Another baseless assertion.
Posted on 03/22/2025 7:45:57 AM PDT by DoodleBob
SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (KY3)—The House Committee on Homeland Security Chair is promising new federal drone legislation this year. We’ve recently had a lot of discussion on Unmanned Aircraft Systems after drone scares in New Jersey.
So, our viewer Jen wants to know; If we see drones hovering over our property, what rights do we have to take them down? Can you shoot them down?
Congress may not have written the word drone in the Aircraft Sabotage Act back in 1984 but the act is now the law of the land. It protects all aircraft... and that includes drones.
“If you shoot at it,” explained Grant Rahmeyer of Rah Law. “You could be subject to some serious criminal penalties, both federal penalties for shooting at what they would consider a drone as an aircraft. There are state law penalties as well for negligently discharging firearms..., which specifically list aircraft as well.”
The FAA sent us this statement: It’s illegal under federal law to shoot at an aircraft. A private citizen shooting at any aircraft – including unmanned aircraft – poses a significant safety hazard. An unmanned aircraft hit by gunfire could crash, causing damage to persons or property on the ground, or it could collide with other objects in the air. Shooting at an unmanned aircraft could result in a civil penalty from the FAA and/or criminal charges filed by federal, state, or local law enforcement. Congress gave certain federal agencies authority to counter credible threats from drones. Generally speaking, it is legal to fly a drone in most locations if you’re operating under 400 feet, but there are rules—including safety tests, keeping below 400 feet, keeping the drone in sight, avoiding all other aircraft, not causing a hazard to any people or property, and avoiding restricted airspace.
If you have a drone circling your property, Rahmeyer says you should photograph it, videotape it, and document it in any way possible. Then, call the authorities with your documentation. You could then pursue a nuisance-type claim against the drone operator.
One more thing to keep in mind, many cities restrict the discharge of firearms in city limits.
To answer Jen’s question; NO, you do not have the right to shoot down a drone.
As I posted above, you only own up to 83' of air above your property and that drones must be flown below 400'.
They may operate in an airports controlled space provided they have contacted the airport or the the control tower at the airport either by phone or using an app like AirMap.
You are required to tolerate it because you only own the air over your property up to 83' AGL.
Prove it. Let's see your source for this assertion.
No one has the right to fly their radio controlled plane over your property without permission either.
If it is not "Public Airspace" it belongs to the people who own the property underneath it.
Something is either public property or private property.
400 feet is generally the height used by most states to decide if it is a case of trespass or not.
Proof provided.
Another baseless assertion.
“Should have made that clear, my bad.”
Nah, you’re cool. I don’t like the things in peacetime either if they are misused. Emergency and police might need them. My problem is that they have become a nuisance to everything from traffic control, to emergency contingencies, airlines, and privacy. Isn’t it always the way for man to screw up a good thing? And we’re supposed to be on top of the food chain. (Of course, we said that)
wy69
Cite a law or court case.
Your baseless assertions are not proof of anything but your ignorance.
Well-said, friend
Keep your childish toys off other people's property.
It is cute that you supplied the picture of a man overcome with emotion because of his failure. Makes it real ironic.
And they may operate in my controlled space - provided they first contact me and obtain my permission.
If an airport can deny permission, then I should likewise be able to deny permission.
See no reason why an airport should be afforded greater use, enjoyment, or protection of its airspace than I.
Regards,
Ok Brandon.
Then, it should be easy for you to prove me wrong.
Keep your childish toys off other people's property.
Anything at least 83' AGL and below 500' AGL is not your property. While it's illegal for someone to fly their drone from your property without permission, they don't need your permission to fly over your property.
It is cute that you supplied the picture of a man overcome with emotion because of his failure. Makes it real ironic.
Parading your ignorance again for all to see. Charlton Heston as Taylor in 1969's Planet of the Apes is laughing at fellow astronaut Landon for planting an American flag.
Where does your controlled airspace end?
See no reason why an airport should be afforded greater use, enjoyment, or protection of its airspace than I.
Do you have aircraft operations on your property? How many airplanes take-off and land at your property?
Ok. I misunderstood you.
My point boils down to one thing...respect.
These clowns are abusing a hobby to instigate a confrontation. The question often asked is, why?
It boils down to respect.
And we wonder why we get laws passed that become intrusive in time.
I'm not the one asserting that I own all the air over my property up to the vacuum of space.
Read your own posts, you said it yourself. Over 500 public air space, under private. On or off.
And your conclusion that anything over 83 feet is legal is so dumb that no one takes it seriously. That had nothing to do with anything.
And now, unable to defend your preposterous assertions you out and out lie about what I said.
Stop eating Hunter's nose powder Brandon.
Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it?
I also showed that the USSC ruled in 1946 that ownership of the airspace over your property extends only up to 83' AGL.
Additionally, I showed that FAA regulations forbid sUAS operations above 400' AGL and that public airspace begins at 500' AGL.
Thus, the space between 83' AGL and 400' AGL is fair game. No one owns it.
I guess I should have included the </sarcasm> tag, but I'd assumed I wouldn't need it.
I won't make that mistake with you again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.