This is just so cool. good for him!
Best is the 4 guys came and starting whining and he stood up to them.
Hopefully they toss the case out against him about shooting in the area
I think I'd have tried to knock it down somehow and hold it for ransom

https://www.yahoo.com/...src=unv-sh&soc_trk=ma

They were over his property, and his daughters. I would have shot the damn thing as well if I couldn't reach it with a baseball bat.

Even if it was over his property, that doesn't give him the right to shoot it down - unless the guy or his daughters' lives were in danger.

A gun isn't there to blast things you don't like or agree with. When a JW or LDS members walk up to your door, you can't just shoot them because you don't like them or find them annoying. I hate wasps, but I don't go around gattin' wasp nests in town limits...

Not to mention he's shooting up in the air, horrible and unsafe idea because he has no idea of where the bullets will fall.

The issue here is that when it comes to drones, our laws haven't quite caught up to them.

KY guy might not have to pay the 1,800 for the cost of the drone, but he's gotta do the time/fine for the wanton endangerment and criminal mischief.

you have no proof that the bullets will fall.

i have more proof of that than christians do of jesus existing... :P

the romans kept very detailed records. the man existed. whether he was the son of god is, however, up for dispute.

that might be up for dispute, but gravity ain't

prove it.

choke your chicken whilst standing up. does your baby batter aimlessly float in the sky or does it fall to the ground making a mess on your carpet/hardwood floors?

is 'hits the wall' a valid answer?

only if you're peter north

terminal velocity of bird shot isnt fatal

a drone hovering over my daughter, who is sunbathing, will get fluffed up.

sounds like a responsible gun owner to me



http://arstechnica.com/...vering-over-his-backyard/

ur such a fluffing idiot

ignoring the gun aspects of this thread, if someone was flying a drone in my back yard/property without my permission, I would absolutely knock it out of the sky. spray it with water, hit it with a pool skimmer... something like that.

oh, even better, sentry water gun hooked up to my hose.

I would have shoved the drone up the weirdos ass for flying it in my back yard as well.

i bet youd like that. pervert.

if this were out in the country, he probably wouldn't have gotten in legal trouble for shooting birdshot at the drone.

but, it was within city limits, so it doesn't matter if it was snake shot, bird shot, slugs, .22, 30/30, .50 cal, 25mm or even an air rifle

unless your family's (or property in some states) lives are in danger, you can't go shooting stuff within most town limits. it's pretty damn clear cut.


-trife
gun owner and sports superstar

Isn't that kinda redundant? How often do you see someone sign off "gun owner and anti-gun activist"...

not very often

-elvesrus
not a gun owner, but a supporter

i fixed it to make more sense

http://www.wdrb.com/...-claims-shows-flight-path

The owner of the drone, David Boggs, just released the flight data recorder from his iPad, saying it tracks the drone's path. In a video Boggs sent WDRB, he comments on drone's path 40 seconds before, during and after the incident.

"We are now one minute and 18 seconds into the flight," he says on the video. "We are now 193 feet above the ground. This area here is the world-famous drone slayer home, and this is a neighbor's home, and our friends live over here, and over here, and over here. You will see now that we did not go below this altitude -- we even went higher -- nor did we hover over their house to look in. And for sure didn't descend down to no 10 feet, or look under someone's canopy, or at somebody's daughter."

"We are right now one minute, 56 seconds over the drone slayer's house. We're still not on his property line -- we're just now getting ready to cross it....In less than two seconds...we are outside of his property, still at 272 feet. He shot the drone here, and you'll see it rapidly lose altitude, and the drone crash. Boom -- there it goes. Crazy, in the words of the great Paul Harvey, now you know the rest of the story."

uh oh.... the drone has flight data

appears that the dude shot it while it was ~200 feet in the air or higher

it'll be interesting to see how this plays out

He could claim they altered it. Who do you believe, the gun-wielding daughter-protecting property defender or the tech-savvy drone geek and his iPad?

i'll take the hotheaded redneck who's answer for everything is hot lead for $200, alex

It should cause some drone laws to be written real fast.
Probably stick with the privacy angle since they can zoom in on anything.
His intentions I think we're good but stupid to shoot it outside your own property.
He loses

Unless they were in danger?

Drones have cameras, pictures end up on the internet or worse.

I would consider a drone flying over my daughter a risk I am not willing to take.



And then you have the case of the guy flying the drone with the remote pistol on it. *smh*

pictures do end up on the internet, but even famous celebrities can't shoot paparazzi even if the paparazzi has a telephoto zoom lens on their camera.

well, i just hope that you don't live near a hospital/airport/military base that planes and helicopters fly over your house so you'd have to shoot them down! helicopters are going to have far better cameras and stabilization equipment than any drone out nowdays so if you're worried about privacy, helicopters are likely your biggest threat!

id like to say that i'm not completely taking the multicopter dudes' side, he definitely could've made better decisions on this, but my point is that the solution to this problem isn't/shouldn't be solved with guns.

also, some blame lands on the lawmakers because while laws generally drag behind society, drones have been quite accessible and popular for years now. hopefully those lazy morons will actually draft up some laws to cover this sort of issue.

Gun laws keep guns out of the hands of bad guys too.. right. Heroin is illegal so people don't use it. Selling oxy to someone who doesn't have a prescription is illegal too... nobody does that either.

Lols at the socialist who looks to the government for "laws".

ftfy

I much prefer to look at it from a very simple perspective. He had a privacy fence around his "back yard" and a pool, and a young daughter. His daughter was being "watched" by this drone over his back yard, thus invading the privacy that he put the fence up to achieve, and could possibly be used by unscrupulous actors to "scout" out a potential victim of crime, either for kidnapping the little girl, or burglarizing the house, or perhaps taking photos and videos through the bedroom windows, whatever it might be, it's dead wrong, he was well within his rights to shoot the sucker down. He used birdshot for the load, the chances of that seriously injuring anyone is slight. The danger to others was minimal.

Said no criminal ever...

That's like saying "tax laws make it harder for rich people to make money."

So I "own" the mineral rights below my property - how does that apply to the airspace above my property, and how high up would I be able to claim it as my property I wonder... not sure of gun laws there - but if you trespass on my property in TX w/out my permission.... (and as I have a 12 yr old daughter I would shoot it down also btw.... creeps)

liberal logic again trife. you MAKE zero points and a couple times contradict yourself.

How did I end up on hot naked women taking selfies???

Oh from Drone shootings to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9C-7_DBOY3o "Italian Model Meets Drone" to Naked selfies to hitting the laptop with cream.

you "own" airspace above your property maybe upto 500 feet, http://www.slate.com/..._airspace_do_you_own.html

#8 birdshot (the size used for quail) is pretty harmless unless fired at close range. Firing it into the air isn't going to endanger anyone.

Heck, even the Vice President can't kill somebody with it when he aims directly at their face.

I intend to contribute nothing useful to this thread

100% correct

#8 just bounces off anything when falling. He will just get a misdemeanor charge maybe a fine,and those guys willl not be looking on his deck anytime soon

Well someone is lying (or falsifying the flight data). #8 birdshot (less than 0.10" diameter) is pretty accurate to 30 yards or so (that is about the far a shot as you can make on a skeet range). Why? Because science. Small objects propelled thru air at high speed very quickly scatter wildly and slow down, and slower speed makes them scatter in even wider (and lower because gravity is also pulling on all those pellets) pattern. Shooting geese - with #2 shot which is almost 2x the size of #8 - I would not shoot past 40 yards and expect to a) hit a moving bird or b) have enough punch left in the shot to kill the bird.

Shooting #8 birdshot at something 90 yards away? Insane. Thats almost a football field. All you are doing is making noise and wasting ammo shooting at that distance. And that is just the physics of how the shot will disperse and decelerate -- consider trying to figure the lead and drop rate at that distance?

So either the man was using #00 buckshot (and still a really DAMN good + lucky shot) or the drone was much lower to the ground.

Personally, I am all for the guy. Why do the drone owners think they can just go anywhere they want? They should be restricted to flying over public areas (and flying over streets to get there). Flying a camera over young girls sunbathing? Bang Bang. :)

As far as i'm concerned a drone flying over your house is trespassing. What's next, are real estate agents going to start selling rights to the airspace over our houses? For Fuks Sake.. The guy didn't want the drone staring at his daughters, the drone pilot could be a scoping out his next victim. I say the father did the right thing. If they try to criminally charge him, I think someone needs to write a petition to save the dad. He did the right thing. Not too mention Drones are not just used for surveillance, but also to kill.

Screw all that legal mumbo jumbo. If the liberal pricks want to screw it up for Americans having the right to eject, or otherwise dissuade unwelcome visitors or guests in the guise of a drone, then us conservatives should have a few demands of our own.

1. Stop flying planes over my house, if you can't, you must pay me for the use of my airspace.
(assuming one could win the trial to have owndership rights of the airspace directly over your own property)

2. People that collect welfare for longer than 1 year straight and still continue to need it MUST participate in a community action service and thus earn their money while helping their own communities.

3. Lying is an immediate ban for life from political elected office.

4. The make up of the congress of the United States shall be of "citizens" who are of eligible age to serve, possess at least a high school diploma, and have no criminal convictions on their records.

5. The congress of the United States shall not arrange itself so that it is made up of primarily lawyers.

My derp isnt as advanced as this... Could somebody stab me in the eyes before i die from laughter.

22

indeed it is

does number 4 mean old people cant be elected?

Like you, I was at first in agreement. 193 feet with birdshot is a hell of a shot, but multiple shots may have done the trick, and based on the flight log, it doesn't show the drone being blown to smithereens, more or less being 'knicked' and falling into the woods.

"As WDRB-TV reports, a neighbor heard gunshots and called the police." which indicates it may have taken several shots.

I am curious if this is a repeat offense (the drone operator flying over the house). Maybe there was some buildup that led to drastic measures being taken.

http://i.imgur.com/XIiaPmU.png