Right to shoot at drones

[davsel]

We'll see what happens on appeal, but this is good news.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...-downed-drone/

“He had a right to shoot at this drone, and I’m gonna dismiss this charge.” With that, Judge Rebecca Ward gaveled the case against William Meredith to a close. Meredith’s the Kentucky man who shotgunned a drone out of the sky that he suspected was ogling his teenage daughter as she sunned herself. He faced charges of criminal mischief and wanton endangerment. “’The next time something like this happens, they’re gonna refer to it,’ Merideth said about future cases involving drones. ‘Now I don’t encourage people to just go out and start blasting stuff for no reason – but three times in one day, three times over the course of a year, six times total, over one property? That’s not right, that’s harassment.'” Justice served?

[airborneranger]

The best part of the story happened when the toy drone operator tried to retrieve it. That is when Mr. Meredith told him that if he crossed the sidewalk there would be another shooting.

[Robb]

Damn Good for him. Very happy to see it play out this way.
It wasn't a drone photographing property or whatever, but peeping at your family, through windows whatever, I'm glad he won the case. Hopefully it se
ts some kind of precident

[Dave_L]

If we can shoot wild dogs, we damn well better be able to shoot wild drones.

[Martinjmpr]

So I guess I'm the only one who thinks shooting at drones is a monumentally stupid idea?

I can think of at least 2 reasons why this is dumb.

First, when you fire a gun you are legally responsible for where that projectile goes. Maybe it goes into the drone, or maybe it goes into someone's front window, either way you are 100% liable. Shooting at flying objects is not easy even under the best circumstances. I hope he's using bird shot because a buckshot pellet can travel quite a distance and still pack a punch.

Second, assuming your aim is true and you hit the drone, again, YOU are now 100% responsible for what happens to it. Maybe it just falls to the ground, but then again, maybe it goes out of control and hits someone's home, a car on the highway, passing pedestrian, etc.

I guess I don't get the tinfoil-hatted paranoia about drones. Using an ominous term like 'drones' makes it sound like they are predator drones flying over us with Hellfire missiles ready to shoot at innocent citizens at the press of a button, or heartless Terminators forever looking for Sarah Connor.

OTOH, Calling them "remote control airplanes" (which is exactly what they are) makes them sound more like a toy (which, again, is what they are.)

[Gman]

OTOH, Calling them "remote control airplanes" (which is exactly what they are) makes them sound more like a toy (which, again, is what they are.)

Hey, let's make peeping Toms with video recorders a protected class.

When they have cameras on them and are looking in your windows or flying over your private property, they cease to be a "toy".

7 1/2 or 8 shot is enough to take out a drone and isn't going to hurt anybody as it falls back to the ground.

[sniper7]

Hey, let's make peeping Toms with video recorders a protected class.

When they have cameras on them and are looking in your windows or flying over your private property, they cease to be a "toy".

7 1/2 or 8 shot is enough to take out a drone and isn't going to hurt anybody as it falls back to the ground.

Id disagree on that last part. My good hunting partner had a guy in his group pheasant hunting almost lose his eye last year when he was a blocker and caught a piece of shot just under his eye which embedded. One more reason to wear eye protection

[Martinjmpr]

Hey, if the kids next door are playing Frisbee am I legally allowed to blast the Frisbee out of the air if it crosses my property line?

[KS63]

How about shooting down this "drone"? This is info that we expect coming from North Korea...

http://abcnews.go.com/US/military-bl...ry?id=34799147

[Aloha_Shooter]

Martinjmpr, I'll disagree with some caveats. We should be exercising judgment any time we pull out a firearm and observing all the safety rules we were trained by -- including knowing your target and what's beyond. The guy in question said he thought the drone was trying to take pictures of his teenage daughter who was sunbathing. With that in mind, I see nothing wrong with downing it with a shotgun if the drone is doing multiple low level passes as was claimed and he knows there's nothing beyond the drone in his zone of fire. Whole different situation if there was an apartment building or a plane behind the drone when he fired.

I have a couple of multicopters, one big, one tiny, and another on order so I don't want people shooting at them but I'm also not going to be doing low level passes over the neighbor's girls in their backyard. If someone is doing passes over my backyard while I'm in the hot tub, I'm not firing at it in an urban residential neighborhood (and having to look at pictures of me in the hot tub is probably punishment enough anyway) but if I was out in the country and had a safe shot, I'd certainly consider it an option if I thought he was snooping on my wife or daughter.