TexasCHLforum.com

A man in Amarillo just got 8 months in federal pen for pointing a green laser at a DSP helicoptor.

I would think something like a sling shot or a thrown ball would at least emphasize how close the drone is. If you shoot it, it is harder to demonstrate to the authorities just how close it was.

I like the paintball gun idea also as those generally have limited range and are not considered dangerous if you miss.

I wonder if you could make a set of bolas that would spread out more like a net.

If the darn thing is low enough, perhaps you could wing it with a frisbee.

There's probably no Frisbees hitting delicate drone wings that can get you in trouble.

Maybe...?

I'd just use a football.

I'd prefer a water hose with a high pressure nozzle. Some of those things can shoot a water jet 30 feet or more. That would probably be enough to force it to land, I would think.

Another consideration to think about:

Your ol' lady is lying down in the back yard wanting that all-over tan. She sees a drone flying at the back edge of your property (let's say it was a suburban area, large lots with an alley in between). You walk out, responding to her scream, and pop a shot at the drone (don't miss, though - that bullet or pellets have got to go somewhere, and you don't want to hit the kids in the lot a few yards south of you).

You hit the drone - it crashes into your yard (or the alley) and you retrieve it. While inspecting it you notice the company name on it and call it. They say they'd like their drone back. In fact, they're sending someone out right now to re-posses their property. And the front door bell rings. And you open it to find a mean looking deputy sheriff, along side a guy in a flight suit.

It seems that you took down a $5,000 drone that was photographing the house behind yours for the real-estate office that's handling the sale of the house. The company that operates the drone gets $500 per house to do a package of video and still photograph, and it was doing a 360 degree orbit around the house when all this went down.

And, oh, by the way, the sherriff is there to arrest you for destruction of private property over $2,000 (the camera being flow by the drone is a special one) and its on-board diagnostics shows that it's trash, now.

Seems the drone company had a permit from the county to do the flights, and ... well, you see where this is going, don't you?

I'm not saying that the whole thing isn't worth it to you and the ol' lady, but not all the drones flying around are owned by a hobbyist that invested $49 at Radio Shack for a toy quadcopter.

Here's antoher option; build yourself a Net Gun http://www.instructables.com/id/Build-A-Net-Gun/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Yeah yeah, I know, the range is not much, but would be fun to play with!!

n5wd wrote: It seems that you took down a $5,000 drone that was photographing the house behind yours for the real-estate office that's handling the sale of the house. The company that operates the drone gets $500 per house to do a package of video and still photograph, and it was doing a 360 degree orbit around the house when all this went down.

And, oh, by the way, the sherriff is there to arrest you for destruction of private property over $2,000 (the camera being flow by the drone is a special one) and its on-board diagnostics shows that it's trash, now.

This isn't that unlikely. Last weekend there was a helo over the lake at midnight. Apparently it picked up a broadcast beacon from a drone and responded as we had a private aircraft down. Turned out to be a drone. I don't think that it was legally broadcasting on aviation emergency frequencies (I need to review how the GPS location works)... But LOTS of these things have location capacity.

cb1000rider wrote:

RJGold wrote:City Limits or neighborhood restrictions on discharging firearms would be my initial answer.
If you're outside the city limits and have no other restrictions for discharge of firearms, I don't think there would be an issue with shooting it.

Yea, there is an issue with shooting it. Exactly how much air do you "own" over your property? Pilots can fly over your property legally (assuming they comply with proper distances required by FAR). Nothing prohibits my flying an RC aircraft or autonomous aircraft over your property.

Shoot it down and you likely just damaged someones property. It wasn't "on" your property at the time. It was over it. Many of these things carry cameras. Shooting at them is not a good idea. Some can upload while in flight. Some pass video back to the "pilot" - and it's recorded.

I would not shoot one down. I would complain - and likely there is something that can be done about the person flying the thing... I'd rather do it that way.

New legislation is pending on these - so hopefully the issue will get straightened out. And I'm with you, if you're buzzing my stuff, I may feel that you're justified to shoot it down, but I don't think there is legal justification for doing so.

Texas has a pretty strict Drone Law already. You cannot fly a drone over private property without permission. Filming private property from a drone without permission is a big no no.

n5wd wrote:Another consideration to think about:

Your ol' lady is lying down in the back yard wanting that all-over tan. She sees a drone flying at the back edge of your property (let's say it was a suburban area, large lots with an alley in between). You walk out, responding to her scream, and pop a shot at the drone (don't miss, though - that bullet or pellets have got to go somewhere, and you don't want to hit the kids in the lot a few yards south of you).

You hit the drone - it crashes into your yard (or the alley) and you retrieve it. While inspecting it you notice the company name on it and call it. They say they'd like their drone back. In fact, they're sending someone out right now to re-posses their property. And the front door bell rings. And you open it to find a mean looking deputy sheriff, along side a guy in a flight suit.

It seems that you took down a $5,000 drone that was photographing the house behind yours for the real-estate office that's handling the sale of the house. The company that operates the drone gets $500 per house to do a package of video and still photograph, and it was doing a 360 degree orbit around the house when all this went down.

And, oh, by the way, the sherriff is there to arrest you for destruction of private property over $2,000 (the camera being flow by the drone is a special one) and its on-board diagnostics shows that it's trash, now.

Seems the drone company had a permit from the county to do the flights, and ... well, you see where this is going, don't you?

I'm not saying that the whole thing isn't worth it to you and the ol' lady, but not all the drones flying around are owned by a hobbyist that invested $49 at Radio Shack for a toy quadcopter.

It is a violation of federal law to use a drone for business or commercial uses without a permit from the FAA.

So far the FAA has only issued permits in Alaska for pipeline monitoring.

So to me you would tell the deputy to also arrest the drone operator.

I like the water hose they are not weather proof and highly susceptible to water.

cb1000rider wrote:

jimlongley wrote: Without regard for the legality of shooting it down, if the drone is L.E. and it is over my property, they had better have a warrant, or I will consider it as eligible to be interfered with as a non L.E. drone.
And how am I supposed to know the difference. will the L.E. drone have special markings so I will know?

I've had LE helos light up my house at 3am and then proceed to orbit it. It's a bit disconcerting. No warrant. They don't need one. And it'll make you think twice about stepping out with a firearm.
How is the drone situation any different?


In terms of spying, it's pretty easy to use a drone to pop up over the neighboring lot and monitor next door... Pretty hard to tell, unless you're on a huge parcel, if the drone is on your property until it's pretty much overhead.

Have you questioned whether those helos had the right to be there, or did you just let it slide because you assume they don't need one? The only case law that I know of is "United States v. Causby" which has been used to decide tree, ham radio, and other cases. Basically it did away, with finality, with the concept that property extends to the stars ("ad coelum") because they could foresee the days when the skies would be treated as highways. But that decision, and various state and local laws, still leave room for the homeowner to have some privacy rights for some distance above their property - "if the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere." and low flights, such as helos, and more particularly drones, which both have some interesting FAA restrictions, might still be considered to be invasions of property - "flights so low and so frequent as to be a direct and immediate interference with the enjoyment and use of the land".

So, if I see a drone flying over my property, I feel that I have recourse to legally bring it down, and I have a pretty good idea where my property lines are.

RJGold wrote:City Limits or neighborhood restrictions on discharging firearms would be my initial answer.

If you're outside the city limits and have no other restrictions for discharge of firearms, I don't think there would be an issue with shooting it.

Depending on size of the drone, you may need to think about where it lands (wouldn't want it on your Missus).

Some of the Legal Eagles on the Forum may be able to think about reasons not to shoot it but my response would be similar to yours.

My two cents...

This sounds wierd but there might be an FAA type law as well.

cb1000rider and rmr24,

Thanks for the warnings about the laser!

I don't have one, but considered it might be less problem than shooting a firearm at a drone. Guess I was wrong!

BobCat wrote:cb1000rider and rmr24,

Thanks for the warnings about the laser!

I don't have one, but considered it might be less problem than shooting a firearm at a drone. Guess I was wrong!

n5wd wrote:Another consideration to think about:

Your ol' lady is lying down in the back yard wanting that all-over tan. She sees a drone flying at the back edge of your property (let's say it was a suburban area, large lots with an alley in between). You walk out, responding to her scream, and pop a shot at the drone (don't miss, though - that bullet or pellets have got to go somewhere, and you don't want to hit the kids in the lot a few yards south of you).

You hit the drone - it crashes into your yard (or the alley) and you retrieve it. While inspecting it you notice the company name on it and call it. They say they'd like their drone back. In fact, they're sending someone out right now to re-posses their property. And the front door bell rings. And you open it to find a mean looking deputy sheriff, along side a guy in a flight suit.

It seems that you took down a $5,000 drone that was photographing the house behind yours for the real-estate office that's handling the sale of the house. The company that operates the drone gets $500 per house to do a package of video and still photograph, and it was doing a 360 degree orbit around the house when all this went down.

And, oh, by the way, the sherriff is there to arrest you for destruction of private property over $2,000 (the camera being flow by the drone is a special one) and its on-board diagnostics shows that it's trash, now.

Seems the drone company had a permit from the county to do the flights, and ... well, you see where this is going, don't you?

I'm not saying that the whole thing isn't worth it to you and the ol' lady, but not all the drones flying around are owned by a hobbyist that invested $49 at Radio Shack for a toy quadcopter.

So... you're saying the government can give 3rd parties permission to make a porno starring my hypothetical wife without her knowledge or consent?