Drone shooting - illegal in the United States

Really thought this paragraph was interesting:

In response to a question from a Forbes reporter, the FAA cited statute 18 USC 32. The aircraft sabotage law authorizes prosecution of anyone who damages an aircraft or commits a violent act against persons operating the aircraft, or even in the aircraft, should that act endanger the safety of the aircraft. Exactly what constitutes an “act of violence” is not defined in the statute, but clearly shooting a drone or its pilot would qualify.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app
 
With the self proclaimed "drone slayer" becoming a folk hero and many people immediately say "I would shoot at one if I saw one flying around my house", it would sure be nice to see some sort of effort made to get it under control before it is completely out of hand. Prosecute someone and make an example out of them.
 
Did you guys read the comments on that article? I fear for humanity. They all beleive we are perverts and pedos and that is the only reason anyone would own a "drone". Thanks media.
 
Did you guys read the comments on that article? I fear for humanity. They all beleive we are perverts and pedos and that is the only reason anyone would own a "drone". Thanks media.
Some of those comments make a pretty good case for tighter gun control laws....there appears to be fair number of mentally unbalanced people waving their weapons around!
 
With the self proclaimed "drone slayer" becoming a folk hero and many people immediately say "I would shoot at one if I saw one flying around my house", it would sure be nice to see some sort of effort made to get it under control before it is completely out of hand. Prosecute someone and make an example out of them.
Not surprisingly, most who've gotten away with shooting one down I strongly suspect may have had a judge who themselves is paranoid of quad copters.

I read that in Michigan, the DNR (Dept of Natural Resources) got legislation to enact a law that prohibits "drones" & people who simply harass verbally from interfering with hunters & fishermen. I mention this because I understand they've been extremely effective in enforcing this law. Bother either sportsperson & you will be prosecuted. Maybe if other forms of government got serious they too could be as successful.
 
Last edited:
I didn't until I read your comment. WOW what a misinformed public! The one that got me was the guy that said something about his wife sunbathing and watching his daughter in the 2nd floor window.

These people have no idea what the capabilities are of these cameras.

What does bother me is most of these people that are willing to shoot down a drone are staunch supporters of the 2nd amendment as I am. These gun owner's often cite misconception of gun owners and gun ownership, yet they are the same one quick to judge drones and drone operators without all the facts...



Did you guys read the comments on that article? I fear for humanity. They all beleive we are perverts and pedos and that is the only reason anyone would own a "drone". Thanks media.
 
It's simple really. Remove the right to bare arms. I still can't believe in this day and age it's the Americans 'right' to carry a gun. *bangs head against wall*
 
It's simple really. Remove the right to bare arms. I still can't believe in this day and age it's the Americans 'right' to carry a gun. *bangs head against wall*
Lets not start up with gun law talk. In the US there will always be guns, that just the way it is.
 
Not surprisingly, most who've gotten away with shooting one down I strongly suspect may have had a judge who themselves is paranoid of quad copters.

I read that in Michigan, the DNR (Dept of Natural Resources) got legislation to enact a law that prohibits "drones" & people who simply harass verbally from interfering with hunters & fishermen. I mention this because I understand they've been extremely effective in enforcing this law. Bother either sportsperson & you will be prosecuted. Maybe if other forms of government got serious they too could be as successful.
Was that the state where a group of anti-hunters was filming the hunting clubs with drones? That group had one shot down. They did capture some pretty damning footage of them doing wrong as I recall.
 
The only gun talk that will be allowed he will be directly related to the story linked above.
Any talk not directly related to the story will be deleted and you will receive a warning. So no talk about having guns in the USA, or removing guns from the USA, or other countries gun laws, etc. We all clear on this? Ok good.
 
I wonder if people would be as adamant about shooting down a drone without a camera as they are about a drone with a camera? Is it the camera itself that wigs people out?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NormanNormal
Was that the state where a group of anti-hunters was filming the hunting clubs with drones? That group had one shot down. They did capture some pretty damning footage of them doing wrong as I recall.
Sorry, don't know anything about that. All I know is the law preventing verbal harassment or interfering with a sportsperson is strictly enforced.

I don't want to be off topic was just trying to show that some laws can be enforced when needed. So if our legislating government really wants to enact and enforce the law or what the FAA said, they SHOULD do so.
 
I wonder if people would be as adamant about shooting down a drone without a camera as they are about a drone with a camera? Is it the camera itself that wigs people out?
I think so. In the early days, before there were a lot of drone owners out there the first questioned ask was "what is it", the second was "does it have a camera on it?"
 
I say yes. One of the reasons some people purchase rural is increased reasonable expectation of privacy. If they go through the trouble of having a rural, tree lined property then they do have the right to defend that. Sort of. Not that I want it to happen but I would really find it interesting to see a privacy and drone advocate face off in court. If they bought rural for that purpose specifically then a camera overhead is most definitely interfering with the enjoyment of their property.

It would come down to remaining in motion or not. If the "shooter" first shot with a camera several times I think any future real shot would be completely justified.

And I'm a drone lover.
Interesting to consider where this will fall.
 
I say yes. One of the reasons some people purchase rural is increased reasonable expectation of privacy. If they go through the trouble of having a rural, tree lined property then they do have the right to defend that. Sort of. Not that I want it to happen but I would really find it interesting to see a privacy and drone advocate face off in court. If they bought rural for that purpose specifically then a camera overhead is most definitely interfering with the enjoyment of their property.

It would come down to remaining in motion or not. If the "shooter" first shot with a camera several times I think any future real shot would be completely justified.

And I'm a drone lover.
Interesting to consider where this will fall.
I hear what your saying and live in the country .Take drones out of this picture...Had a member show me in my yard pushing a wheel
barrel from Google earth street view so if you want total privacy move under ground .
Just saying .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lonewolf

Recent Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,094
Messages
1,467,590
Members
104,977
Latest member
wkflysaphan4