This afternoon as I was driving, there was an interesting program on drones on a local public radio station. While there are many worthwhile uses for pilotless small aircraft, there are concerns about privacy. While I’ve been against firearms, I now see a use for them. As soon as a drone trespasses one’s property lines, using a shotgun or rifle to blast them out of the sky seems reasonable. While it’s usually illegal to fire a weapon in city limits, I think this could come under the self-defense exception. Comments? :lol:
Occam
Why stop at “drones”(which are being used for all kinds of useful purposes)
Shoot the little neighbor boy’s kite down down too. It could have cameras.
Better shoot down airplanes and helicopters that fly over you too. They could be spying on you with cameras.
Next keep the meter reader off of your property-he could be a spy.
The pizza delivery guy could have hidden microphones…or maybe he’s bugging the pizza box?
You never know…
I tried to limit it to drones because they don’t have any other regulations. There are federal laws permitting aircraft to fly over property, and to get utilities one has to sign a contract (which no one reads) that allows the meter readers and repair personnel onto one’s property. And the same goes for ordering a pizza. I know you have a point, Vy, but I don’t think we’d get away with it for very long is we started knocking off meter readers and delivery people. :lol:
Occam
An airplane or helicopter can be 20,000 ft. above you and read the newspaper in your hands on the back patio Occam.
I agree that modern technology has shot our privacy all to hell, but the FAA does control what we can do with piloted aircraft, and they’re probably writing similar regulations for drones, but for now if one wants to nude sunbathe in the privacy of their back yard, they shouldn’t have to worry about some jerk with a camera on a drone publicizing it.
And the A__holes should buy their own newspaper. :lol:
Occam
An airplane or helicopter can be 20,000 ft. above you and read the newspaper in your hands on the back patio Occam.And this capability has been available for a loooong time. Back when I administered a Dept. Of Labor program for Native Americans one of our board members was a retired Air Force major with some pull at the Wright Pat Air base. This was in 1978. He requested a fly over of an area that had once been a Shawnee village and the resulting photos (taken with a regular camera and infra red, I saw the pics BTW) showed details of fire pits, unseen even on the ground. The detail was incredible and that was almost forty years go. Now with google Earth I can see the toys our granddaughters have scattered all over our back yard. They really don't need drones to spy on us. Every now and then I stand in my back yard and flip the bird skyward just to let them know I'm watching too! Cap't Jack
The FAA is currently working on regulations for these devices in an attempt to balance the benefits, harms and risks. Drones have a lot of potential but of course as with any new technology there is always the potential for abuse.
I am optimistic that we can come up with regulations that will allow use of drones for things like hobbyists, creative uses like photography and film], and even scientific uses. Where it gets a little sticky is surveillance. Where is the line between legitimate surveillance uses and invasion of privacy. Safety is another issue. How do we regulate these things so that they don’t interfere with and endanger commercial and private manned aircraft. There are also environmental concerns from effects on wildlife to the deterioration of the natural beauty of our environment if the skies become cluttered with drones ( Do we really want a sky full of Pizza and smiling Amazon boxes?).
I think Occam’s concern is a real one. Individuals can now buy pretty sophisticated drones with cameras capable of taking HD video for less than $500. Its one thing to allow casual passage of a drone over one’s property but what happens when an annoying neighbor has his drone hovering over your yard for 15 or 20 minutes filming your kids or peeking in your windows? Should we all be allowed to shoot them down or buy some other type of anti-drone technology ( a canon that shoots a net over the drone?). Should we have limits on what can be filmed?
All new technologies require regulations to balance the risks and benefits. The tech here has real potential for good as well as bad. We just need the legislation to catch up with the technology.
Should we all be allowed to shoot them down or buy some other type of anti-drone technology ( a canon that shoots a net over the drone?).A blue or green laser pointer should be able to destroy the camera, don't you think? But take care that there are no persons somewhere in-line in front of, or behind the drone...
http://www.techspot.com/news/57074-faa-permits-first-commercial-drone-over-land.html In an effort to ease restrictions on commercial drone use in the US, the Federal Aviation Administration for the first time has granted permission for a commercial drone to fly over land. The government agency has permitted oil company BP and drone manufacturer AeroVironment to fly unmanned aircrafts over Prudhoe Bay in Alaska, which is home to North America's largest oil field. The drone-maker said it was awarded a five-year contract with BP. The Puma AE, a hand-launched drone that is about 4½ feet long with a wingspan of 9 feet, will be used to survey pipelines, roads, and equipment for BP. AeroVironment flew the drone on its first commercial flight Sunday.
Drones Approved: FAA Gives OK To First Commercial Use Over Land by BILL CHAPPELL - June 10, 2014 http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/06/10/320630017/drones-approved-faa-gives-ok-to-first-commercial-use-over-land
Should we all be allowed to shoot them down or buy some other type of anti-drone technology ( a canon that shoots a net over the drone?).A blue or green laser pointer should be able to destroy the camera, don't you think? But take care that there are no persons somewhere in-line in front of, or behind the drone... I'm not certain but I dont think that's true. The laser may blind the camera for a second or two but I tested the resilience of these chips with an older digital camera once. I pointed it at the sun for 15 minutes and there was no damage. I then tried a standard laser pointer and nothing happened. Not sure what would happen with a higher powered laser though. I think the idea of lasers blinding cameras just makes for good Hollywood spy stuff more than an actual practical method of disabling a drone.
What goes up must come down.
Shoot at the drone and miss and the bullet comes down and kills a baby two blocks away.
Great Idea!
Lasers burning out cameras would be better.
Laser beam comes down and sets fire to the Pentagon. :lol:
psik
I have a better idea. We all get our own drones and when an uninvited drone flies over your house you fly yours up and take it down. This could actually be fun. Like battle bots but in the sky. Mine is going to have a canister of silly string on the front that I shoot into the blades of the evil drone to gum up the works and knock it out of the sky. Then we wipe any images from the on board memory hold it for ransom.
I’ve been looking for an way to justify buying a Phantom 2] to do some areal photography but the wife thinks I spend too much on my photography toys. Now I have a whole new excuse…Homeland defense 
No drone is going to gather a fraction of the amount of information that is already compiled about all of us who have any kind of digital life through memberships, phones, computers, apps, credit cards, bank accounts, insurance, etc. Shooting your smart phone would be far more of a hinderance to spying on you than any drone.
Take it out of your pocket before you shoot.
I have a better idea. We all get our own drones and when an uninvited drone flies over your house you fly yours up and take it down.Heck macgyver, you might have a new event there. Good addition to all those Robot War contests going on these days. Just remember to post it to YouTube when you take down your first one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NNY1_MoAjw ======================================== Oh heck, get yourself a Falcon and train it. Birds attack phantom drone quad-copter causing crash landing www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzfiLmbhvqg
Shooting your smart phone would be far more of a hinderance to spying on you than any drone. Take it out of your pocket before you shoot.Now that's some handy advice :lol:
Bingo, here we go.
Shotgun vs Drone - UAV Torture Test by Game of Drones Aerial Combat Design and Engineering https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pl2Z9N4Q82g
Just the other day, some guy accidentally crashed his personal drone on top od AT&T Stadium. Someone reported seeing it go down. Maintenance workers had to go up and search for it. It took them a while to find it. I’m not sure how much trouble the owner of the drone is in.
Bingo, here we go. Shotgun vs Drone - UAV Torture Test by Game of Drones Aerial Combat Design and Engineering https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pl2Z9N4Q82g Signature How many times do lies need to be exposed before we have permission to trash them?That's some damned expensive skeet shooting! Those puppies cost around a grand apiece. Now, put a slug in that 12 gauge and try it again fella. I guarantee you'll scatter it's feathers! Cap't Jack
Just the other day, some guy accidentally crashed his personal drone on top od AT&T Stadium. Someone reported seeing it go down. Maintenance workers had to go up and search for it. It took them a while to find it. I'm not sure how much trouble the owner of the drone is in.Could the drone damage the stadium? They could have left it and the dummy was just out one drone. psik
Just the other day, some guy accidentally crashed his personal drone on top od AT&T Stadium. Someone reported seeing it go down. Maintenance workers had to go up and search for it. It took them a while to find it. I'm not sure how much trouble the owner of the drone is in.Could the drone damage the stadium? They could have left it and the dummy was just out one drone. psik I didn't hear anything in the news report about damage to the stadium. But they had to go to the trouble of finding it, to see. Also, you know, the roof opens, so I guess that, even if there was no damage from the initial impact, they wouldn't want to chance it falling on someone, or otherwise gumming up the works.