Drone shooting: US home-owner faces charges

[narchee]

And yes, if I commonly flew and hovered low level over private homes in my aircraft while taking photos of people in their yards, I would fully expect to catch some bird shot given enough hours of annoying people.

Did you see the owner of the drone show that the drone was at about 200 feet and over this idiot's property for about two seconds as it crossed over? Hardly "hours of annoying people".

 

[James331]

Did you see the owner of the drone show that the drone was at about 200 feet and over this idiot's property for about two seconds as it crossed over? Hardly "hours of annoying people".

If what the home owner said about it "not being the first time" is true, that could get old rather fast.



How about just don't fly your drone over people's homes?

As a kid I flew RC, we went to a park which had a strip just for it, we didn't fly over people's homes, worked great for years.



Also I'm not sure I buy that ipad flight path, taking a small quad copter out while it is in full forward flight and over 200AGL with one shot is just too impressive IMO.

 

[narchee]

How about just don't fly your drone over people's homes?

It's distasteful yes. Same as peeking over the fence into your neighbors yard. Doesn't mean your neighbor can shoot you in the face.

 

[Silvaire]

...The fact that you're defending this gun happy lunatic is pathetic...

First off I'm not defending the guy shooting his shotgun off in town. What I am saying is that as the sky starts becoming peppered with these drones the general public is going to quickly become fed the F up with them, period. The result is going to be a bevy of ordinances, regulations and laws. Like it or not, that's what's gonna happen. The latest one is the Delta at JFK story.

As implausible as it may seem I can almost envision drones joining Lawn Darts as a banned consumer product. If an airliner ever hits one I can guarantee you something drastic is going to come of it.

And for the record I'm not defending or advocating regulations either, I'm just stating the obvious.

 

[frcabot]

If what the home owner said about it "not being the first time" is true, that could get old rather fast.



How about just don't fly your drone over people's homes?

As a kid I flew RC, we went to a park which had a strip just for it, we didn't fly over people's homes, worked great for years.



Also I'm not sure I buy that ipad flight path, taking a small quad copter out while it is in full forward flight and over 200AGL with one shot is just too impressive IMO.

Huh? It was stationary for about 20 secs, not 2 seconds. Also, you're taking the idiot at his word that it's been a nuisance but he's also been shown to have lied repeatedly. What do the other neighbors have to say?

I have an acquaintance who lives in that neighborhood. From what I hear there is a single nuisance, and it's Mr. Drone Slayer. Apparently he is not very popular with his neighbors. At all.

 

[frcabot]

First off I'm not defending the guy shooting his shotgun off in town. What I am saying is that as the sky starts becoming peppered with these drones the general public is going to quickly become fed the F up with them, period. The result is going to be a bevy of ordinances, regulations and laws. Like it or not, that's what's gonna happen. The latest one is the Delta at JFK story.

As implausible as it may seem I can almost envision drones joining Lawn Darts as a banned consumer product. If an airliner ever hits one I can guarantee you something drastic is going to come of it.

And for the record I'm not defending or advocating regulations either, I'm just stating the obvious.

I wouldn't mind drone regulations. But in the absence of laws or ordinances, shooting one out of the sky that is in public airspace is not acceptable. 10 feet hovering in your backyard is one thing. 200 ft is quite another.

"If you cross the sidewalk there's going to be another shooting." Not only is this lunatic shooting drones, he's threatening to shoot people too. The problem wasn't the drone, it was ****-4-brainz.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Why does this have to be one or the other. In my opinion they are both flippin' idiots.

Perhaps this should be handled like an admiralty law case where blame is assigned to both parties by percentage.

 

[James331]

Why does this have to be one or the other. In my opinion they are both flippin' idiots.

Perhaps this should be handled like an admiralty law case where blame is assigned to both parties by percentage.

Huh? It was stationary for about 20 secs, not 2 seconds. Also, you're taking the idiot at his word that it's been a nuisance but he's also been shown to have lied repeatedly. What do the other neighbors have to say?

I have an acquaintance who lives in that neighborhood. From what I hear there is a single nuisance, and it's Mr. Drone Slayer. Apparently he is not very popular with his neighbors. At all.

Well he MIGHT have been caught in a lie, doesn't mean the other guy isn't full of it, and that's presuming that telemetry is accurate in the first place.

Also if he's such a horrible person and everyone knows it, why did the drone stop and hover over his place, often when you go looking for trouble you find it.

Add to that how the peeping Tom drone guy was filming the guy get arrested, that screams odd ball freak who likes to bother people.

I would be very interested to see some interviews with the neighbors and hear what they have to say, I'd also be interested to hear if anyone asked that drone freak to go away before.


I wonder if there is any law which allows someone to keep a drone if it somehow crashes on your property, that would help eliminate people acting a fool with their drones.

 

[Silvaire]

Why does this have to be one or the other. In my opinion they are both flippin' idiots.

BINGO - simple solution would be to make it illegal to fly your drone anyplace it's illegal to fire your weapon, problem solved.

 

[Silvaire]

...Add to that how the peeping Tom drone guy was filming the guy get arrested, that screams odd ball freak who likes to bother people...

Just by watching his own rebuttal video and the flight path, he points to where his friends live and than I wonder okay, why's he flying over there then? There was lots of open space, why is he over peoples houses?

This guy was looking for a fight and he got one. For drone advocates I'd say it's most unfortunate that this clown has become your defacto spokesperson.

 

[frcabot]

Well he MIGHT have been caught in a lie, doesn't mean the other guy isn't full of it, and that's presuming that telemetry is accurate in the first place.

Also if he's such a horrible person and everyone knows it, why did the drone stop and hover over his place, often when you go looking for trouble you find it.

Add to that how the peeping Tom drone guy was filming the guy get arrested, that screams odd ball freak who likes to bother people.

I would be very interested to see some interviews with the neighbors and hear what they have to say, I'd also be interested to hear if anyone asked that drone freak to go away before.


I wonder if there is any law which allows someone to keep a drone if it somehow crashes on your property, that would help eliminate people acting a fool with their drones.

The guy was probably filming him because he just destroyed $2000 worth of property and was threatening to shoot people. I would have too. Drone slayer came off as seriously unhinged in that video, shrieking like a little girl.

 

[Aeric]

It's distasteful yes. Same as peeking over the fence into your neighbors yard. Doesn't mean your neighbor can shoot you in the face.

A bit different. How 'bout "same as peeking over the fence into your neighbor's yard while pointing a high-quality digital camera at his children and possessions"?
I doubt that you would be anything less than enraged.

 

[genna]

I'm assuming that the drone records GPS altitude. Wouldn't that be MSL?

 

[frcabot]

A bit different. How 'bout "same as peeking over the fence into your neighbor's yard while pointing a high-quality digital camera at his children and possessions"?
I doubt that you would be anything less than enraged.

Bullsh*t. He was 200ft up, not 5 ft away pointing and taking pictures. And even if someone were five feet away taking pictures, you still can't shoot them in the face. Taking pictures: not illegal. Trespassing: illegal. Destroying or vandalizing another's property: illegal. Shooting firearms in the city: illegal. Threatening to shoot someone: illegal. Only one person committed criminal acts. Only one person was arrested.

 

[Aeric]

Bullsh*t. He was 200ft up, not 5 ft away pointing and taking pictures. And even if someone were five feet away taking pictures, you still can't shoot them in the face.

200 feet? So says the peeper.
Who got shot in the face? I musta missed that part...

 

[Silvaire]

Not illegal but look where the clown is taking his drone. From his own description his "friends" live off to the lower right of the map. Plenty of open ground, why on earth is he flying over those people's backyards?

Because he's looking for a fight. I can see that plain and straight. He apparently likes to irritate folks just 'cause he can.

Also, if he's at 200 feet, why's he going around those trees?

 

[frcabot]

200 feet? So says the peeper.
Who got shot in the face? I musta missed that part...

Why do you blindly trust the story of some guy who threatens to shoot people and destroys property? He has ONE piece of evidence. And the evidence is AGAINST him. It's a photo of the drone well over 10ft high, as a speck, probably at over 200ft. So what's your bias that you're so convinced he's telling the truth that you're willing to discount the evidence he himself produced?

Has a single person corroborated his account?

The evidence of the alleged "peeper" makes a hell of a lot more sense. You realized the drone crashed not in the guy's back yard, but at a park two blocks away right? How would that have been possible if it were 10 ft over the guy's property?

 

[Silvaire]

The more "evidence" I see the more convinced I am that this guy was not flying line of sight, we was looking at his iPad.

 

[James331]

Not illegal but look where the clown is taking his drone. From his own description his "friends" live off to the lower right of the map. Plenty of open ground, why on earth is he flying over those people's backyards?

Because he's looking for a fight. I can see that plain and straight. He apparently likes to irritate folks just 'cause he can.

Also, if he's at 200 feet, why's he going around those trees?

 

[Silvaire]

One more X in droid clown's column - why can't we see the video from the flight?

Yer kidding me, he "lost" it?

 

[frcabot]

One more X in droid clown's column - why can't we see the video from the flight?

Yer kidding me, he "lost" it?

By droid clown do you mean drone slayer or drone owner?

Drone slayer said he took the "sim card," ie the SD card, as "evidence." So he has the video. Question: why hasn't he released their contents? Hmm, I wonder why.

 

[frcabot]

I'm assuming that the drone records GPS altitude. Wouldn't that be MSL?

Yes, it would be MSL. Technically GSL but GSL and MSL are the same at ground level.

 

[Silvaire]

...Droid slayer said he took the "sim card," ie the SD card, as "evidence." So he has the video. Question: why hasn't he released their contents? Hmm, I wonder why.

No, I think you may have mis-read that. Here's a quote from the original story:

Merideth said he was disappointed with the police response.

"They didn’t confiscate the drone. They gave the drone back to the individuals," he said. "They didn’t take the SIM card out of it…but we’ve got…five houses here that everyone saw it – they saw what happened, including the neighbors that were sitting in their patio when he flew down low enough to see under the patio."

 

[frcabot]

No, I think you may have mis-read that. Here's a quote from the original story:

Ah, thanks for pointing that out. So drone clown (i.e., owner? Who is clown?) has the "sim card"? That does change things a bit. What did he say about the data?

 

[genna]

Yes, it would be MSL. Technically GSL but GSL and MSL are the same at ground level.

The town is Hillview, Kentucky. Looks hilly on Google. In fact Google says its 540 feet elevation. I wouldn't put any faith in that iPad altitude

 

[frcabot]

The town is Hillview, Kentucky. Looks hilly on Google. In fact Google says its 540 feet elevation. I wouldn't put any faith in that iPad altitude

Interesting. Thanks for pointing that out. Drone clown should release actual video of flight.

If drone clown was actually at low altitude peeping on people, it doesn't excuse drone slayer but I have a lot less sympathy for clown.

This is why I love you guys. When you actually put out good, verifiable info, it's easy to parse the facts from the media bull**** and draw a more educated conclusion. Keep going.

 

[Aeric]

Why do you blindly trust the story of some guy who threatens to shoot people and destroys property? He has ONE piece of evidence. And the evidence is AGAINST him. It's a photo of the drone well over 10ft high, as a speck, probably at over 200ft. So what's your bias that you're so convinced he's telling the truth that you're willing to discount the evidence he himself produced?

Has a single person corroborated his account?

The evidence of the alleged "peeper" makes a hell of a lot more sense. You realized the drone crashed not in the guy's back yard, but at a park two blocks away right? How would that have been possible if it were 10 ft over the guy's property?

You didn't address your claim of someone being shot in the face...ok, senseless hyperbole, I expect that.
IF the camera was actually 200 feet away from it's subject, and not closer due to technical shenanigans, GPS inaccuracy, etc., the peeper would still have very clear images of his kids and property. You don't find that creepy? You wouldn't be ****ed?
This guy was angry and shot down a peeping-toy. I do question his judgement regarding discharging a firearm in the city though.

 

[Silvaire]

If you want to get a better look here are the exact coordinates of the droids origination point. Lots of open ground around, no need to pester anyone.

38.084067 -85.683066

 

[frcabot]

You didn't address your claim of someone being shot in the face...ok, senseless hyperbole, I expect that.
IF the camera was actually 200 feet away from it's subject, and not closer due to technical shenanigans, GPS inaccuracy, etc., the peeper would still have very clear images of his kids and property. You don't find that creepy? You wouldn't be ****ed?
This guy was angry and shot down a peeping-toy. I do question his judgement regarding discharging a firearm in the city though.

I think it really does depend on altitude and what the drone owner was "seeing." You do have some privacy in your backyard and you should. But what about satellites? What about planes or hovering helos at 500 ft?

Yes, having a drone hover a little over my backyard would bother me. A lot. But it would depend how high is the drone and how long has it been there. From drone clown's account, it was only there for about 15 or 20 seconds and was high above the ground. That's much different than a few minutes staring directly at half-naked teenage daughter. So what we really need is factual verification, e.g. from neighbors or video of the flight itself.

Quite frankly, we do need drone regulations to address these privacy issues. They are only going to get more acute. In the meantime, you can't take the law into your own hands. If it were me, I would have tried to track down the owner.

 

[frcabot]

Also stop calling it droid. It's drone!! Droid is a phone.

 

[Silvaire]

Also stop calling it droid. It's drone!! Droid is a phone.

Yer right, wish someone would shoot mine sometimes

 

[James331]

So the police let the peeping tom keep his footage of a half naked teenage girl? What if she was changing or something, now you just let a pedo get away, gave him his tools to do it again back, complete with child pornography on it. Good job police!

IMO we need LESS regulation, if someone takes down a drone over their property the police should just give the peeping Tom a police report and leave, that would take care of these problems and drone folks would just go play at open fields and other places where they wouldn't incur the rath of protective parents and people who don't feel like having a armature flown 15lb object zipping by their children and hovering and taking pictures.



As far as how long it was creeping on the teenage daughter, well he had time to ask the girl what happened, talk to the neighbor, go inside get his shotgun, load it, walk back outside, aim and fire.

 

[overdrive148]

So the police let the peeping tom keep his footage of a half naked teenage girl

Has it been established for sure that that's what he was doing?

 

[Silvaire]

Ah, thanks for pointing that out. So drone clown (i.e., owner? Who is clown?) has the "sim card"? That does change things a bit. What did he say about the data?

Well the owner says it was just "gone" and frankly the shooter doesn't come across as someone who could sneak out to the downed drone and remove the SIM card. I mean, why not take the whole darn thing? It was his "kill" and this is Kentucky after all.

From the owners story:

Boggs says he bought the drone just a few days before it was shot down.

Maybe this dude just has bad karma?

 

[frcabot]

Well the owner says it was just "gone" and frankly the shooter doesn't come across as someone who could sneak out to the downed drone and remove the SIM card. I mean, why not take the whole darn thing? It was his "kill" and this is Kentucky after all.

From the owners story:



Maybe this dude just has bad karma?

Hmm, that does sound dubious. Although it is possible it got lost on impact or something.

 

[Silvaire]

Let's see if we can make some sense out of this:

Kentucky
Good 'ol boy on porch with shotgun and half naked teenage daughter in yard
Naive geek with more money than he knows what to do good with
$2000 21st century drone
Was this a setup or just a bad mix of circumstances?

 

[Aeric]

I think it really does depend on altitude and what the drone owner was "seeing." You do have some privacy in your backyard and you should. But what about satellites? What about planes or hovering helos at 500 ft?

Yes, having a drone hover a little over my backyard would bother me. A lot. But it would depend how high is the drone and how long has it been there. From drone clown's account, it was only there for about 15 or 20 seconds and was high above the ground. That's much different than a few minutes staring directly at half-naked teenage daughter. So what we really need is factual verification, e.g. from neighbors or video of the flight itself.

Quite frankly, we do need drone regulations to address these privacy issues. They are only going to get more acute. In the meantime, you can't take the law into your own hands. If it were me, I would have tried to track down the owner.

Satellites? Show me satellite imagery that is available to a pimply-faced overly-hormoned young man that can show detail of a sunbathing teenaged girl and I'll apologize for my position. Planes? No sane pilot would go low enough to get that kind of shot. Helicopters? You're kidding, right? Someone who could afford to hire or operate a helo could pay for hookers or have a trophy wife negating the need for this sort of nonsense.
15 or 20 seconds? That's about 10 or 20 seconds longer than he would need to get a series of detailed pictures or video that he can then review for hours on end.
And if you tracked down the owner, then what would you have done? Something illegal?

 

[frcabot]

Satellites? Show me satellite imagery that is available to a pimply-faced overly-hormoned young man that can show detail of a sunbathing teenaged girl and I'll apologize for my position. Planes? No sane pilot would go low enough to get that kind of shot. Helicopters? You're kidding, right? Someone who could afford to hire or operate a helo could pay for hookers or have a trophy wife negating the need for this sort of nonsense.
15 or 20 seconds? That's about 10 or 20 seconds longer than he would need to get a series of detailed pictures or video that he can then review for hours on end.
And if you tracked down the owner, then what would you have done? Something illegal?

You have wayyy too much faith in the NSA my friend. Pimply faced hormonal immature tech hacker geeks are exactly the kind of people who work there and manipulate our satellites.

I'm not asking you to apologize for your position. In fact, I'm saying I agree with it depending on the facts. But as it appears, the facts are far from certain here.

What we need is appropriate regulation. Maybe prohibiting overflight of populated areas? Or is that too much?

 

[frcabot]

Let's see if we can make some sense out of this:

Kentucky
Good 'ol boy on porch with shotgun and half naked teenage daughter in yard
Naive geek with more money than he knows what to do good with
$2000 21st century drone
Was this a setup or just a bad mix of circumstances?

So the police let the peeping tom keep his footage of a half naked teenage girl? What if she was changing or something, now you just let a pedo get away, gave him his tools to do it again back, complete with child pornography on it. Good job police!

IMO we need LESS regulation, if someone takes down a drone over their property the police should just give the peeping Tom a police report and leave, that would take care of these problems and drone folks would just go play at open fields and other places where they wouldn't incur the rath of protective parents and people who don't feel like having a armature flown 15lb object zipping by their children and hovering and taking pictures.



As far as how long it was creeping on the teenage daughter, well he had time to ask the girl what happened, talk to the neighbor, go inside get his shotgun, load it, walk back outside, aim and fire.

Meh, the daughter was nothing special. I'm sure there are more appealing targets.

 

[Silvaire]

Really, is this scenario that far of a stretch of the imagination:

Mary Beth git yer bikini on an' git out in the yard like yer Pa told ya
We're gonna lure that sucker over here and blow it ta kingdom come!