Here we go again.
The drone was owned by John Boggs, a hobbyist, who told authorities he was trying to take pictures of the scenery. He argues in a lawsuit filed this month in U.S. District Court in Louisville that Merideth did not have the right to shoot the craft down because the government controls every inch of airspace in America........ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/01/13/you-may-be-powerless-to-stop-a-drone-from-hovering-over-your-own-yard/
here's the thread we had on this one when it went to local court.
https://surveyorconnect.com/threads/drone-shot-down.322950/
"According to the Federal Aviation Administration, every inch above the tip of your grass blades is the governmentÛªs jurisdiction."
This is appalling. I guess Federal Bureaucracies now 'decide' their jurisdiction over the private property of citizens. Thanks for letting me throw a baseball through your air to my son oh wise overlords...
We have air rights because they have been bought and sold by neighbors to secure their view of the land and to place billboards and block the building of billboards.
The TxDot ROW manager is responsible for permits of signs along their roadways and to insure that the view of certain aspects of things are not blocked by signs and billboards and accepts papers to review the protests against them.
There are no fly zones and recommended fly zones.
The FAA is the bureaucracy that is in charge to decide where it is safe for anything to be flown and they are probably beyond their reach to control what happens within the confines of my yard and the reach of my Remington 1100.
I simply must make sure that all the shot expelled does not cause my neighbors to charge me with anything.
I'm sure there will be new regulations in the near future regarding drones. The courts just haven't had time to really address the issue.
I am sorry that I have not read all of the FAA rules. They have the authority over things in the sky. Do they have authority over cameras? This leads into privacy. What drone owner in their right mind would intentionally intrude upon someone's personal space without expecting a reaction?
Will someone market the Peeping Drone for the modern Peeping Tom?
Here is an update.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/whos-sky-anyway-u-drone-case-tests-rights-132753742.html
Federal Judge dismisses the lawsuit.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/judge-rules-in-favor-of-drone-slayer-dismisses-lawsuit-filed-by-pilot/
https://www.engadget.com/2017/03/24/airspace-rights-drone-lawsuit/
If the FAA really wanted to go after the shooter they could, it's illegal to shoot anything down period. I think in this case everyone agreed it was a privacy issue and decided to let sleeping dogs lie.
A Harris, post: 353439, member: 81 wrote: We have air rights because they have been bought and sold by neighbors to secure their view of the land and to place billboards and block the building of billboards.
The TxDot ROW manager is responsible for permits of signs along their roadways and to insure that the view of certain aspects of things are not blocked by signs and billboards and accepts papers to review the protests against them.
There are no fly zones and recommended fly zones.
The FAA is the bureaucracy that is in charge to decide where it is safe for anything to be flown and they are probably beyond their reach to control what happens within the confines of my yard and the reach of my Remington 1100.
I simply must make sure that all the shot expelled does not cause my neighbors to charge me with anything.
Don't use lead shot or you'll be faced with hazardous waste cleanup fees...
Lee D, post: 420658, member: 7971 wrote: If the FAA really wanted to go after the shooter they could, it's illegal to shoot anything down period. I think in this case everyone agreed it was a privacy issue and decided to let sleeping dogs lie.
Seeing that the government classifies drones as aircraft (which are all supposed to be registered with the FAA, like any other aircraft), I'm surprised the guy is not up on terrorism charges.
I'm kind of wondering if the courts aren't buying the definition that drones are just like any other aircraft as the FAA wants. There is an ongoing case right now on the legality of the FAA's compulsory drone registration rule. The FAA might have figured getting behind this particular lawsuit wouldn't help their case for the regulations that they are trying to putting on drones.
https://www.recode.net/2017/3/27/15077998/us-drone-owners-registered-fly-15-months
Horse is out of the barn.
I wish you would quit "droning" (I'm making quote marks with my fingers) on about this.