) and can't be flown under 1,000 feet in a "congested" area.

 

The FAA proposed a regulation for drones (or, really, quadcopters) that they could fly under and up to 500 feet, ostensibly to keep them out of regular air traffic, but that they had to remain within eye sight of their operator and that they couldn't be operated over anyone not "participating," which would preclude the sort of snooping (or nuisance, otherwise) that seemed to be going on here. But, I don't know where these proposals now stand.

 

Either way, there are some interesting privacy concerns that are left out of the current laws.

[cammando]

I saw some balloons hovering over a car lot last week, should we shoot them down too:lol2:

Please do !! I'd love to help ya.. LOL

[mexitucky]

It's a pretty interesting subject and this story gets at the heart of it. From what I gather, most laws about this sort of thing are fairly murky. The FAA regulates that a plane can't be flown lower than 500 feet (takeoff and landing excepted) and can't be flown under 1,000 feet in a "congested" area.

 

The FAA proposed a regulation for drones (or, really, quadcopters) that they could fly under and up to 500 feet, ostensibly to keep them out of regular air traffic, but that they had to remain within eye sight of their operator and that they couldn't be operated over anyone not "participating," which would preclude the sort of snooping (or nuisance, otherwise) that seemed to be going on here. But, I don't know where these proposals now stand.

 

Easy, drones should only be flown under color of law with a warrant inside of residential areas.

[Jumper_Dad]

I think the vast majority of people buying a quadcopter are doing it more for stuff like this than to spy on the neighbor...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJK1k0PpCxc

[Habib]

^ No doubt, but the potential for misuse is still there.

[Jumper_Dad]

^ No doubt, but the potential for misuse is still there.

True, as for the potential misuse for just about everything out there. I honestly think the amount of hand wringing over quadcopters is sad and funny at the same time.

[spindoc]

It's not illegal to discharge a firearm where I live. I dare one of you to fly one over my house and let me see it. You'll see it destroyed in 3D.

[Habib]

True, as for the potential misuse for just about everything out there. I honestly think the amount of hand wringing over quadcopters is sad and funny at the same time.

 

Is there? I haven't really seen a lot of complaints about them, other than they get called "drones" which evokes their much larger, weaponized cousins. I think they are pretty cool. But I still think their potential use for harassment or something ought to be stamped out.

[theguru]

That was a spectacular video JD, thanks for posting! I felt like I was watching Air America on steroids.

 

Drones will get more and more controversial as the government regulates them (much needed) for everyone but the government.

 

And I did not read this case but in general terms if anyone is using a drone to spy on a neighbor (or something similar) and the victim shoots the drone down I will not convict the victim in a jury trial.

[Jumper_Dad]

Is there? I haven't really seen a lot of complaints about them, other than they get called "drones" which evokes their much larger, weaponized cousins. I think they are pretty cool. But I still think their potential use for harassment or something ought to be stamped out.

I think they are cool too, but any mention of them and all you see, hear and read is people freaking out about their privacy concerns and threatening to shoot them down.

 

I agree there needs to be some control, but I think it is a fine line as to sensible control and over reach.

[Jumper_Dad]

That was a spectacular video JD, thanks for posting! I felt like I was watching Air America on steroids.

 

Drones will get more and more controversial as the government regulates them (much needed) for everyone but the government.

 

And I did not read this case but in general terms if anyone is using a drone to spy on a neighbor (or something similar) and the victim shoots the drone down I will not convict the victim in a jury trial.

I agree

[Habib]

I agree there needs to be some control, but I think it is a fine line as to sensible control and over reach.

 

Definitely, but I think it can be done easily. I think the proposed FAA regulations about cover it. We might need an additional clarification about privacy/private property, but that's about it. The worst case scenario is that ambiguous and conflicting regulations end up before a federal court and then they set the policy on them. It's unlikely they would be good for everyone.

[Bert]

It's not illegal to discharge a firearm where I live. I dare one of you to fly one over my house and let me see it. You'll see it destroyed in 3D.

 

If the things didn't cost so much, I would fly one over your house just to test your accuracy with a gun and to mess with you some.