Comment by Ellison Chan on September 19, 2012 at 10:12am

The question is "Should" not "Can".  Any good hunter with a rifle and scope should have not problem doing it.  Regardless of that, there are already laws about using fire arms in metropolitan settings.  In the country, it's an issue of following the trespassing laws.  If someone flies a drone into another's property, they probably have the right to do something about it.  

Comment by frederic reblewski on September 19, 2012 at 10:20am

what is the altitude limit of "property"?

Developer Comment by R_Lefebvre on September 19, 2012 at 10:57am

Frederic, about 6 feet.  Maybe 1", depending on interpretation of the laws.  But for sure, people do not have ANY right to the "airspace" above their property.  Just as they do not have any right to the land under the surface (ie: if somebody wants to mine under your house, you pretty much can't stop them).

I also think Ellison's idea that it would be "easy" for somebody to shot one down is optimistic.  I have shot various firearms on several occasions, and it's not nearly as easy as it's made out to be in the movies.  There's a reason shotguns and the Phalanx system were invented. (ie: if it's moving, your best bet is to spray and pray).

I do believe that firing a bullet at anything above a flat trajectory, anywhere near civilization is highly frowned upon, if not outright illegal.

Comment by Candleknight on September 19, 2012 at 10:57am

frederic_reblewski: I would guess about 400 feet?

Developer Comment by R_Lefebvre on September 19, 2012 at 11:01am

No, absolutely not.

Comment by Ellison Chan on September 19, 2012 at 11:11am

Robert, I didn't say "somebody".  ;-)

I said, "a good hunter".  Big difference.  Also, was watching "Top Gun" on History Channel, and they were shooting clay pigeons with shotguns, from pretty much the same range that a drone would fly.  Basically shooting a drone trespassing on your property, would be like shooting ducks in the sky.

Also laws are different regarding property rights, in the US.  You actually do own the mineral rights, on your property, as oppose to Canada.   Also people do own, to some extent the airspace above their house.

Check these links I've found:

http://geology.com/articles/mineral-rights.shtml

http://www.legalflip.com/Article.aspx?id=17

Developer Comment by R_Lefebvre on September 19, 2012 at 12:24pm

The law is clear that an owner is entitled to freedom from excessive noise and passage by airborne carriers. If an aircraft is in flight so low that it is unreasonably disturbing to the landowner, the aircraft could be held liable for trespassing on your property. Additionally, if the aircraft or airport is government-owned, such flights would constitute a "taking" of your property.

That's basically the same as what I'm saying.  You don't have any absolute right to the airspace over your property at any certain distance.  It's a real "hand wavy" thing.  There's a huge difference between a 747 flying 300 feet over your house, and a small drone.  I think you'd have a hard time arguing that a small electric aircraft flying 300 feet over your house is "disturbing" you.

I have done some clay pigeon shooting.  The range is much shorter than I would think domestic spy drones would be flying at. You're talking 50-100 feet I figure, and that's with somebody standing there, with a shotgun, loaded, waiting for something to fly by.  That's a far cry from what would be required if you're relaxing in your backyard and notice a drone flying overhead.  And I'm not sure a shotgun would even be effective shooting 3-400 feet up into the air, even if you could get the aim right.

Comment by Ellison Chan on September 19, 2012 at 12:38pm

Yeah, they were shooting in the 15-25 yard range.  Well, it probably would not bother anyone, unless the drone is within shotgun range, and lingering in the property.  So, I'd say if you're property is in the country side, and some evil, and nefarious drone pilot decides to invade your privacy, all bets are off. ;-)

Developer Comment by R_Lefebvre on September 19, 2012 at 1:07pm

Sure.  But still doesn't make it legal.  So don't do it while they're looking.

I wouldn't be surprised to see people taking offensive actions against these things.

Developer Comment by R_Lefebvre on September 19, 2012 at 1:08pm

Duh, I forgot, it's already happened!  Remember that case with the gun club doing a live pigeon shoot, and an animal rights activist using a drone to film it.  They actually did shoot the drone down, so there you go!  I wonder whatever happened with that case?  

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page