Man Shoots Down Drone.

Kentucky man arrested for shooting down drone with shotgun loaded with birdshot. Drone was flying and hovering over his deck in his fenced in backyard where his daughter was laying by the pool. I personally think this is the same as a Peeping Tom spying on your daughter.
This is going to happen more often as the popularity of drones increases don't you think? Who is at fault here?

http://www.wdrb.com/story/29650818/...or-shooting-down-drone-cites-right-to-privacy

 

I see some discrepancies.

If he was using birdshot as mentioned, and the drone was flying as as mentioned, then I don't think it would have taken down the drone.

 

There's way too much he said, he said going on here for me to form an opinion. I suspect these neighbours have had issues with each other in the past, which will definitely be a factor.

However, at face value, if someone is flying a drone over my yard with a camera attached, taking video of my children, we're going to have an issue. First thing I'd do is talk to the neighbour about flying it over my property, and if they continued then I'd do something to knock it out of the air. I don't own guns, but if I was a gun person that would certainly be an option... although in a city-type situation you have to weigh the fact that you aren't allowed to fire guns within a certain proximity to houses and decide if it's worth it to get arrested for that just to teach the neighbour a lesson. Because whether he was right or wrong about the drone owner's intentions, the fact remains that he was arrested for laws he broke by firing the gun.

Like I said, too much conflicting information on this. I tend to side with the guy who shot it down, but then when you hear from the neighbour he sounds like the kind of a$$hat who would do it just to be a jerk.

 

The thing is, at 170+ feet, shouldn't it be out of range?

 

Is in the comments of the second article, so apparently its been edited since I last read it.

 

To clarify I read two different articles about this and caught a bit of it on he news where he said he used birdshot and fired 3 times at the drone up in the air. To the validity of the account of events I am not sure. Just the fact that they were spying on the girl at the pool is wrong in my opinion.

 

I also got the idea it was not the first time.

 

Been there, done that.

http://www.gizmag.com/handgun-drone-investigation-youtube-connecticut/38571/

 

I think this would be an invasion of privacy, an I would shoot it down too.

 

First, the drone was obviously not being used for a positive purpose (especially not one of the ones listed), as freely admitted by the man flying it. Second, there is some dispute as to whether it was over his property or not. Third, they arrested him for firing his shotgun because he broke the law... if surrendering his guns was required under the law, then they would have already confiscated them. Fourth, the City of Hillview police department handled the arrest as they have jurisdiction, no reason to involve the county or state. Fifth, why do you keep asking about weaponizing drones? Hasn't that already been asked and answered by both me and you?

 

There is nothing wrong with breaking the law if you are prepared to accept the consequences.

Had it been me, I would have shot the drone down, and when confronted, I would have pistol whipped the fool for potentially spying on my daughter.

I would have gone to jail smiling.

 

You assume I've never been to jail before. One thing you never do is mess with my daughter.

 

The thing is, you're saying the exact same thing I am. I don't get why you're arguing with me. I have thought it through, with the available information. I wasn't there, and neither were you. We can only rely on what is reported in the news, which along with $1.50 will buy you a cup of coffee.

As to your thoughts on the law, that's very neat, but in this country we have this thing called "innocent until proven guilty". He was arrested and charged, and the system will work through the process in the time it takes. The consequences of his actions are spelled out in the laws under which he was arrested. If confiscating his weapons is one of them, then they will do that.

 

It doesn't seem the flyer was using it for negative or nefarious purposes either.

If the telemetry and inflight video back his story, he might be able to sue Mr. Meredith for the cost of his drone.

 

I live out in the country....in the woods. If I see a drone fly over my property then I'll wave and go about my business. If I see it stop and hover near my house or circle the house then it's invading my privacy and I will bring it down.

Chances of a drone flying anywhere near my property are rather slim however. Cars are rare enough let alone an unmanned craft...

 

I never said he was. I was simply pointing out that he was not flying it in order to perform "bridge and power line inspections, roof inspections, search and rescue, delivery of emergency medicines or supplies for someone in trouble, inspection of a fire before sending in fire fighters". He said he was flying it in order to take pictures of his friend's house, which could be positive or negative depending on whether his friend knew about it and/or gave him permission to do so.

 

To clarify my stance on this:

Outside of a few friends who come to visit once in a while weeks can pass before an unknown vehicle comes to where I live. There is absolutely no reason for people to be coming up my dirt road since it's a mile long and private. So if I see a drone then it is very out of place and has no reason to be flying around the house. This is why I would be very suspicious and monitor it's behavior.

If I lived in the suburbs my actions would be entirely different.

And I had to add another post because I am not allowed to edit my posts after 10 minutes apparently. Sorry

 

Shoot drone with camera, call police. Using a gun should only be if your life or another's life (as your law's dictate) is in danger. It seems this guy is a bit over aggressive with his gun habits.

 

Possibly the gun shooter and the drone owner are both at fault.

 

Yes, but this is why we have police. The drone was an invasion of privacy, and should not happen. Not really something needing a gun, IMHO.

 

Heh.

Cops take 2+ hours to arrive to burglaries here. Something like that is even lower priority. By that time, pictures of my daughter could be on the Internet.

No thanks, I'd handle it myself.

 

Wow, we have much faster police response time here. While part of me says shoot the drone, it is an invasion of privacy. I don't see lethal force to be an option. Now, some might call my lawyer cruel and unjust punishment...:-D

 

Bird shot isn't what I call lethal force unless close range. Besides, I doubt the drone knows the difference.

 

Bird shot can kill a person, not what I keep in my home defense shotgun. But, what if the drone is shot, goes down and hits a pet, or God forbid, a baby in a stroller on the street?

Don't get me wrong, I would not tolerate the drone, just not sure shooting in a town is the best option.

In the States, you are liable for what happens when you shoot. If a bullet over penetrates and hits another person, life just got bad for you. You would be responsible for how the drone landed I would think.

What if it caused a wreck, or a fire?

To me, part of defending me and mine is being able to keep on doing it, hard to do from a jail cell. And yeah, I carry a gun every day.

 

Well, what do you propose then?

 

And if it is spying on my daughter? Do you have children? How would you feel if some pedo throws them on a porn site so pervs can masturbate to them?

Your solution fixes nothing and continues to allow an invasion of privacy.

 

I'm going to have to side with Fred here and suggest that that unless you know that for a fact, firing a lethal weapon in the middle of a neighborhood seems like an over reaction.

Admittedly, a large part of the parental job description is to love your child to the point that just the thought of someone hurting them turns off your ability to think of anything except putting a stop to that by any means necessary, which leads to over-reactions. But another part of it is to recognize that fact, and try hard not to take it too far.

As Tibbs has said already, we know nothing about what actually happened except for hearsay. The way I see it, if the drone's owner is a sex offender known for going after very young girls and selling footage of them online, by all means shoot the drone. But in every other situation, hold off on pulling the trigger and be the adult.

 

man with the drone could have been a burglar, pedophile, etc. wanting to take pics
of his kids or the women ,still invasion of privacy .
besides its good target practice .:-D

 

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I stand by mine.

Shooting birdshot in the air is a whole bunch safer than any other firearm. Those BBs coming down will sting, but they will not kill. It is obvious the drone operator is lying; birdshot doesn't have the range to take down something that high up. It is a shotgun; it is not designed for range or accuracy.

You don't have to be a registered sex offender to be a sexual deviant. I'd rather not take the chance. There is no "adult" decision to make, either you protect your privacy or don't. Ignoring the drone won't keep someone from spying. Until we get some drone legislation, this will be a recurring problem.

 

I still say call the cops, and your lawyer. A nice fat lawsuit is better than illegally ramping up to lethal force. Note how the guy seems to enjoy going to confront the 4 people with his Glock... Just not smart in my opinion.

You have every right to privacy, but how far in practicality do you want to go? You know the gubment has better photo capability in satellites... You gonna take them out as well?

 

They confronted him though, and he was on his property. I think you probably would have done the same, no?

I see it as an act of trespassing, and here, you are allowed to shoot trespassers. Same for the drone IMO.

 

The more accounts I read on this the more questions I have.

News quote the drone owner saying "“The reason we don’t have the live footage is because when we got there where the drone was shot down and a
neighbor had gone and retrieved it and the SD card was gone,” Boggs said. “We want that SD card.”
http://www.popularliberty.com/comment/43605

Later the drone owner releases video he says is the flight pattern of the incident showing drone is not flying low.
http://www.wdrb.com/story/29670583/...ry-produces-video-he-claims-shows-flight-path

If SD card was not in his returned drone, and we have yet to see that SD card video we can't know if the flight path video is showing only the second pass and the first pass,
which was the pass the daughter said the drone was hovering over her has been left out of the video he later released.

The article says "The owner of the drone, David Boggs, just released the flight data recorder from his iPad, saying it tracks the drone's path. In a video Boggs sent WDRB,
he comments on drone's path 40 seconds before, during and after the incident."

The man shooting down the drone said the drone flew over his property more than once. Neighbors say there was more than one pass of the drone over the neighborhood.
The drone owner said his friend who was out of town ask him to check on his house. He could of done that and still not flown over the rest of the neighborhood but he did.

Just leaves more questions. It often seems in these kind of disputes you listen to or read both sides of the story and you find the truth somewhere in the middle.

I am not a gun expert but question how high the drone could be flying and a shot gun loaded with #8 bird shot shoot it down? So would he of not had to be flying low at some point?

I don't question the guy broke the law shooting a gun in city limits. That could of ended badly. I don't question he was upset because he thought that his daughter was being spy-ed on. I do know I would do everything I could to protect my child!
I do question the privacy issue of the drone flight over private property.

This brings forth the need for privacy issues to be addressed by law makers. Who's rights do we protect?

 

Good post. 193 feet is out of range for bird shot. Birdshot's range isn't much past 40 yards, and I doubt you can even break a clay pigeon at 50 yards, much less 65 yards.

I question the drone owner's video. To give you an idea of how far away that is, that is more than 1.5 times the width of a football field. A drone isn't that large and I doubt this guy is a sharpshooter.

 

When I first read the thread title, I thought a civilian had shot down a government/military UAV and you can imagine how blown my mind was that someone with civilian-class weapons was able to accurately shoot down a UAV cruising at 10,000 ft...I still need to get used to people calling little remote-controlled quadcopters "drones".

 

Anyone see the local laws regarding air space?
Where I live we only "own" up to 40 ft. Housing is limited to 36 ft so there is a 10% margin of error. I have found nothing about the local laws where the drone was shot down.

 

If the drone was 193 feet away, no way bird shot would take it down. Even with buck shot, that would be one heck of a shot with the average shotgun!

 

That was my thought too.

Too many questions, but that is one we can answer: the drone owner is lying. What else might he be lying about?

 

Guaranteed. He might not be doing it intentionally, but no one ever remembers everything accurately. Part of being a human and not a camera.

 

Fixed that for ya.

 

Provide any data? Yeah, you wont be hitting a drone at 193ft with birdshot, period.



http://www.rem870.com/2013/02/22/effective-ranges-for-buckshot-birdshot-and-slugs/

40 yards range. Now you are asking me to believe that somehow this guy has sharpshooter accuracy at an additional 15 yards, defying the range of buckshot, and that assumes that the drone is at its lowest elevation; the drone operator claims they were flying higher.

 

This is at 28 feet:



To remind you, that is just a hair over 9 yards. What do you think the pattern is at over 7 times that distance?



40 yards.

Now add 15 yards to that, with a small target. The guy is lying.

 

It seems to me the drone owner's claim of how high the drone was flying is going to be the shooter's best defence for not shooting it down...

 

http://www.luckygunner.com/12ga-3-uranium-drone-load-tacnition-5-rounds

Maybe it was not regular #8? :-D

 

I think I'd shoot it too

 

bird or buck shot falling stings like a yellow jacket and there's no way he shot it down at 193 feet. The fall of the drone went way to far in the video as they pretty much fall straight down if there isnt much wind. Also why did someone just take the sd card? Im sure the owner was there in minutes and no one else would even know where to look for the drone or the sd card. Bring on the lie detector! That'll shut one of them up. lol

 

Maybe

 

Just for the sake of discussion:
The drone owner shows a short video of the flight on his ipad and he says this is the first time he has flown the drone and he only flew over the mans house once and that took about 3 seconds according to his account on the video.
So let's say we believe the drone owner to be telling the truth and the video is not altered, remember he did not release the vido right away, then we would have to think the man with the gun was waiting in his yard with his shotgun just in case a drone was to came flying over his house that day otherwise he would of had to be real fast to run in the house get the gun and locate the drone in the sky and get off several shots and bring down the drone suposedly flying at over 193 feet in the air. Quick action and a darn good shot.

There is the question of what was in the gun when he shot the drone down. And yes he was shooting a gun in city limits which is against the law. But there is still the privacy issue also.

Looking at flight video I wonder if the drone was in his sight at all times.
Will be interesting to see what the missing SD card shows.

Also according to FFA a drone should not be flown out of the sight of operator. You are to keep the aircraft within visual sight at all times and not fly near people.
https://www.faa.gov/uas/model_aircraft/

http://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/model_aircraft_operators/

 

What, you don't walk around in your back yard with your trusty shotgun?:-D

Even if you kept one propped up by the back door, would take you much more than 3 seconds to get it and shoot. Someone is lying...

 

Am I missing something?
Is there evidence that the drone was actually shot down?