I’m very sympathetic to the man but let’s just say someone shoots a drone out of the sky and it crashes and damages someone’s roof - who’s responsible, the gunman or the drone owner? Let’s say it crashes and kills a neighbor’s dog who didn’t see it coming - who’s responsible, the gunman or the drone owner? Let’s say it knocks a satellite dish off somebody’s roof - who pays to fix it? Etc.
Does the drone owner have an unlimited right to air space over people’s homes without their permission and without consequence? Does the homeowner have an unlimited right to self-defense of any perceived intruders in the air space above his head? I don’t think we want to grant either one but I lean more towards the man with the house because, after all, he can’t move the house and he has put in place all reasonable means of privacy to his property. The drone owner should be limited to public right of ways and properties where he has permission to fly over.
No. According to the federal airspace rules, radio control model airplanes are limited to no more than 400' altitude.
Also, they cannot fly over buildings and must be kept at least 100' from people.
R/C aircraft must also be flown specifically by line of sight. They cannot be flown first-person video (FPV)
Naturally, a lot of drone owners disregard these rules and do whatever they darn well please.
I have no sympathy for these idiots. They got what they deserved. I hope the shotgun blast did significant damage to their drone. The only reason they were flying so low was to shoot video. (read: peeping tom)