So, there was a RC "drone" hovering above my house yesterday...I was kinda pissed.
-
Looking at the law, it appeas that the use of "model" is purely by the person making the website and not from the FAA's lawyers. Why they changed the term to be confusing when making it for the general public I have no idea because calling them unmanned aircraft in the law is both straightforward and obvious to everyone.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Did you ever consider becoming a lawyer instead of IT, Scott?
I did actually looking into challenging the bar back when it was still legal to do so (part of my "you don't need college to do this." thing) but they since found that they weren't making enough money up here in NY and added the college requirement so I lost interest. Did look into it and got a book, though.
-
I live in Ga, so I say shoot the thing down. Exterminate with extreme prejudice.
-
What happens when a drone "interferes with your free-fire zone"?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
What happens when a drone "interferes with your free-fire zone"?
There are other weapons that can be used in the city limits... or as somebody else suggested: A frisbee.
-
My dad was looking at getting a "net" launching device for capturing bees. That would cause some havoc.
-
Tiny EMP devices are what is needed. No damage, just take them out of the air.
-
Or a jammer.
-
@scottalanmiller Except for the part where they suddenly crash land, lol.
-
Drone is about to be jammed!
Neighbor's kid: Daddy, the drone isn't working! The remote is covered in red sticky stuff.
Neighbor: Only one man would dare give me the raspberry...!(sorry... I couldn't resist)
-
Taking it down with a boomerang would be pretty cool. Though I'm sure that just because something is on your property doesn't mean you have a right to destroy it (in the UK at least).
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Taking it down with a boomerang would be pretty cool. Though I'm sure that just because something is on your property doesn't mean you have a right to destroy it (in the UK at least).
In much of the US you can shoot PEOPLE if they are on your property and don't leave. Pretty sure in Texas you can just open fire. Just yell "get off my property" and if the drone doesn't run for it you are free and clear to open fire.
-
@mlnews said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
Taking it down with a boomerang would be pretty cool. Though I'm sure that just because something is on your property doesn't mean you have a right to destroy it (in the UK at least).
In much of the US you can shoot PEOPLE if they are on your property and don't leave. Pretty sure in Texas you can just open fire. Just yell "get off my property" and if the drone doesn't run for it you are free and clear to open fire.
You're talking about the castle doctrine, right?
-
The law is currently to ambiguous to dictate trespassing with regards to airspace. So at this point we have to wait for a court case to help define it.
As for nuisance, I don't think this would qualify for nuisance as long as it's within the normal sound ordinances of your town. You're allowed to run a chain saw as a much louder sound during most daylight hours in most places. Most drones aren't anywhere near as loud.
As for the camera, picture taking thing - I think you can legally put up a 50 tall later and take pictures of anything you can see from your own property. So if we take the trespassing part away by making the drone stay over the street in front of or behind your home, they can take all the pictures they want (except in California), and I think the nuisance part would instantly go away as well, again assuming you're following the nuisance ordinances of your location.
As for shooting it down - If, IF it's on your property, Maybe you have some right to destroy other people's property at will, but really, that seems pretty unlikely.
-
@Dashrender said:
As for nuisance, I don't think this would qualify for nuisance as long as it's within the normal sound ordinances of your town. You're allowed to run a chain saw as a much louder sound during most daylight hours in most places. Most drones aren't anywhere near as loud.
Running a chainsaw on your own property is not the same as running one on someone else's, though. Quite different things.
-
@Dashrender said:
As for the camera, picture taking thing - I think you can legally put up a 50 tall later and take pictures of anything you can see from your own property. So if we take the trespassing part away by making the drone stay over the street in front of or behind your home, they can take all the pictures they want (except in California), and I think the nuisance part would instantly go away as well, again assuming you're following the nuisance ordinances of your location.
Sure, on their own or public property. But there is a difference between taking pictures of you from public space and taking pictures of you by going into your space and just not touching the ground.
Again, think hovercraft or the new Lexus hoverboard.... do they exempt me from trespass laws by keeping my feet off of the ground?
-
@Dashrender said:
@mlnews said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
Taking it down with a boomerang would be pretty cool. Though I'm sure that just because something is on your property doesn't mean you have a right to destroy it (in the UK at least).
In much of the US you can shoot PEOPLE if they are on your property and don't leave. Pretty sure in Texas you can just open fire. Just yell "get off my property" and if the drone doesn't run for it you are free and clear to open fire.
You're talking about the castle doctrine, right?
Texas doesn't need castle doctrine, they just let you shoot people.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
As for nuisance, I don't think this would qualify for nuisance as long as it's within the normal sound ordinances of your town. You're allowed to run a chain saw as a much louder sound during most daylight hours in most places. Most drones aren't anywhere near as loud.
Running a chainsaw on your own property is not the same as running one on someone else's, though. Quite different things.
Agreed, that's why this really comes down to what is or isn't trespassing, and little or nothing to do with nuisance law.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
As for the camera, picture taking thing - I think you can legally put up a 50 tall later and take pictures of anything you can see from your own property. So if we take the trespassing part away by making the drone stay over the street in front of or behind your home, they can take all the pictures they want (except in California), and I think the nuisance part would instantly go away as well, again assuming you're following the nuisance ordinances of your location.
Sure, on their own or public property. But there is a difference between taking pictures of you from public space and taking pictures of you by going into your space and just not touching the ground.
Again, think hovercraft or the new Lexus hoverboard.... do they exempt me from trespass laws by keeping my feet off of the ground?
No, and I'm not claiming they do - that is why I specifically mentioned keeping your drone over the street in front of or behind the house you want to surveil.
-
Those who are worried about being 'spied' upon are going to have huge issues. Surveillance from public spaces into your private space will be nearly impossible to block, it's unlikely that you'll want to, much less be able to build a 400-500 foot tall fence to prevent the currently considered legal ability to fly a drone in public space at 400-500 feet and take pictures of you.
