Skip to comments.
Ka-Blam! Woman Shoots Drone Near Godfather Actor's Home
Fortune ^
| August 29, 2016
| Jeff John Roberts
Posted on 08/31/2016 4:48:33 AM PDT by SJackson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-69 next last
1
posted on
08/31/2016 4:48:33 AM PDT
by
SJackson
To: SJackson
Why bother covering Clinton when the media can cover 80 year old something Duvall!
2
posted on
08/31/2016 4:51:40 AM PDT
by
miss marmelstein
(Richard the Third: With my own people alone I should like to drive away the Muslims)
To: SJackson
3
posted on
08/31/2016 4:52:22 AM PDT
by
uncitizen
(Americanism NOT Globalism! - Trump)
To: SJackson
4
posted on
08/31/2016 4:52:22 AM PDT
by
alancarp
(George Orwell was an optimist.)
To: SJackson
I suppose a drone should be the legal equivalent of one’s nose. Start shoving it in other folk’s business expect it to be broken...
5
posted on
08/31/2016 4:53:07 AM PDT
by
wastoute
(Government cannot redistribute wealth. Government can only redistribute poverty.)
To: SJackson
You just don’t mess with “Boo” Radley.
To: SJackson
absent a video, there is no proof she shot the drone down.
her confession is just braggadocio
7
posted on
08/31/2016 4:55:27 AM PDT
by
bert
((K.E.; N.P.; GOPc;WASP .... We Frack for Peace)
To: SJackson
went over my airspace
How high can we claim “airspace”?
Did she bill the drone owner for her flat tires?
8
posted on
08/31/2016 4:56:24 AM PDT
by
rfreedom4u
(The root word of vigilante is vigilant!)
To: bert
To: SJackson
In the Kentucky case, prosecutors dropped the criminal charges, though the drone owner is still pursuing civil charges in federal court. Bet it never goes to a jury.
10
posted on
08/31/2016 4:57:51 AM PDT
by
SeeSharp
To: SJackson
Out West, we follow the Three S’s. Shoot, Shovel and Shut Up, concerning wolves or drones.
11
posted on
08/31/2016 4:58:12 AM PDT
by
Buffalo Head
(Illegitimi non carborundum)
To: rfreedom4u
As the law currently stands, we can't claim airspace at all. The National Airspace System begins at ground level. I'm currently becoming familiar with the newly introduced "Part 107" FAA rules, I could be mistaken on this point.
I'm not saying she's in the wrong shooting down the UAS, but she may be wrong about the airspace.
12
posted on
08/31/2016 4:59:50 AM PDT
by
NorthMountain
(Hillary Clinton: corrupt unreliable negligent traitor)
To: NorthMountain
Isn’t there a FAA rule about HAM tower height? Seems to me that would indicate your airspace height.
13
posted on
08/31/2016 5:05:49 AM PDT
by
AFreeBird
(BEST. ELECTION. EVER!)
To: NorthMountain
If I were to have anyone flying a drone over my property thus violating the privacy of my home and property, they can consider an all out attack on said drone to be eminent.
14
posted on
08/31/2016 5:08:17 AM PDT
by
DaveA37
(t)
To: DaveA37
If I were to have anyone flying a drone over my property thus violating the privacy of my home and property As I understand the current state of FAA rulemaking, "privacy" is the correct approach to the problem. Airspace ownership is not. Also be aware that using your neighbor's property for an impact area (your shot must come down somewhere) is an invasion of his privacy and a negligent (at best) hazard to his safety.
15
posted on
08/31/2016 5:12:19 AM PDT
by
NorthMountain
(Hillary Clinton: corrupt unreliable negligent traitor)
To: AFreeBird
No, tower height does not indicate airspace ownership.
16
posted on
08/31/2016 5:13:01 AM PDT
by
NorthMountain
(Hillary Clinton: corrupt unreliable negligent traitor)
To: SJackson
Tobert Duvall loves the smell of shot down drones in the morning.
It snells like...victory.
17
posted on
08/31/2016 5:14:24 AM PDT
by
Jack Hydrazine
(Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; We need a second party!)
To: miss marmelstein
I thought the same thing. What is the mentality of someone who would use a camera drone to do this?
18
posted on
08/31/2016 5:15:53 AM PDT
by
day10
(You'll get nothing and like it!)
To: SJackson
At this point irresponsible drone operators and these hicks that think shooting at ones because they exist, are both equally retarded.
To: DaveA37
20
posted on
08/31/2016 5:16:29 AM PDT
by
xp38
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-69 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson