Shoot that drone down

On 2016-05-28 02:13, Rich A wrote:
So, you can't shoot a drone down that's invading your privacy, but of course the STATE wants weapons to bring them down. The wonderful, wonderful STATE.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...k-police-72271

That's not so bad. I'd use a shotgun myself - there wouldn't be much
surviving it. Several firms have developed microwave transmitters that
put a powerful, narrow beam pulse on the drone to disrupt the
electronics - after the crash it might not be all that salvageable.

At least one US case was thrown out after a homeowner shot down a drone
due to invasion of privacy. That sets precedence.

Not sure about Canada or other locales where shooting a shotgun is
considered damned impolite, wot.

--
She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics.
-Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

At least one US case was thrown out after a homeowner shot down a drone
due to invasion of privacy. That sets precedence.

that was because it was creeping on his teenage daughter by the pool.

On 2016-05-28 10:04, nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

At least one US case was thrown out after a homeowner shot down a drone
due to invasion of privacy. That sets precedence.

that was because it was creeping on his teenage daughter by the pool.

The ruling cited privacy. What that privacy is is irrelevant.

--
She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics.
-Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

At least one US case was thrown out after a homeowner shot down a drone
due to invasion of privacy. That sets precedence.

that was because it was creeping on his teenage daughter by the pool.

The ruling cited privacy. What that privacy is is irrelevant.

it's not irrelevant. he said that if it just flew over his property or
if it was much higher (where it couldn't get closeup views of his
daughter), he wouldn't have bothered.

the fact that it was low enough and close enough to creep on her was
why he took action.

On 2016-05-28 11:40, nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

At least one US case was thrown out after a homeowner shot down a drone
due to invasion of privacy. That sets precedence.

that was because it was creeping on his teenage daughter by the pool.

The ruling cited privacy. What that privacy is is irrelevant.

it's not irrelevant.

Of course it's irrelevant. Privacy means nobody should know what the
substance of what was private. The father's motivations may be narrower
- but the judge's ruling is what was relevant: privacy.

--
She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics.
-Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

At least one US case was thrown out after a homeowner shot down a drone
due to invasion of privacy. That sets precedence.

that was because it was creeping on his teenage daughter by the pool.

The ruling cited privacy. What that privacy is is irrelevant.

it's not irrelevant.

Of course it's irrelevant. Privacy means nobody should know what the
substance of what was private. The father's motivations may be narrower
- but the judge's ruling is what was relevant: privacy.

then why not shoot down *any* plane that overflys someone's property?

where i live, small planes often fly over houses at around 2000 feet
(the lowest i've seen is 1700 feet).

someone on board could have a high resolution camera with a long
telephoto lens and get far better quality results than from an fpv
drone that's a few hundred feet up.