A precedent has been set; although, a slightly dangerous one.

Judge rules man had right to shoot down drone over his house - CNET

Let's remember, what goes up, must come down.

I have more issues with this than I can shake a stick at, not the least of which is that you can fire a shotgun blast into the air in a residential area and be found innocent of wanton endangerment and criminal mischief. After that it's a judge who's not willing to consider evidence because they're not a fan of technology. As for drones, I'll talk about the threat they pose to ordinary citizens after they address the threat that the buck/bird shot presented to every one of that asshat's neighbors. A million and one things in this country less deadly that a shotgun but for some reason they're what's subject to regulation and registration.

Have at it, folks, I'm walking away from this one right here.

I couldn't have said it better, Jake. I agree totally.

Become proficient with a bolo?

Definitely seems like some bias had more effect than actual evidence did in this case.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk 4

I can't wait till some yoyo shoots down a UAV in a neighborhood inside of city limits. They will get busted big time. Next someone will shoot a photographer because they were pointing their camera in their direction.

BackdoorHippie said:

I have more issues with this than I can shake a stick at, not the least of which is that you can fire a shotgun blast into the air in a residential area and be found innocent of wanton endangerment and criminal mischief. After that it's a judge who's not willing to consider evidence because they're not a fan of technology. As for drones, I'll talk about the threat they pose to ordinary citizens after they address the threat that the buck/bird shot presented to every one of that asshat's neighbors. A million and one things in this country less deadly that a shotgun but for some reason they're what's subject to regulation and registration.

Have at it, folks, I'm walking away from this one right here.

Click to expand...

If you're just going drop your opinion here and than walk away, I'm not even going to give mine. :indecisiveness: Which is probably for the better, since threads like this degrade into political arguing real fast, and before you know it, you have a war on your hands.

Blacktop said:

[/B]
If you're just going drop your opinion here and than walk away, I'm not even going to give mine. :indecisiveness: Which is probably for the better, since threads like this degrade into political arguing real fast, and before you know it, you have a war on your hands.

Click to expand...

I actually don't think he is anti drone. Just stating that the shotgun issue with firing it into the sire is the more serious issue.

If anyone here has flown a UAV or seen the video from one then they would know that if they are 100 feet up then the shot is so wide you can't tell anything about a person from that high up. Now if you had a pot field then yes, you would probably be able to tell that.
I will continue to fly and I am respectful and safe with my flying. I will have a major problem if someone starts firing a gun at me which is what I would think was happening.

The judge was hindered by federal statute that if you violate private airspace you are trespassing and the owner had the right to defend his property from trespass. We'll see more of this as technology often overcomes existing laws.

Sent from my LG-V410 using Tapatalk

The guys 16 year old daughter was lying out in the back. The man and others said the drone was flying below tree level (not 100 feet or more). I'm shooting it down also.

Don Kuykendall said:

I actually don't think he is anti drone. Just stating that the shotgun issue with firing it into the sire is the more serious issue.

If anyone here has flown a UAV or seen the video from one then they would know that if they are 100 feet up then the shot is so wide you can't tell anything about a person from that high up. Now if you had a pot field then yes, you would probably be able to tell that.
I will continue to fly and I am respectful and safe with my flying. I will have a major problem if someone starts firing a gun at me which is what I would think was happening.

Click to expand...

My point (almost) exactly. I know enough not to get into a debate about guns, let alone cause one, which is why I said my piece and left it lay. But the contrast here between what is seen as something dangerous that requires licensing and registration and what is dismissed is glaring, as is the public outrage about doing something to make us safer from everything that could hurt us except one particular thing. The religious viewpoints of zealots have made it impossible to even broach a subject that needs addressing, both in public and in the halls of government and justice, and that's an honest-to-god tragedy. But just so I state it clearly, asshats like this guy, with a shoot first and ask questions later mantra, are more and more determined that because they've got a gun and they're gonna use it because it's "their right" to do so, and they've made this country one of, if not THE most dangerous first-world nation to live in. I state that emphatically and with my Firearms ID card in my wallet. So when I see idiots like this getting off scot-free while putting the lives of innocents at risk whose only crime is being in the way of stray buck shot, while the guy with the drone is seen as a bad guy whose evidence will not even be considered (regardless of his intent), I'd say we've got one bass-ackwards set of priorities in this country.

Every other danger in this country is legislated to protect the 95% of us who can do whatever it is that we're legislating against from the 5% who seem incapable of behaving in a reasonable manner with it. From drinking while out on the town to deciding whether or not to answer a phone while driving to crossing a street without looking both ways first, laws are designed to protect us from idiots who cannot handle what should be, and constitutionally is, every one else's right to do with no interference. Except in one case.

Now as I said, if you want to, have at it.

@BackdoorHippie. [MENTION=6277]Don Kuykendall[/MENTION]. I'm going to weigh in against my better judgement .

First ,Don!

I actually don't think he is anti drone.

Click to expand...

I didn't say that he was, nor am I. I'm just anti anything that invades my privacy. I fully understand that in today's world privacy is getting harder and harder to come by. This is why it bothers me when a man gets condemned in public opinion (The judge did the right thing) for something natural like protecting his and his family's rights to privacy, and some asshat with a toy who thinks that he's got a right to do whatever he/she wants with it.

You want to fly your drone over my property? I have no problems with it whatsoever. Just don't fly it at tree level while my 16 year old daughter is sunbathing in my back yard, or any other time for that matter. How is this any different than someone climbing onto the top of my tree and shooting pictures on my property?

I will have a major problem if someone starts firing a gun at me which is what I would think was happening.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, that is not what was happening. No one was firing at anyone. However when the drone dudes came around demanding that they'd be reimbursed for the value of their drone, I think this man showed tremendous amount of restraint by not putting a few buckshots in their butt.

As for Jake's post, I was going to get into it with some depth, but re-reading your post for the third time now, I can clearly see that if I responded with all honesty (I couldn't do it any other way) none of us would be happy about it. I'm just going to leave it at that for now by saying, that you have nothing to worry getting hit by stray buckshot living in NJ.

@Blacktop, with all due respect, you've obviously never visited NJ. You may have landed in an airport, but you've never been to my neck of the woods, or you're simply speaking in ignorance. Next street over we have two people with shooting ranges in their backyards - all perfectly legal and done well within the confines of NJ gun regulations which site clearly the necessary perimeter under which a firearm can be discharged. I've done my research, found this asshats property and seen the homes in various directions well within the range of shot fired into the air. I know of what I speak.

I'm not saying that the guy with the drone wasn't violating anyone's rights, and yeah, if the guy's daughter was out there then that is disconcerting. Not as disconcerting as a firearm being the first volley in what should have been a face to face confrontation over what he was doing and why, with a call to the cops to mediate when it goes south. That's what responsible, thinking human beings do. Asshats fire at will. Had this happened before, all bets are off. The fact that the guy could have reasonably shown that his version of the truth was far closer to the shooter's but the evidence was not even considered shows a whole additional layer of ignorance about this. The fact is, an asshat with a toy has the right to play with it as they choose and do whatever they want with it within the bounds of the law until it can be proven that laws were violated - and that's the difference between what this guy did and someone physically trespassing on your property with a camera. At present, there were no laws violated, other than the one in which charges were ridiculously dropped. Taking the law into your own hands is not what reasonable people do in a non-life threatening situation. That is my point. The man should be condemned for using deadly force in this kind of situation when a call to law enforcement is the called for and entirely normal person's response. Every person with a gun is not a deputized agent of the local cops, but some of them sure as hell act that way. When they do, they act criminally and that requires punishment under the laws the do exist.

BackdoorHippie said:

@Blacktop, with all due respect, you've obviously never visited NJ. You may have landed in an airport, but you've never been to my neck of the woods, or you're simply speaking in ignorance. Next street over we have two people with shooting ranges in their backyards - all perfectly legal and done well within the confines of NJ gun regulations which site clearly the necessary perimeter under which a firearm can be discharged. I've done my research, found this asshats property and seen the homes in various directions well within the range of shot fired into the air. I know of what I speak.

I'm not saying that the guy with the drone wasn't violating anyone's rights, and yeah, if the guy's daughter was out there then that is disconcerting. Not as disconcerting as a firearm being the first volley in what should have been a face to face confrontation over what he was doing and why, with a call to the cops to mediate when it goes south. That's what responsible, thinking human beings do. Asshats fire at will. Had this happened before, all bets are off. The fact that the guy could have reasonably shown that his version of the truth was far closer to the shooter's but the evidence was not even considered shows a whole additional layer of ignorance about this. The fact is, an asshat with a toy has the right to play with it as they choose and do whatever they want with it within the bounds of the law until it can be proven that laws were violated - and that's the difference between what this guy did and someone physically trespassing on your property with a camera. At present, there were no laws violated, other than the one in which charges were ridiculously dropped. Taking the law into your own hands is not what reasonable people do in a non-life threatening situation. That is my point. The man should be condemned for using deadly force in this kind of situation when a call to law enforcement is the called for and entirely normal person's response. Every person with a gun is not a deputized agent of the local cops, but some of them sure as hell act that way. When they do, they act criminally and that requires punishment under the laws the do exist.

Click to expand...

Landed at JFK in December 13th 1975 at the age of 13.. (Escaped Communist Hungary with my parents and little brother.).

We were met by the airport by my Uncle who escaped during the 1956 revolution.

We drove to Maywood NJ, where my uncle owned a bakery. I attended Our Lady Of Peace Catholic School in Maywood NJ (elementry) for one year.
Next year, I entered high school in Hackensack NJ where I spent the next 2 years.

After that time, we moved to Paramus NJ where I attended Paramus HS for a year. (did not graduate). During my 3 years in HS I worked part time in a few bakeries around NJ.

Saddle Brook, Lyndhurst and I believe in Emerson. (BTW, we always had the Bergen Record delivered, so I may have even seen a few of your brothers shots)

After dropping out of HS (I wasn't very motivated in school.) I went to work in my father's bakery in Glen Rock NJ full time
I was there on and off for years. Sometimes I would leave, and travel the country, but I always ended up back home in NJ.

On December 24th of 1989 I met my lovely wife, (who is also from Hungary) and married her 2 months later in Carteret NJ.

We lived in an apartment in Dover NJ, then bought a house first in Lake Hopatcong NJ, then in Sparta NJ.

In 2006 ,after living in NJ for 30 years, we got sick of the politics, the red tape to get anything done, the crowds, the traffic, the rush and every other bullshit that comes with living in NJ, we sold the house packed up our shit, and moved to Tennessee.
Don't regret it one bit.

So, yes Jake. I know a few things about NJ. Now, you may ask "why would a guy who values his privacy so much would give out all this info on the internet?"
Because it's all there for anyone to find it anyway. This is why I get pissed about this whole thing. We have soooo little privacy left anymore in this country, why lose more of it?


(BTW, if you ever get lost in NJ, give me a call, and I'll give you some directions)

Blacktop said:

Landed at JFK in December 13th 1975 at the age of 13.. (Escaped Communist Hungary with my parents and little brother.).

We were met by the airport by my Uncle who escaped during the 1956 revolution.

We drove to Maywood NJ, where my uncle owned a bakery. I attended Our Lady Of Peace Catholic School in Maywood NJ (elementry) for one year.
Next year, I entered high school in Hackensack NJ where I spent the next 2 years.

After that time, we moved to Paramus NJ where I attended Paramus HS for a year. (did not graduate). During my 3 years in HS I worked part time in a few bakeries around NJ.

Saddle Brook, Lyndhurst and I believe in Emerson. (BTW, we always had the Bergen Record delivered, so I may have even seen a few of your brothers shots)

After dropping out of HS (I wasn't very motivated in school.) I went to work in my father's bakery in Glen Rock NJ full time
I was there on and off for years. Sometimes I would leave, and travel the country, but I always ended up back home in NJ.

On December 24th of 1989 I met my lovely wife, (who is also from Hungary) and married her 2 months later in Carteret NJ.

We lived in an apartment in Dover NJ, then bought a house first in Lake Hopatcong NJ, then in Sparta NJ.

In 2006 ,after living in NJ for 30 years, we got sick of the politics, the red tape to get anything done, the crowds, the traffic, the rush and every other bullshit that comes with living in NJ, we sold the house packed up our shit, and moved to Tennessee.
Don't regret it one bit.

So, yes Jake. I know a few things about NJ. Now, you may ask "why would a guy who values his privacy so much would give out all this info on the internet?"
Because it's all there for anyone to find it anyway. This is why I get pissed about this whole thing. We have soooo little privacy left anymore in this country, why lose more of it?


(BTW, if you ever get lost in NJ, give me a call, and I'll give you some directions)

Click to expand...

At least you didn't mention Piss'thataway' NJ. lol

BackdoorHippie said:

My point (almost) exactly. I know enough not to get into a debate about guns, let alone cause one, which is why I said my piece and left it lay. But the contrast here between what is seen as something dangerous that requires licensing and registration and what is dismissed is glaring, as is the public outrage about doing something to make us safer from everything that could hurt us except one particular thing. The religious viewpoints of zealots have made it impossible to even broach a subject that needs addressing, both in public and in the halls of government and justice, and that's an honest-to-god tragedy. But just so I state it clearly, asshats like this guy, with a shoot first and ask questions later mantra, are more and more determined that because they've got a gun and they're gonna use it because it's "their right" to do so, and they've made this country one of, if not THE most dangerous first-world nation to live in. I state that emphatically and with my Firearms ID card in my wallet. So when I see idiots like this getting off scot-free while putting the lives of innocents at risk whose only crime is being in the way of stray buck shot, while the guy with the drone is seen as a bad guy whose evidence will not even be considered (regardless of his intent), I'd say we've got one bass-ackwards set of priorities in this country.

Every other danger in this country is legislated to protect the 95% of us who can do whatever it is that we're legislating against from the 5% who seem incapable of behaving in a reasonable manner with it. From drinking while out on the town to deciding whether or not to answer a phone while driving to crossing a street without looking both ways first, laws are designed to protect us from idiots who cannot handle what should be, and constitutionally is, every one else's right to do with no interference. Except in one case.

Now as I said, if you want to, have at it.

Click to expand...

Blacktop said:

@BackdoorHippie. @Don Kuykendall. I'm going to weigh in against my better judgement .

First ,Don!

I didn't say that he was, nor am I. I'm just anti anything that invades my privacy. I fully understand that in today's world privacy is getting harder and harder to come by. This is why it bothers me when a man gets condemned in public opinion (The judge did the right thing) for something natural like protecting his and his family's rights to privacy, and some asshat with a toy who thinks that he's got a right to do whatever he/she wants with it.

You want to fly your drone over my property? I have no problems with it whatsoever. Just don't fly it at tree level while my 16 year old daughter is sunbathing in my back yard, or any other time for that matter. How is this any different than someone climbing onto the top of my tree and shooting pictures on my property?



With all due respect, that is not what was happening. No one was firing at anyone. However when the drone dudes came around demanding that they'd be reimbursed for the value of their drone, I think this man showed tremendous amount of restraint by not putting a few buckshots in their butt.

As for Jake's post, I was going to get into it with some depth, but re-reading your post for the third time now, I can clearly see that if I responded with all honesty (I couldn't do it any other way) none of us would be happy about it. I'm just going to leave it at that for now by saying, that you have nothing to worry getting hit by stray buckshot living in NJ.

Click to expand...

Guys I was just trying to calm things down here and not start any arguments.

For me to shoot video from a drone commerical use legally I either need a FAA Pilots license or an expensive FAA waiver, neither do I have the time, inclination nor funds for. I had at one time thought it would be a great addition to my business to shoot ranches and large estates but the fools that have misused their use have prevented others from beginning their use. Seems fair, afterall this is the land of freedom... The only question is for who.

A friend of mine that is a professional photographer has been posting pics from the drone she bought. Pretty much exclusively their family farm. I haven't seen her in awhile to see if she plans on using it in her business or what the restrictions around here are.

I said what I said above concerning that one situation. (I don't even own a gun so I couldn't actually shoot a drone down). IMO if you are going to use one, only use them in your own space.

I really don't understand the "my daughter is sunbathing" argument. What does she wear to the beach? And do you get upset when people look at her there?

Also, she really shouldn't be doing that. Skin cancer is bad.