Posted on 08/01/2015 11:31:04 AM PDT by Enlightened1
A father has been arrested after shooting down an $1,800 drone that was reportedly hovering over his two sunbathing daughters.
William H. Merideth, 47, from Kentucky was charged with first-degree criminal mischief and first-degree wanton endangerment.
The owner of the drone claims he was only trying to take pictures of a friend's house when Merideth shot at the device, sending it crashing into a field near his yard last weekend.
Sunday afternoon, the kids – my girls – were out on the back deck, and the neighbors were out in their yard," Merideth told WDRD. 'And they come in and said, "Dad, there’s a drone out here, flying over everybody’s yard."
'I went and got my shotgun and I said, "I'm not going to do anything unless it's directly over my property,"' he added.
At that time, the drone was hovering over the house of a neighbor, Kim VanMater, who has a 16-year-old daughter who likes to lay out by the pool.
VanMeter said: '(The drone) was just hovering above our house and it stayed for a few moments and then my daughter finally waved and it took off.'
It then allegedly flew over the Merideths' garden.
Mr Merideth said: 'Within a minute or so, here it came. It was hovering over top of my property, and I shot it out of the sky. I didn't shoot across the road, I didn't shoot across my neighbor's fences, I shot directly into the air.'
Four men were about to confront him after the drone was shot out of the sky, but he says they soon changed their minds when they saw his firearms.
'I had my Glock on me and they started toward me and I told them, "If you cross my sidewalk, there's gonna be another shooting,"'
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
“Oh dear lord... Sigh....OF COURSE, THAT IS WRONG, ethically and legally”
That is what happened. It’s not even being debated.
And to answer your other question... City Ordinances DO NOT trump the Bill of Rights.
You have a right to protect your family when you are at home and PERVERTED PEEPING TOMS are filming your little girls sun bathing.
Machine gun quadcopter is a hoax. Already debunked.
Love it!
If I invert my question marks would you give a quick online summary¿¿
“Cool, he has his own drone blind....”
Ha! Funny... Good one!
http://freakoutnation.com/wordpress/2013/09/05/deer-trail-co-where-the-men-are-men-and-the-drones-are-scared/
As reported here by our intrepid reporter, Anomaly, “Colorado town considers granting residents hunting licenses to shoot down drones for bounty money,” July 18, 2013, Deer Trail, CO, (a town of 550, that lies southeast of Denver, in Arapahoe County) was to “debate an ordinance that would allow residents to purchase a $25 hunting license to shoot down ‘unmanned aerial vehicles.'”
Well debate they did – the town board presented a proposal to license drone hunters and added a $100 bounty for each drone caught…
I have to wonder if those drones hide in the brush and can get flushed like a pheasant with a good ol’ hunting dog or do they light on the water as easy target from a drone blind…but I digress
...
How about no charges
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/17/drone-hunting-deer-trail-colorado_n_3611806.html
As the father of 3 daughters I can sympathize with this guy, however grabbing a gun and shooting it down should be the LAST option, not the first.
First have your daughters go in the house.
Second, try to locate the operator (he will probably be close by). Tell him in no uncertain terms not to fly the copter over your property and not to take pictures of anyone in the family, especially his daughters. Also get the guys name address, and licence # if possible.
Third, file a police report. Ask the cops to talk to the guy.
Fourth, learn the laws and your rights regarding drones and privacy.
If it shows up again and the guy gets mysteriously punched in the face at least you have a complaint file.
“Machine gun quadcopter is a hoax. Already debunked.”
(shhhh, I know... but it is funny nonetheless...)
How are we supposed to know if he even has daughters until we’ve seen them?
Wha....??
Something hovers over my granddaughters in my yard behind a fence at 85 feet, it’s coming down.
Probably 99.99% of the .00001 % that own drones and hover over preteen girls are pervs. You seem to be defending them.
Of course we don’t know that’s what was happening but that is 99.99% of everyone’s thoughts.
So, if I'm to use YOUR logic and presumption, then I guess you would be against firing a weapon in your house to protect yourself against an intruder, as it's prohibited by city ordinance?
Right... It all sounds perfectly innocent.
“So if a peeping Tom is filming/taking pictures of your young daughters (2 little girls in this instance), wife or girlfriend...You are going to be polite to the pervert about it?”
Several points. It’s not been established that the drone took pictures of anyone’s daughters. If they were taking pictures, then that is a law enforcement issue. The police didn’t file charges for trespass or being a peeping tom. It would be better to try to resolve this peacefully, than it is to face these criminal charges.
“The story doesn’t say where the ‘pilot’ was located. If he was flying FPV, and from the story it sounds like he certainly was otherwise there’s no way to know whether the “friend’s house you’re taking pictures of” is in the frame or not. So, without knowing the pilot’s location it’s pretty difficult to ask them to fly over different property.”
They weren’t that far away. After all, they showed up rather quickly after the drone crashed.
Mine surely is. That might eventually be tested in the courts, but it would be after the fact. Just like this case.
How does that help to locate them? Are you supposed to go traipsing around looking for them?
If you do not have permission to go on someone’s property, then don’t go there, whether in person or drone.
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.