Posted on 09/30/2014 12:19:11 PM PDT by Paul46360
"LOWER TOWNSHIP, N.J. (CBS) — A New Jersey man was arrested after police say he shot down a neighbor’s remote control drone."
(Excerpt) Read more at philadelphia.cbslocal.com ...
You could say the same about an airplane or a helicopter. What's the difference? There should maybe be a minimum altitude to fly over other people's property, but in the age of Google Earth, people can look down on your yard if they want to.
Good
so is a drone in navigable airspace?
I certainly can't control satellites or photos from the public right-away. I'm a good citizen, I prevent despair and the gnashing of teeth by covering up and closing the blinds when necessary, but if they go looking for it, they get what they deserve. There's good naked, and bad naked. I'm a whole lot of bad naked.
Not if it's hovering in my backyard it ain't...
More specifically, federal aviation regulations stipulate the operation of an aircraft cannot come closer than 500 to any person.
lool
if someone is peeping at me nekkid, they need some psych help
;>)
Depends on the altitude. IIRC, that same law, as someone else mentioned, said you owned the air-space up to 83 feet (weird number, I'd like to see what it was based on). But that from 83 feet up, the government considered it a public right-of-way, but set lower limits on aircraft depending on distance from the airport given safety concerns. RC planes/copters and drones are certainly in a grey area. I don't really care, I think they're neat, but don't want them directly over my property at an altitude lower than what the tallest structures in my area are (cell towers/trees/power or light poles).
Where we used to live, we'd get hot-air balloons all over the place, they rarely got close enough to hit the house, but a few came over lower than 100'. We lived in an area where there was enough space for them to take off and land.
We didn't care, as we were quite certain our little abode was not high on their list of photogenic objects.
guessing we’ll have a bunch of new regs for drones
Does that cover R/C stuff, too, or just full-sized commercial and private aircraft? It doesn't make sense for R/C at all.
IF the R/C falls under FAA regulations it does. I believe there is a size limit there. However, any device used to violate privacy has already been deemed an invasion by the operator and any use of force necessary to protect the privacy is fair game.
I hope not. Model Rocketry was dealt a harsh blow for a while from over-zealous bureaucrats. They finally won the issue in court. It had to do with those who make their own rockets and the propellants being considered explosives. All kinds of storage regs came down on them, but were eventually corrected.
True dat bro.......
Why are you bringing in peeping tom laws into a discussion about toy helicopters over a house under construction?
There was no mention that such toy helicopter was involved in "peeping tomism......"
Nuisance animal license.
Crows can be considered a nuisance.
Say you were blasting crows.
True. Same applies to model rocketry. Size/altitude limits. I joined a club for a bit, and they did flights where they had to have FAA approval for launch (I know there were flights upwards of 5,000 AGL, and we were already at 5,000' - 6,000' or so above sea level in the Albuquirky metro-area).
83 feet (weird number, I’d like to see what it was based on)
It was the height the planes were at over Mr. Walter J. Cummings, Jr. farm in outside of Greensboro, North Carolina in the 1940s.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=328&page=256
Why is your toy copter over my house?
Thanks! I looked at Wiki for my original answer of a reasonable distance, but it didn't set the altitude. I didn't search on your case specifically.
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.