Let'sgoflying!
Touchdown! Greaser!
information; not primarily media - respectful request to leave here in FF
Legal interpretations of airspace ownership
- Thread starter Let'sgoflying!
- Start date
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
Cool. Mine is for sale. I’ll take check, cash, PayPal or Venmo. $500,000.00 OBO. May consider Owner Financing.
There were some flight restrictions on counter drug missions I was involved with; I followed the policy without knowing (or caring) much about the legal reasoning on limiting aspects of reconnaissance. If I recall correctly we couldn't just surveil a field or yard without a valid reason, which I guess equates to "probable cause"? It was above my pay grade - I just flew the real LEs where they wanted to go. I remember there might have been policy driven altitude restrictions, as well, beyond the FAR constraints. ..
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2019
- Messages
- 6,165
- Location
- Atlanta / Marietta
- Display Name
Display name:
Vintage Snazzy (so my adult children say)
So.... when the ISS flies over I can send them a bill?
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2021
- Messages
- 3,888
- Display Name
Display name:
Albany Tom
Is this one of those guys that believes you can sprinkle lime dust around the perimeter of your house and declare that you're not in the United States anymore?
(I think that actually might work for zombies, though.)
(I think that actually might work for zombies, though.)
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
the hairstyle def gives off that sovereign citizen vibe fo sho.
Not at all. As he explains it, under historical common law, you do own the airspace above your property, but the Supreme Court has ruled that aircraft are allowed to fly above your property at an altitude that is legal under federal regulations, and that it's considered to be the equivalent of an easement.
He mentions that this ownership is what prevents someone from building a structure that extends over your property.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
People erect stuff over other people properly quite often. It’s called electric lines.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
Also an easement.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
There are very good reasons why these discussions are textual rather than video.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2019
- Messages
- 6,165
- Location
- Atlanta / Marietta
- Display Name
Display name:
Vintage Snazzy (so my adult children say)
90% might be a low estimate
The recent decision about corner-crossing would seem to disagree. Criminal charges had been dismissed already, and all that remained until a couple of days ago was a civil suit. Hunters used a ladder that rested on public land to cross over private land.
https://www.outdoorlife.com/conservation/hunters-win-corner-crossing-case-wyoming/
If you haven’t been following this case closely, corner crossing means walking from one corner of public land to another corner of public, crossing diagonally between corners of private land, without ever setting foot on private property. Phillip Yeomans, Bradly Cape, John Slowensky, and Zachary Smith, all of Missouri (and nicknamed the Missouri Four), used a small stepladder to cross from one parcel of public land to another while on a hunt in 2021 and in 2020.
Chief U.S. District Judge Scott W. Skavdahl ruled in favor of four hunters who crossed a corner of the Elk Mountain Ranch.
The Order states: “. . . the Court finds that where a person corner crosses on foot within the checkerboard from public land to public land without touching the surface of private land and without damaging private property, there is no liability for trespass.”
Chief U.S. District Judge Scott W. Skavdahl ruled in favor of four hunters who crossed a corner of the Elk Mountain Ranch.
The Order states: “. . . the Court finds that where a person corner crosses on foot within the checkerboard from public land to public land without touching the surface of private land and without damaging private property, there is no liability for trespass.”
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 23,962
- Display Name
Display name:
Bob Noel
e.g., watching someone talk is almost as exciting as golf.
Nah, building code and setback requirements prevent that
It would seem from the corner-crossing case I mentioned above, at least a temporary “structure” (a ladder in this case) that doesn’t fall under building codes would qualify as a use of easement.
The court may have set an interesting precedent, though.
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Messages
- 9,770
- Location
- Broken Arrow, OK
- Display Name
Display name:
SoonerAviator
Assumes there are setback requirements in every jurisdiction.
Let'sgoflying!
Touchdown! Greaser!
I’ve been listening to Lehto for a while now (i find law both interesting and frustrating) and he has some great topics.
I made it 40 seconds. Does that count?
He mentions that airspace-ownership is complicated. One of the complications he discusses is the corner-crossing issue.
I watched all of it, but I really dislike videos that use 15 minutes to make a 5 minute point.
Yes, that was my point. I think he made the video prior to the latest ruling. And it’s not just complicated; something can be complicated but still have clear rules and definitions. There’s no such clarity here.
Probably closer to 1 minute.
One of the difficulties of discussing a video is that it's not practical to post all of the exceptions and complications that he discusses in the video! Maybe posting a transcript would be better, if one were available!
My impression is that case law is not always consistent.
Different strokes for different folks.
For the truly ADD-afflicted, the video could have been summarized in less that two seconds:
"It's complicated."
Last edited:
I just thought it was funny he immediately cited a court case that contradicts his view.One of the difficulties of discussing a video is that it's not practical to post all of the exceptions and complications that he discusses in the video! Maybe posting a transcript would be better, if one were available!
My impression is that case law is not always consistent.
Now, the corner crossing stuff comes from out west where BLM land checkerboards the map. Hunters want to hunt the BLM but can't get there without corner crossing. I know of a guy that used a helicopter to give the landowners the finger. Landowners want to keep the hunters out because they hunt want to hunt the BLM exclusively. Or sell landowner tags/hunts
White is private. Orange is BLM
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,997
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
A good lawyer tells you about the complications and contradictions in the case law, as he does.
So the lawyer man says I can bust out the little 28 ga. For some quail practice when the neighbor kids drone buzzes my beehive's. Got it!
Let'sgoflying!
Touchdown! Greaser!
90% might be a low estimate
1. he literally covers the topic of people commenting on his video when they haven’t heard/understood everything before that lol!
2. are there still people who think the law is clearcut? Easy? Can be distilled in 5 minutes? One preceded or ruling and the issue is solved? Info like Lehto’s reminds me how complex & fascinating the law can be - stimulates me to learn more, reminds me how little I know!
if your attention span for this kind of topic is short, you will leave with totally incorrect ideas, it seems.
I wouldn't assume that he says that!
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2021
- Messages
- 3,888
- Display Name
Display name:
Albany Tom
Yep! I asked my question specifically because I *didn't* watch any of the video. I'm not likely to watch a 15 minute video on what seems like a 30 second topic if the presenter is someone I know I like, let alone someone I don't. Turns out the answer is 'not crazy but probably pointless', which I admit I wasn't expecting. Way faster to skim here than watch, though.
