How to address people illegally flying drones in your personal

>>30156567
I just set up nets and claim I'm a butterfly enthusiast.

Is it fucking swooping at me? Is it waking me up? Is it doing a fucking thing besides traveling by?

Because unless it's doing any of those I couldn't give a shit. I might go and compliment his flying contraption.

>>30156597
It's recording video footage of your property and reporting to the government that you have plenty of free space that should be allocated to housing migrants and "refugees".

>>30156627
That's fine, if notified by the government I must surrender my rightfully owned land to house people of their choosing in direct violation of the Constitution I will do terrorist things as per the oath they made me take in order to join the army. Nothing to do with autismo and his done.

Drones are pretty neat. I live in a fairly urban area and I rarely see any. It's not really a problem where I live.

If I did see a drone stalking around my neighborhood consistently, I'd probably see if there was any way I could find the owner and ask them to be less annoying or something. It's not really a problem for me.

Shooting down someone's $1000+ equipment at first sight is just being an asshole.

File: image.jpg (38KB, 590x350px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 590x350px

>>30156597
>>30156692

This dude, knows what's up.

File: image.gif (976KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

976KB, 300x168px

Chase it down in my Cessna 150....

>>30156567
First you have to tell me what exactly makes that airspace yours?

>>30156567
Can you come up with a justified use of said airspace above your house. If not and you mess with a registered device you just commuted a federal felony.

Most consumer drones are wifi based . So

Either A. Interrupt the wifi signal via radio means

Or B. If it's a parot drone use the unpached telnet interface and kill all of the process and watch it crash

>>30156841
Ham radio and other Comms boys know what's up.


A short temporary wifi fuckup and no one would necessarily know that it was you.

The FAA is testing drone jamming guns so in a few years you can get one and disable the drones

>>30156841
The jamming guns block GPS signal and the 2.4 ghz band most drones have a fail-safe where they hover and just power down until they land.

File: dronedefender-1.jpg (277KB, 1280x995px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1280x995px

>>30156828
The airspace above your property up to 200 feet is also your property. So,birdshot range.
>>30156567
Also,this anti-drone rifle is available.

Buy a hunter-killer drone, conduct aerial combat from the safety of my couch.

>>30156567

But a bunch of those cheapo airhogs rc copters, allahu ackbar into any other drones on property.

File: eagle-drone.jpg (72KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 1200x675px

train eagles

Throw rocks at it with a Slingshot, cheap as fuck

>>30156692
But imminent domain is part of the constitution

>>30156933
>The airspace above your property up to 200 feet is also your property.

No it is not only the airspace that you can justifiably use / need is. The more common mention is 83 feet but that was only a court case for a lawsuit that alleged a bunch of chickens died from stress from an extremely low flying plane.

>>30158453
depends what the contract specified
I still own the airspace and mineral rights to 3 lots I used to own

>>30158355
You don't own the air.
The government does.

>>30158470
You have every right to build whatever you are zoned for but if nothing is there the air is not your property according to the federal government and FAA.

>>30158355
>imminent domain
Are you fucking retarded?

>>30158355
>imminent domain
>not Eminent domain
They pay you for your land, there's a difference.

What the fuck happened?

The first time I've heard about drones was almost 5 years ago, and back then, they were marketed as harmless toys.

>>30156567
but OP, that's not your airspace - you and every american pays the government to keep that airspace safe! dont you want to be safe OP?

>>30160716
Now they are larger/louder, fly further, can fly automatically along a specified flight path, and they can take HD video of your daughter through her bedroom window; nevermind surveying your private property as another anon mentioned previously. The fuckwits who use these things now consider all area reachable by the machine to be sovereign airspace in which they can operate. They trespass on private property and, out on a nature trail - for instance - can introduce the vile buzzing of the propellers to an otherwise beautiful, peaceful, and natural environment.

what was once a a neat toy with incredible implications for research/photography/filmography has now become a tool for perverts, assholes, and tyrants

>>30161059
Actually short if the pro models they are smaller and more silent and as an enthusiast I had all those features 5 years. As for trespass on private property no unless you consider ultralights and other airplanes trespass.

>>30158523
The government doesn't own the air, the property owner does.

The property owner owns airspace up to and just above whatever they can reasonably make use of.

School yourself, shitter.
>>30156692
>>30156692

Fun fact, you don't own the airspace above your property. The FAA regulates it, but they don't own it either. It's sort of a legal grey area right now. They are breaking no laws by flying 'over' your property. photography is not a crime

>>30161554
>photography is not a crime
if you have a reasonable expectation of privacy then yes it is a crime. flying over a fence to get a better view is a crime

File: 1456986542715.jpg (193KB, 600x739px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 600x739px

>>30158470
No you don't, because the airspace was never theirs to 'sell' you. You can't sell something you don't own. It'd be like me giving you a deed to the moon. Totally unenforceable. the 83 foot thing was because of the noise depriving the farmer of the use of his land. So unless you have a very very loud drone and your neighbor's livelyhood depends on a reletave level of quiet, they have no ndamages. If they have no damages they can't sue you. Emotional distress is a BS tv show lawsuit that never happens IRL because judges and lawyers laugh them out of court.

>>30161059
Is this Phil? This sounds like Phil.

>>30161572
THis anon nailed it.

>>30156831
In my deed i own the 1500 feet of airspace above my house . old ham operator lived here before me and set that up for his antenna

File: 1443366820221.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>30158470

>>30161572
what crime anon? cite me any sort of law forbidding this. You could sue them in civil court, but you wouldn't win a penny, unless they are somehow depriving you of the use of your lawn. Also, you only have a reasonable expectation of privacy if there is no way the public could view your lawn, IE from a nearby hill.

But negligently discharging a firearm into the air IS a crime, and the popo will gladly lock your happy ass up for it. Like that doof in tennessee

>>30156567
>How to address people illegally flying drones in your personal airspace without getting arrested.
If it's actually illegal, just call the police and report it you cunt.

>>30156567
record it
get their FAA registration number
report the unlawful flight

If either the drone or the controller does not have a number affixed, report that too.

Fuck the FAA and their laws, but they exist so it's your duty to use them.

I own a small plot of land that has been used for the past 10 years for an RC club. In the past two years it's almost all drones despite signs prohibiting video recording and transmission.

>>30161554
Fun fact: you own the airspace over your property up to whatever you can reasonably make use of. Your claim is about 30 yards higher than the tallest structure on your land.
Fun fact: it is unlawful to operate an unmanned aerial vehicle over occupied property without the consent of the owner.
Fun fact: it is unlawful to operate a UAV over a crowd
Fun fact: it is unlawful to operate a UAV above 500ft AGL.
Fun fact: it is unlawful to operate a UAV over 100mph
Fun fact: it is unlawful to operate a UAV between sunset and sunrise
Fun fact: photography and videography is not protected speech unless whatever is observed is visible from the ground, between the property owners airspace and the flight ceiling, or with the property owners expressed consent.
I have a 180' cell tower on my property. If you fly beyond my fence you will be detained.
>>30161644
voyeurism, which is a crime here
The reason you are confused is that normally public photography is a protected speech, so state laws are unenforceable. This is generally not the case with UAVs operated over private property without the consent of the owner.
>>30161572
>>30161603
>>30161604

>>30161669
this. dronefags itt btfo

File: 1449247455075.jpg (9KB, 230x252px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 230x252px

>>30161669
drones under .55 lbs aren't registered, you cotton headed ninny muggins.

>Fun fact: you own the airspace over your property up to whatever you can reasonably make use of. Your claim is about 30 yards higher than the tallest structure on your land.

no. the FAA controls everything from the 'blades of grass up'.


>Fun fact: it is unlawful to operate an unmanned aerial vehicle over occupied property without the consent of the owner.

source?


>Fun fact: it is unlawful to operate a UAV between sunset and sunrise


hahah no, you're an idiot.


>Fun fact: photography and videography is not protected speech unless whatever is observed is visible from the ground, between the property owners airspace and the flight ceiling, or with the property owners expressed consent.

yeah just like they jail all those paparazzi for sitting on a hill with a telescoping lens... oh wait they don't and they can't
>I have a 180' cell tower on my property. If you fly beyond my fence you will be detained.

You have no legitimacy to preform a citizens arrest in this case. If you want to try, we can figure out who is a quicker draw. If you're faster you go to jail, if you're slower you die. Sound fun?


>The reason you are confused is that normally public photography is a protected speech, so state laws are unenforceable. This is generally not the case with UAVs operated over private property without the consent of the owner.

Show me the court case which says it's unlawful to fly a drone on private property. State laws are overruled by federal laws, and the FAA has specifically said that local laws regulating airspace are unenforceable if they contradict the FAA's stance (no regulation below 700 feet)

>>30161650
>police won't/can't really do much

>>30161669

>>30161741
This guy beat me to it so I won't long post, but in short, I reasonably certain most of your 'facts' at bullshit.

>If you fly beyond my fence you will be detained.
Yeah. Okay. Sure.

>>30156831
Why is my own personal privacy, peace and quiet not a justified use of said airspace? A lot of these quad-copters act like an asshole older brother staying just out of reach going "I'm not touching you".

>>30161748
>Vigilantism is a valid thing
If they won't/can't do it, stop whining on the internet and get them off their asses instead.

>>30161604
If I draw up a contract to sell you the golden gate bridge, and we both sign it, does that make it yours? No, because the golden gate bridge isn't mine to sell.

File: 300px-Doe_cardholder.png (82KB, 300x193px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 300x193px

>>30156581
lepidopterist

>>30161784
If they are disturbing you with noise to a level that you can't enjoy your property, you're welcome to sue them in civil court. You won't win, because you have no monetary damages (what did the noise deprive you of exactly? a sunny afternoon? how much is that worth?)

In 1946, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that a landowner has a right to prevent “intrusions of airspace” just as he does invasions on the ground, and that he owned “at least as much of the space above the ground as he can occupy or use in connection with the land.” U.S. v. Causby, 328 U.S. 256 (1946).

>>30161784
Because your feelings don't trump the legal system and aren't valid here.

>>30161831
>how much is that worth?)
nothing is more valuable than time

>>30161741
>>30161765
https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdf
and soon
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/media/021515_sUAS_Summary.pdf
>>30161833
and there it is, I'm going to get some coffee and close this tab.

>>30156567

I never understood why people get so worked up over these until I spotted one in my neighborhood last week flying over my yard. It was creepy.

>>30161593
that reminds me. you never gave me the deed.

>>30161847
>Stuck in traffic
>Sue everyone around me for clogging the road

>>30161866
apples and oranges like usual

>>30156872
>most drones have a fail-safe where they hover and just power down until they land...
>in your yard
free drone.jpg

I'd do this and go full Old Man Jenkins keeping the neighbor kids baseball when some gauged hipster faggot knocks on my door to ask for their drone back.

The precedent has been set by the guy that shot one and got away with it.

>>30161741
>no. the FAA controls everything from the 'blades of grass up'.
Yeah, because a 747 might need to divert its flight over your front lawn. Fucking idiot, FAA airspace starts 400 feet up.

>>30161847
only when you can bill for it, son

>>30161853
>Proposed Rulemaking
>Proposed
Shut up

>>>30161833
>and that he owned “at least as much of the space above the ground as he can occupy or use in connection with the land."
I'm sorry, do most people occupy or use in connection with the land the airspace over their houses? No? Then your point in invalid.

>>30161872
It's not. Your argument was suing over lost time is a valid thing. I gave an example of how that's retarded and wrong.

>>30161907
i made no "point" in that post ya nigger. kys

File: 1459637961837s.jpg (3KB, 125x114px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x114px

>>30161853

>https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdf

>he can't tell the difference between a UAV (capable of flying with no human inputs) used for commercial purposes and a hobby quadrocopter.


LaughingAnimeGirls.jpg

>>30161918
>private property vs public roadways
kys

File: 1454816794349.jpg (67KB, 476x717px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 476x717px

>>30161929
doesn't know the FAA doesn't make a distinction

>>30161921
If you're >>30161833, I didn't mean you. I meant the first guy who quoted you. Hence the extra '>'. Sorry for the confusion. That said, go fuck yourself.

>>30156567
>tfw have never seen a personal air drone in my life

What an odd feeling. Does it happen in the more popular towns and cities in the US?

File: 1456670872676.png (47KB, 314x315px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 314x315px

>>30161929
>>30161942
or rather, the FAA does not make a distinction between a hobby quadrocopter and an autonomous UAV. They do make a distinction between hobby and commercial/government.

>>30161937
The point was lost time, the location where you lose time is irrelevant.

>kys
Fuck you and your stupid shit.

>>30161948
no you, literally kys

>>30161962
location is everything

>>30161882
Yeah that's called theft. If a car crashes into your backyard, do you own the car? no you stupid faggot, jesus christ.

>>30161896

You mean the multiple people who have been arrested and jailed for similar things?

>>30161898

I'm not going to argue facts with you. The FAA controls all airspace, that is not up for debate.
>>30161866


There was a car crash in front of me the other day. My time is worth about 2,000$ per second. I sued the guy and now I'm a millionare! check out this one big secret lawyers don't want you to know!

>>30161981
>The FAA controls all airspace, that is not up for debate.
not according to the supreme court

>>30161942
>>30161957


>(4) PUBLIC UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM.—The term ‘‘public
unmanned aircraft system’’ means an unmanned aircraft
system that meets the qualifications and conditions required
for operation of a public aircraft
because reading is hard right? Does a hobby quadrocopter meet the definition of a public aircraft?


Hint: answer begins with N, ends with O

>>30161981
>dats theft ;_;

enjoy being arrested as a voyeur when you try to get the popo to make me give it back m8. Either I sell it to a out of county pawnshop after denying it's crashing in my backyard with the only proof being your assertion of illegally flying it low and slow over private property or I hold it until the police you call arrive and have you arrested for voyeurism.

dronefag plz, you're ilk are the same level of faggot as retards who drive golf carts on suburban streets.

>>30162009
That ruling was because the noise of the planes disrupted his livelihood. He was a chicken farmer who could not raise chickens. It had nothing to do with the proximity of the planes, just their volume level.

holy shit you're all simpletons

like nigga it's just a fucking toy calm down

capcha: resistance fusille

>>30162044
yet look at what the rulings say

>>30161976
>location is everything
It's not, but fine.

>At home
>X causes Y that happens to take up my time
>Sue because my loss of time is a valid thing to sue over

>>30162039
>TFW they have triangulation, data recordings, and live streamed video and audio recordings proving you stole it.


Enjoy your jail time nigger. Your post is pure fantasy.


Like when the tenessee guy shot down the drone, and then the arrested the drone operator for being a pervert right? On wait no they arrested the dipfuck who shot a gun into the air.

>>30161976
>no you, literally kys
I hate summer

>>30162081
and how much is your time worth? I think mine is worth about 50,000$ a minute. Sadly, nobody else agrees with me.

>>30162105
ive been here for years though

>inb4 no u have not

>>30162039
>enjoy being arrested as a voyeur
How do you prove that?

>have you arrested for voyeurism.
>Be me
>Flying drone over house
>Fucker crashes it
>Ask for it back
>Get told to fuck off
>Call police
>mfw he starts stammering about me being a voyeur while getting arrested for property damage and theft

>>30162147
>property damage
lmao you drone fags are retarded

>>30162111
>Be 8
>Find edgy place called 4chan
>Spend every summer on it, acting like a fag
>Fast forward to me being 13 and still a fag
>"lol ive bin hear 4 years'

>>30162167
>lmao you drone fags are retarded
>Breaking/damaging a $1000+ object isn't property damage

>>30162179
is that what you did?

>>30162191
you crashing it is your own fault dumb negro

>>30162100
They arrested the dude who shot it then the judge ruled is was completely okay for him to shoot it and they dropped all charges. The dronefag is out a 1k drone for being a fuck.

File: tiger.jpg (40KB, 480x509px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 480x509px

>>30156567
>TFW drone operator and gun oper8er.

Can't we all just live in peace and operation?

>>30162216
dont fly over my shit and yeah

>>30162196
>you crashing it is your own fault dumb negro
Are you actually retarded? People were talking about shooting it/jamming the controls to cause it to crash you moron.

I'm done replying to you, this isn't even decent bait.

>>30162216
If you hover over my shit for a long time, expect for it to be coming down the second it's not facing in my direction.

>>30162201
One stupid judge ruling from her heart and not from the law doesn't change federal law. Her decision will be appealed and overturned by someone who cares more about the law than MUH FEELS. Google shooting down drones and read about california, jew jersey, etc. I'm not going to spoon feed you. educate yourself.

>>30162259
kek gets btfo then stops replaying

>>30162275
>I'm not going to spoon feed you. educate yourself
t. i have no proof of my claims

>>30162230
>>30162265


but you don't own the air anon...... You can't tell me where to walk in a public park because the government owns it, not you. Same with airspace.... how is this so hard to understand. Do you have the right to shoot a MANPAD at an airliner if you feel that it's making too much noise and disturbing you in YOUR AIRSPACE?

>>30156627
Gonna be a whole buncha dead muslim cowards that need burying and a new story for the corporate run media to distract the masses, then.

>>30162304
airlines dont fly in my airspace, they fly above it per faa rules ya dubass

File: 1461004466351.png (128KB, 778x778px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 778x778px

>>30162300


wow you shur trolled me gud. here's one because you russle wilson'd my jimmies.

http://www.popsci.com/it-is-federal-crime-to-shoot-down-drone-says-faa

>>30162304
Go fly it in the public park and stay away from my private property then. Do annoying shit and get hit, faggot.

>>30156567
I shattered a pretty nice looking one a couple weeks back with my integrally suppresed 10/22. I see a lot of them where i live, fucking rich hipster cunts.

>>30162353
>>30162333


“There is gray area in terms of how far your property rights extend,” said Jeramie Scott, national security lawyer at the Electronic Privacy Information Center. “It’s going to need to be addressed sooner rather than later as drones are integrated into the national airspace.”

According to the Federal Aviation Administration, every inch above the tip of your grass blades is the government’s jurisdiction. “The FAA is responsible for the safety and management of U.S. airspace from the ground up,” said an agency spokesman, echoing rules laid out on its website.

.


It is a federal crime to shoot down aircraft, and this week, the FAA confirmed that that includes drones. This is great news for anyone who has a drone, and for anyone who doesn’t want errant bullets falling from the sky, and it’s bad news for anyone eager to pump a quadcopter full of lead.
From Forbes’ John Goglia, who confirmed this with the FAA:
According to the FAA “regardless of the situation, shooting at any aircraft — including unmanned aircraft — poses a significant safety hazard. An unmanned aircraft hit by gunfire could crash, causing damage to persons or property on the ground, or it could collide with other objects in the air. ”
.
YOU
DON'T
OWN
THE
AIR

it is a communal resource managed by the government, in this case the FAA.

>>30158860
Not when you say no and they do it anyway. You know, all eminent domain like and all. Lost out on acres of inherited land because the gubmint decided it should be a fucking highway instead of my birthright.

>>30162407
Hide behind your gray area laws all you want nigger.
If you're hovering over my huge property for a long time for no reason you will be shot down and I will deny doing it.

>>30162407
>be me shooting clays
>dumb nigger flys a drone over my property
>shoot drone
>??????
>kill drone fag when he trespasses on my land

>>30162439
>Lost out on acres of inherited land because the gubmint decided it should be a fucking highway instead of my birthright.
Good

>>30162442


>I'm wrong but MUH FEELS tell me that I'm right, IM GONNA DO IT ANYWAY


you big baby. go back to your safe space.

>>30162464


>step 1) break federal law

>step 2) commit murder


mentally unstable people like you should have their funs confiscated by barack hussein obama.

>>30162477
That's literally what you're doing to defend your stalking. Hiding behind your gray area laws to defend your ways. Don't try to turn this around when I try to defend my privacy you pussy.

>>30162442
>What is data
Jeez, my drone was over this guy's property legally and then it started to break and it fell down before I lost contact. I wonder who did it or where it might be.

>>30162500
>Don't try to turn this around when I try to defend my privacy you pussy.
>Huge property
>Staring at dirt is invading your privacy
Regardless, at height, your privacy isn't being invaded.

>>30162493
>murder
lmao maybe in your shit state

>>30156707
>urban retards don't understand privacy

Some of us don't live with degeneracy.

We own land, a space away from the scum to raise children and live a happy life.

Then some cunt starts flying his faggot video camera over my land?? Fuck off.

Shoot them down, without hesitation.

sure is a lot of fed bootlickers here.

>>30162518
That's why I said "for a long time".
I don't care if you're just flying through to get by, but don't even try to bullshit me that you're just going to look around at dirt which is what you can see from google maps.

>>30161509
>aircraft and drones are the same

Fucking autists

>>30156567
Javelin/Thrown Spear
>someone post the video, i'm lazy

>>30162533
Are they trying to force entry into your domicile? If not, you can not use deadly force to protect your property. Not even in texas. Please actually read the laws of your state before you go to jail for murder.

>>30162553
What exactly is a 'long time'?

>but don't even try to bullshit me that you're just going to look around at dirt
What else would I be doing if I'm not near your house?

>which is what you can see from google maps.
>Jeez I can see the Eiffel Tower on google maps
>I guess I have no reason to go there or take any pictures myself

>>30161907
Now you're just ignoring a sound argument. I was with you until this point, guy. But you're stupid, so oh well.

>>30156567
Give them a fucking break.

You obviously never flew one and have no idea how difficult it is to control it. Even if it is a "smart" one, supposedly with stabilization, you still can lose orientation and control in a blink of an eye. Moreover, "smartest" ones are prone to losing control on their own (google "runaway dji"), so if you see a drone flying "over your property", it is likely not a result of malice, but has a frantic pilot running after it trying to save a lot of invested $$$ and not get people injured (those fuckers are heavy, if you shoot one, it might fall on neighbor's kid or dog and kill them on the spot).

Give them a benefit of the doubt, you might even make some friends in RC community. Just don't be an asshole, is all.

>>30162596
What argument did I ignore exactly?

Honestly.... Hit it with a hose

>>30156724
And this dude, can read. My man.

>>30162599
>making friends with autists
>pls don't be a dick as we violate your privacy

Fuck off.

I'd gladly shoot some faggot little drone down, gladly don't seem to be a problem around here.

>>30156841
>wifi based
And this dude is talking straight out of his ass.

Hint: they're not.

>>30162595
A long time is until i judge that you're snooping around. If some guy is hovering around the edge of my property and taking a look at what's in my yard, I'd come out and ask what's he doing out there.

That's how I view drones.

Just because your actual body isn't there doesn't make it any less weird for me.

However, you niggers go the extra mile and bring up a bunch of gray area laws that need to be looked at because you know you're doing something I judge as shifty shit and go on saying "I'm not breaking any laws!" is just going to piss me off.

>>30162639
well they use the 2.4 g frequency which is also shared by wifi. But yeah, drones aren't controlled via wifi.

>>30156858
Whoever says so, knows little.

Disrupt a communication to a seventy inches long carbon fiber blade spinning at 2400RPM driven by a fifteen horse power motor flying 20+ lbs airframe a hundred feet overhead and take a bet where it will fall.

The first thing I envision is outraged parents of that kid you just killed gouging your eyes out and only then reaching for your genitals, 'cause shooting you would be too merciful as far as they're concerned.

>>30161833
>fly kites all day
>I'm using my airspace
>shoot down drones, as well as enemy kites

>>30161509
>as an enthusiast
well then, if that's the case you could've mentioned that you can count airtime in minutes with fingers of one hand, and that the payload the "quiet" drone can carry is nowhere near the weight of a camera that will produce anything better than a blur at the distance you can still see it, could you?

>>30162680


>I'd come out and ask what's he doing out there.

that's cool, nothing stopping you from having a little chat. I agree the laws should be clarified too, but as it stands, I am not breaking any laws flying over your property. If you try and tell me I'm being a voyuer of whatever stupid shit the other posters are saying about peeping tom laws, I am going to laugh in your face and continue what I'm doing.

>>30162680
>you know you're doing something I judge as shifty shit
Well that's assuming you've told them/they've asked, and while I agree they should respect your wishes in regards to flying drones over your property, what they are doing is not illegal and you attacking the drone is. And frankly, as long as they aren't actually peeping at your house (or other buildings) or in it, I don't see any justification for you shooting the drone down. If they're flying around your farmland/forests/etc, I really don't see what the harm is besides your not liking it.

>and go on saying "I'm not breaking any laws!" is just going to piss me off.
First, if it's not actually illegal then you have no legal justification to do what you suggested. Second, you getting pissy isn't a valid reason to destroy someone's property, and frankly if you're acting like that out of anger, you shouldn't be owning guns.

>>30162500
>implying most of the people who fly drones are perverts
Are you serious?

You can't just scream "voyeur!" when you have no fucking evidence.

File: leopardtank.webm (1MB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 480x360px

>>30156567
bamp

>>30162259
What if I just happen to be broadcasting a jamming signal from my property? How was I to know you were going to fly a drone over my property right at that minute? How was that my fault?

>>30163176
>What if I just happen to be broadcasting a jamming signal from my property?
That's illegal, you can't do that.

>How was I to know you were going to fly a drone over my property right at that minute?
>You have good enough means to jam the communications of a drone 50ft up
and
>What is intent

>How was that my fault?
How is it not?

File: wutttt.webm (861KB, 800x410px) Image search: [Google]

861KB, 800x410px

>>30156567
Here.

>>30162275
>what is precedent

>>30163355
that's actually.... kind of impressive.

>>30163365
>one small time judge in podunk nowhere has made a ruling, therefor IT IS LAW THROUGHOUT THE LAND


Are you in high school or did you reach the age of maturity and still manage to be this stupid?

>>30162685
>regular cordless house phones run on wifi too!

>>30162849
>let me fly a drone across someone's property and record the whole thing
>this is not voyeurism
Nah, hopefully your shitty little hobby gets fucked up the ass in courts.

>>30163384
There are currently very little in the books regarding drones so until there are sweeping legislation previous case law will determine the future of drones. Hopefully land owners can hire better lawyers than hipsters so the noose can be drawn tight.

>>30163424
>not sure if trolling or just stupid

>>30163456
Probably the latter

>>30162439
>eminent domain
>not getting significantly over market value for your shitty unzoned land
>not getting "waaaah muh ancestral methlab" pityparty money too
you're either a liar or an idiot, or a lying idiot.

>>30163447
Wrong. Just wrong. The FAA has jurisdiction. They have chosen not to regulate flying vehicles under .55 lbs below 500 feet.

>>30163355
>inb4 a vs thread with The USAF and some god damned vikings

File: 1457379501172.jpg (57KB, 604x425px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 604x425px

>>30163456
>>30163465
>>30163471
>>30163274
>>30161741


Just to prove I'm not samefagging this entire thread and there are actually educated people on /k/, much to my surprise.

>>30156692
You swore to obey the president, didn't you?

>>30163176
Yeah, you can't jam shit there without getting into some serious no-no federal crime territory.

>>30158523
You can't take the sky from me...

I am a leaf on the wind.

>>30162837
>>30162794
>I'm not doing anything wrong by invading your privacy!
you lot are as insufferable as "muh right to roam!" hippie faggots who like trespassing, knowing that if they get caught and leave when asked they won't be arrested.
>if you hurt muh drone it's illegal lol why u mad bruh
http://makezine.com/2015/10/16/research-company-takes-aim-uavs-portable-anti-drone-rifle/
http://jammers4u.com/drones-jammer
stay mad faggot when your quadcopter drops out of the sky. GG getting it back, trespassing is illegal.

File: KisforKek - Copy.jpg (117KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1366x768px

>>30163490

>>30163456
You are aware that people have an expectation of privacy in thier own home and property, right? Voyeur laws exist to protect that privacy.

Legal issues stemming from what exactly can be done about it are what drives current conversation regarding drones.

File: gatlinggun.jpg (11KB, 380x317px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 380x317px

Been waiting for a reason to post this.

>>30163536
Ebin, posted it on /r/4chan for

BB gun = win

Hand full of small pebbles = win


A hand held RF jamming device made from spare parts and 15 $... = win win.

>>30156567
Holy shit this is honestly the equivalent of the "feels" or a few bad apples means we should ban all guns vs 2nd amendment but with drones inplace of guns. No one gives a shit about your surveying your property unless their creek is full of fucking oil for some reason and neighbor upstream of you says their shit is clean.
Creep perving on you daughter is subject with a drone is subject to the same equivalent laws as someone being a dispshit with a gun in public is, if not worse.

File: 1446132095626.jpg (64KB, 427x640px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 427x640px

>>30163516

Shooting down a drone is a federal crime.

http://www.popsci.com/it-is-federal-crime-to-shoot-down-drone-says-faa

Using a firearm in the comission of a crime, is a crime.

Destruction of property is a crime.

It is a violation of federal law to employ a jammer of any kind. (You can thank the fcc for this jailtime)

Firing a gun into the air in a populated area is a crime.


I could go on and on, but the point is that if you do this, you will be in prison for the rest of your natural life. ( expensive drones relay all sorts of information, enough to easily prove your involvement)

*mic drop*

>>30163516
Hey how can I piss off 2+ federal agencies at the same time.....enjoy your burned crib baby and dead dogs

File: 3.jpg (90KB, 724x844px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 724x844px

>>30163515
>yfw we'll never get a second season or even a spinoff.

>>30163584
All these fat neckbeards thinking someone is flying a drone over their property to catch them sunbathing and jerk off to dat flab. Hahaha, get real.

>>30163610
>if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear!
god damn you people are the worst.

File: taytaycc.jpg (77KB, 620x629px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 620x629px

>>30163629
>>if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear!
>god damn you people are the worst.
Annon why are you ccing on our date, do you really thing jehadist are going to pop out some blood oath?

>>30163597
>*mic drop*
Nice one there fag. Thankfully I live around the area this >>30162201 happened so you can record little girls in whatever liberal haven you choose to call home and I can shoot down faggots' toys where I live.

>>30162685
They may use 2.4GHz. They may not. Those that indeed can violate your privacy efficiently probably don't.

>>30163584
it's more of a "you can't be on my property taking pictures without my consent, that doesn't change because you're using an RC camera" issue.

>>30163597
>>30163598
>flying within 90ft of someone's house
>not an invasion of privacy
enjoy losing your drone to old man jenkins the technomancer
>implying you could prove shit
>implying the cops wouldn't be as annoyed at your asshurt as any normal person would be

>muh FCC will stop u!
yeah just call them and they'll totally send out a team to try and triangulate my jammer that only gets switched on when assholes are flying a quadcopter in my backyard

>muh drone...
won't transmit shit after being jammed and taken apart with a claw hammer and disposed of offsite.

>but das illegal!
no one cares. if you insist on pissing people off, they'll piss you off right back. Your noise complaint tier impossible to prove assertion that anyone in a neighborhood you spy on is responsible and all they have to do is get multiple search warrants to prove it ;_; doesn't mean jack if someone actually jams and swipes your drone.

And this is all just a stopgap until your wreckless dronefaggotry ruins a good thing for everyone and the nonassholes and (you)'s alike get their drones heavily regulated and open to ruinous civil suits for violating two party consent to being recorded, which come to think of it is already an easy way to shut you fuckers down.
>inb4 nuhuh i'm doing no wrong
you can't record people or private property. public places are different because there is an implied consent to being observed. someones backyard isn't public. Eventually someone of you fucks will piss off the wrong person and get sued into the ground.

>>30163424
Little?

Man, you're seriously stupid. Your whole gun arsenal and year's supply of ammo probably costs less than one battery on a serious RC aircraft.

Wanna prove your superiority? Come to an RC club and keep "a little shitty drone" in the air for over ten seconds without crashing. Oh, and bring your little shitty drone, or be prepared to put your cash on the table.

File: 1294644955869.jpg (55KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 500x375px

>>30163728
How much mercury did you drink before posting that?

Good god i love watching these privacy invaders get destroyed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyQ-qo7kZes

>>30163703
The ravings of a sad, pathetic, manchild, totally devoid of reality. Trump will put your kind in the camps first.

>>30163728

>Look at me and my drone dick see how big it is oh wow

>>30163779
>said the fat pathetic manchild who likes peeping on others
Enjoy your camp, kid.

>>30163728
You got an amazon link for that "one battery on a serious RC aircraft"? I'm guessing that shit is like $300 or less.

But a little bitch like you only knows shit like airsoft, so $300 for a year's supply of ammo would seem like a big deal.

Sad fucker.

>>30163765
>kid with the basketball
what a bamf

>>30162354
So admit it, then - it's all about jealousy. You can't afford to buy it, save maintain it, and you can't fly it, so you shoot it down from concealment or safe distance like a cowardly faggot you are.

Q: How to stop being a faggot and realize that RC pilots are normal people just like /k/ommandos are?
A: Get one and realize that it's quite a bit more challenging than shooting. Then get some humility and come back to /k/ and report.

PS: I shoot, I fly. It took me six month from nogunz to 3"/25' controlled pairs, but it took me six months to just hover the fucking thing upright, and another year to do it inverted. Yeah, be the hero, show me you're cooler. Fly it. Then we'll laugh together.

>>30163779
>the Godemperor of "I'll sue you!" will protect faggots like you
>muh drones!

explain to me how dronefagging like in >>30163765 isn't voyeurism and highly illegal.

you're going to get regulated into the ground because you can't stop being incorrigible faggots. until that happens, people are going to keep taking your expensive ass drones down with birdshot and random thrown objects and you'll REEEEEE at the courts over "muh property" "muh felony to shoot muh drone ;_;" and get your shit banned.

they're just going to limit you to flying them on approved model aircraft courses like any RC plane, but the model aircraft courses being private institutions will just ban your shitty drones as ariel hazards to real RC.

File: 1362985821864.jpg (33KB, 445x345px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 445x345px

>>30163833
It's time to stop posting, you pathetic faggot.

It doesn't take 6 months to learn how to hover a drone unless you're down with the syndrome.

File: 1459643417226.jpg (72KB, 640x605px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 640x605px

>>30163814


>Every drone user is a pervert, only a creep would use those things
BAN DRONES!

>Every gun owner is a nutter, only a violent sociopath would want to own a gun
BAN GUNS!


No anon, stop.

File: laughing whores.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>30163833
>took a year and a half to learn to fly a babbytier self stabilizing RC helicopter

>>30163833
I'm not jealous nor do I think flying drones isn't hard and requires skill, the technology that goes into them nothing short of astounding and I'm glad you also appreciate them for that. But if you fly it above my property I will shoot it down because that is not something I can accept. I wish people were nice and they flew on public and thier own private property and I also wish that people who shoot down drones in that context would be punished but this is not a perfect world.

>>30163878
Well, dude... I'm wasting my time here, obviously, 'cause you seem to unable to comprehend that a) "self stabilizing" doesn't fly inverted and b) small birds are way more difficult to control than big.

Yeah. I'd like to see you do it sooner.

Now you must forgive me, I'm late to my range session. I'm sure I won't see you there 'cause you'll still be here bashing drone pilots instead of learning to shoot.

>>30163877
>muh false equivalency!
don't fly drones in private airspace and don't be a voyeur and you wouldn't have a problem, but you're a cunt so the FAA and local ordinances will just restrict you faggots like model aircraft.

>hurrr i ain't no perv why u keep sayin that i'm doing nothing wrong
voyeurism isn't inherently sexual m8. you simply can't take pictures of people on private property without their consent.

whats going to happen eventually to the typical dronefag is someone is going to break your faggy drone over private property, you're going to sue them civilly and it'll be thrown out because of your criminal charge of voyeurism related to the case.

>>30163907
>nor do I think flying drones isn't hard
This is a drone, per FAA classification (yeah, just like the gun laws): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOAoHmBs8vA

>>30163925
Still waiting on that amazon link for this "expensive battery" you want to impress us with, you stupid piece of shit.

p.s. I'm not really waiting, you dumb fuck.

File: seriously.jpg (44KB, 535x345px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 535x345px

>>30163925
you're checking all the boxes for how people perceive drone pilots

File: 1420761852136.png (249KB, 358x358px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 358x358px

>>30163703
>violating two party consent to being recorded
>you can't record people or private property.

This isn't illegal you fucking monkey.

>Eventually someone of you fucks will piss off the wrong person and get sued into the ground.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

>>30163950
Okay, replace all that with UAV. I wonder if there is an extentionbto autoreplace potentially triggering words for people like us. 'Assault rifle' becomes rifle 'high capacity' becomes magazine 'Obama' becomes uppity nigger.

File: 1338070335526.jpg (117KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 800x534px

>>30163925
obviously you don't realize that the average person learns how to hover a drone in 6 minutes, not 6 months.

>>30163979
>he thinks being a raging autist will convince people he's right

>>30163979
>it isn't illegal to record people without their consent
>it isn't illegal to trespass
wew

>streisand effect
>when someone chucks a wrench and downs your flying neetbucks checks, then the footage of him catching you watching him nets you a voyeurism charge as you REEEEEEE about how "no it proves he killed muh precious drone das illegal ;_;" as a local judge tries to bore a hole through your skull with the ire in his eyes.

>>30163956
http://www.helidirect.com/batteries/multirotor-battery/plu25-220006-pulse-lipo-22000mah-22-2v-25c.html

$500. In today's prices, that's roughly

833 .308 rounds.
2500 9mm rounds.
8300 .22 rounds.

200 rounds a session (and even that's a stretch, I'd like to see your bruises after shooting 200 .308 rounds) once a week,

4 weeks of .308
12 weeks of 9mm
40 weeks of .22 (that's 10 months)

Now, that was just *one* battery, worth about 5 minutes of flight. Do the rest of the math. And, seriously, try it one day, you may even like it.

>>30164027
>I'd like to see your bruises after shooting 200 .308 rounds
Is this a thing? I started shooting with a nugget so 308 out of my FAL is pretty comfortable. I could do it all day, and when i feel like spending too much money; I do

>>30163993
Now we're getting somewhere. Just like 'assault rifle' isn't, the "drone" is slapped on anything and everything.

>>30164021
>>it isn't illegal to record people without their consent

It isn't in most states, sorry nigger

> downs your flying neetbucks checks, then the footage of him catching you watching him nets you a voyeurism charge as you REEEEEEE

When someone flys over your property has log evidence of a 5.8ghz + gps jam + shotdown visual , crying when FCC + FAA rapes your ass in federal court

>>30163994
Sure. Drones are cheap on Amazon, show me the video of how you did it.

>>30164044
It is no shit a button on most commercial quadrotors or whatever the hell you have bound it to on your DIY quadrotor. Both sticks neutral

>>30164032
>.308
>I could do it all day

stronk

>>30164021
>it isn't illegal to record people without their consent

It isn't. Recording people and then materially benefiting from it may open you up to civil suit, but it isn't a criminal offense.

>it isn't illegal to trespass

Flying a drone over your property isn't tresspassing.

>voyeurism charge

Voyeurism is specifically a sexual offense in the UK, Canada, and 9 states of the US. In the United States this relates to actually taking photos into buildings or places where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Places with a reasonable expectation of privacy are described as:

>A place where a reasonable person would believe that he or she could disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that his or her undressing was being photographed or filmed by another; or
>A place where one may reasonably expect to be safe from casual or hostile intrusion or surveillance.

File: Helicopter Pilots are different.jpg (450KB, 1204x1600px) Image search: [Google]

450KB, 1204x1600px

>>30164075
(suppressed giggle) You forgot about collective, lost your whatever the hell you bound into the sky, the wind drifted it into your neighbor's yard, BAM! it's gone.

>>30164027
>because he has an 8 rotor, $5000 landscape photography drone
pics or didn't happen. If anything I'd be angry that someone so autistic is wasting that equipment, but it's obvious you just went to a battery shop and did a sort by price.

>bruises
>.308
how much cringe can be in one person

>>30164039
>doesn't know that video recording laws are state and local
>doesn't know that barring further restriction you can only record people on public property, persons within the public domain, and of private property visible or audible from the public domain
"someones backyard" isn't public property
"20ft above their fence" isn't visible from the public domain

>muh evidence
>implying you'd ever know who stole your drone with a jammer
>implying any court would convict someone of knocking down your drone
that drone hunter guy got off scott free and now texas is drone hunting territory due to case law precedent. Same for anyone charged (most aren't) knocking down some assholes drone mid harassment.

all being a cunt is going to do is heavily regulate your quadcopter. GG when they're banned from public airspace and restricted to model airplane fields.

>>30164097
>It isn't
recording people in public, from a public vantage point isn't illegal.

recording someone on private property with a drone from private property or from "the public domain" like hovering your drone over someone's vanity fence is highly illegal. shit like this is what will lead to a registry and visible license numbers like on planes and boats to facilitate all the summons you'll get for being "drone fucks with guy lol vid no5443" on youtube

>>30164027
>I'd like to see your bruises after shooting 200 .308 rounds) once a week
suicide yourself

>>30156707
Mostly this. If they're flying over their own yard or in the park or whatever, great. I might even grab my airplane and join them. But if someone's (deliberately) flying over your property without permission, it's not fucking cool.

>>30164118
>all being a cunt is going to do is heavily regulate your quadcopter. GG when they're banned from public airspace and restricted to model airplane fields.

All being a cunt with your AR is going to regulate your 30 round magazine from public property and restrict to ranges. GG.

Any jamming (since quads occupy from 5.8 down to 72 mhz) will get you fucked by FCC

>>30164039
>it isn't
in PUBLIC, retard

someone's yard is their private property, if you fly over their fence and videotape their property, that is tantamount to your physically hopping over the fence and recording shit.

if you think that's reasonable in any capacity, you're an un-american retard crying about how his right to violate the rights of others is being violated

File: JUST_98.jpg (31KB, 526x508px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 526x508px

>>30163601

>>30164176
>muh all seeing FCC
you really don't get this whole "jammer" thing, do you? it isn't something trackable like pirate radio that can be triangulated, the <5 minutes to take down a problem drone and remove the batteries aren't something the FCC will care about or bother attempting to prove. A $200 jammer bought with a gift card and shipped to a friends unregistered private PO box is all it takes to fix "cunt" behavior when a "please stop flying your drone over my property" didn't suffice.

>muh false equivalency
if you went to my house and decided that florida's "shooting in a safe manner" law let you trespass and set up a rifle range in my backyard I'd be pretty fucking pissed too. Almost as pissed as some fuck with a RC helicopter fucking around in my backyard. Both would be dealt with.

>>30164173
>But if someone's (deliberately) flying over your property without permission, it's not fucking cool.

It's amazing that dronefags can't defend this.
Their entire defense is that. "It's not against the law!" Why the fuck would you even want to be looking at other people's private property?

Would the average dronefag take any hints if someone put up a privacy fence? Honestly with the amount of autism they're showing in this thread, I'm sure they won't be able to understand.

I live 15 miles from anybody here in the woods, you also own the airspace above your home.


I'll step outside and start unloading with my Ar.

>>30164176
great argument, find me a case where someone flew an AR over a fence and pointed it at a 16 year old girl

>>30162275
What is case law

>>30164232
>you really don't get this whole "jammer" thing, do you? it isn't something trackable like pirate radio that can be triangulated, the <5 minutes to take down a problem drone and remove the batteries aren't something the FCC will care about or bother attempting to prove.

You really don't understand how many spectrums a decent DIY can broadcast across do you. You will be triangulated easily, the jammer guns make me laugh with....the multipirate wii's would have no problem homing in on the signal and rebroadcasting locations

FAA and FCC shit on signal leak / jams so much I have had them come to my door when I had signal leak from an incorrect power converter for one of my consoles...no joke

>>30164265
>great argument, find me a case where someone flew an AR over a fence and pointed it at a 16 year old girl

No one has ever used a 30 round AR to shoot anyone on private property...no masta

>>301642651
>tfw draw fag
> tfw have sudden inspiration of Ichiroku hopping a fence and raping a girl

Time for bed.

>>30164291
>signal leak
>sustained
>constant
>immobile
>noticeable

people use wifi and cell jammers all the time, you getting a "unfuck your shit" visit because you were inadvertently blotting out part of the spectrum in your area is unrelated.

>>30164176
>Free drone usage being necessary to prevent private property the right of the people to fly drones shall not be infringed.
You forgot the back story to your false analogy.

>>30164303
Yes, I remember vividly all those times a UAV has stopped crime. Enjoy your airfields.

File: ss+(2016-06-04+at+02.48.29).jpg (146KB, 1046x766px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1046x766px

#NotAllDrones

>>30164173
>flying over your property without permission
That's the only thing though.
They can be over public property or any private property whos owner's permission they have and record whatever they can see, including what they can see of your property without trespassing.
The only reason that dipshit who gets posted didn't get charged was because the quad passed ever so briefly over his property on its way elsewhere. It didn't linger or make multiple passes as he claimed in reality but that was enough to justify it despite the fact that they had no intent to creep on his harem.

>>30164245
>Why the fuck would you even want to be looking at other people's private property?

Literally gun control logic. It's a first amendment issue, just like owning an AR-15 "for no good reason" is a second amendment issue.

>>30164362
>actually thinking anyone would belive your same fag attempt to discredit UAVs

>>30164100
>you can't glide a helicopter
Confirmed for being a retard

Judge upheld man's right to protect privacy http://www.wdrb.com/story/30354128/judge-dismisses-charges-for-man-who-shot-down-drone

File: 687190023098476879.gif (495KB, 500x250px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 500x250px

>>30164362
>another false equivalency
surprising, given the rest of the thread

>>30164118
>pics or didn't happen
don't care, I'm secure in my manhood.

Just like gun people (myself included) have many guns and different ammo stashes, RC people (myself included) have many different birds, and different batteries. Extrapolate.

Point is, stop being condescending faggots.

Do you grief your beginner friend for missing the target completely? Well, if you do, you are a faggot, and your range buddies will likely treat you as one. Likewise, if you see a drone, it's not because someone's invading your privacy, it's most likely because they don't know better or have other things to be afraid of. Flying is not less scary than shooting, and fear of crashing a few thousand dollars in a blink of an eye certainly adds adrenaline and creates tunnel vision - they may not even realize they're flying next to/above your property.

Now, let me step aside for a second an say this - I do not condone flying anything like that anywhere near people, for a simple reason that loss of control might just as well ruin or end someone's life. Just like with firearms, there's safety issues there - like with this assclown who decapitated himself among hundreds of other people: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2413231/Roman-Pirozek-Jr-Man-decapitates-remote-control-helicopter.html

But, big or small - be a fucking person.

>>30164044
I fly a drone anon, mine isn't fancy but it gets the job done. I lost one in a tree but it was about an hour total flying time until I could hover/ glide smoothly. 5 min battery life that was like, less than 12 flights. 6 months seems...... unreasonably long

>>30156567
thank god we got that flak 38 out in the back and that anything short of a nuke is legal in my country

>>30164149
you have an expectation of privacy INSIDE YOUR HOME not on your lawn baka. You gonna go sue google earth ya geenyus?

>>30164245
>It's amazing that dronefags can't defend this.
>Their entire defense is that. "It's not against the law!
Not everyone's. Look up in the thread, and you'll see "it may not be intentional" argument all over.

Just like hitting the center of the target is hard, flying is, too. I'd say much more so, even with simpleton $10 "drones".

>>30164232
>muh false equivalency

baby's first philosophy course.

>>30164265
Easy. Sandy Hook.

>>30163497
You only obey the orders of the President and your superior officers if they abide by the UCMJ and one cannot legally comply with illegal orders.

Ordering me to go door to door confiscating the weapons of Americans would be an illegal order in direct violation of the US constitution.

Ordering me to go to an American's house and force him to surrender his property in order to quarter troops or forcibly use his property without permission in order to establish a rapeugee camp would also be an illegal and unconstitutional order and anyone with half a brain would refuse to comply.

As far as I can tell, if the US President starts issuing illegal executive orders in direct violation of the US constitution, and if Congress does nothing about it, then it seems that the military has a duty to go after a domestic enemy of the US constitution in order to protect it. And any officers of the military who attempt to enforce the illegal orders of the Commander in Chief are similarly in need of removal.

So in such a silly scenario in which such blatantly unconstitutional orders are given, the President and his cronies can eat a bag of dicks while they wait for trial.

>>30164362
Spying on people is a right under the constitution? How much lead paint have you eaten?

>>30164378
Stop that shit. If you know how to autorotate, you certainly know it's nowhere as easy as gliding, and that the coffin corner is way bigger.

>>30164452
>spying on property that can be seen from public space.

Sure dude

>>30164404
so confirmed for choosing the most expensive battery on the first site you found without knowing what it went to

>they might just be new
all the more reason to fly in a controlled environment within their line of sight and not over people's backyard below the roofline.

>>30164430
thats a bullshit argument, see above. it's all entirely intentional and a purposeful violation of privacy

>>30164418
>backyard
>public
>viewable from line of sight of public property
>implying
you have the right to privacy on private property outside of line of sight from public property. you flying a videocamera over a 10ft privacy fence isn't legal, which is why all these "guy knocks down faggots drone" cases always end in tears of impotent dronefag rage as courts around the country hold privacy rights above your desire to be a nuisance.

>>30164409
Clock hover 60 RPM? Then inverted? Try again.

>>30164418
>Google earth/maps takes a single photo randomly to occasionally keep their database updated and blurs out anyone's face/license plate they happen to catch, and you can only get a ground view from the street.
>A drone has clear image quality on their cameras, can get close shots inside the property, is visible so the person is aware when they're being filmed which shockingly makes them not okay with it, and makes an annoying buzzing sound.

Can you see difference? Do you now understand there's only a few people pissed at Google and tons of people pissed at drone owners?

>>30164467
a drone is no different from chucking a camera over a fence or holding a video camera up to someones 2nd story window. dronefags dronefagging is blatantly illegal, with state law and local ordinances only making it varying degrees of more illegal.

you're saying if someone rented a bucket truck to look into your backyard you wouldn't take offense at it? wouldn't consider it a violation of your privacy?

there is no innocent reason for a drone to be recording people on private property.

>>30164485
The funniest thing about all this is that those drones that didn't get out of the way and got shot are probably those piloted by innocent, inexperienced and oblivious pilots.

If you were really being filmed, that'd be done from an FPV drone, and that one would be gone before you could do anything with it for a simple reason - they'd see you coming (actually, going for your gun) and have time to react.

>>30164437
>lanza had a remote controlled flying rifle
hmm, learn something every day

>>30164496
>you're saying if someone rented a bucket truck to look into your backyard you wouldn't take offense at it? wouldn't consider it a violation of your privacy?

Sure I'd be upset, but I understand that a person doing that is just trying to get a rise out of me.

I also understand that photographing people in a public place or viewable from a public place with no reasonable expectation of privacy is protected by the first amendment.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>30156567
I apologize everyone.

What has happened is that for decades, I mean decades, our RC hobby has not been a real issue.

What has happened is that literally anyone can buy a quad copter that can fly a considerable distance and all that other stuff for a reasonably inexpensive cost.

For the longest time flying radio controlled aircraft was very expensive, required a lot of invested time and effort. People willing to put in that effort were usually safe.

As a RC pilot I can tell you that our clubs have protocol for how to set up in the Pitts, where and how to fly safely, etc etc.

So be mad at the jackass flying it like a fucktard, not the hobby.

>her wingspan is 122"

>>30164530
>viewable from a public place with no reasonable expectation of privacy
>fenced yard
>no expectation of privacy

give one legitimate reason for a drone operator to loiter his faggy quadcopter over someone else's residential or business property.

>>30164469
>so confirmed for choosing the most expensive battery
Yep. Bite me, I'm too lazy to count how much I've spent for mine at the moment. But before that, acknowledge the math. And realize it's *one* measly battery. A fraction of a price of the whole setup.

>all the more reason to fly in a controlled environment
Isn't that exactly what I said? Yes, we're on the same page. But not everyone's as smart as you and me, and "dronefags" go through a learning curve just like /k/ do, and some unlucky fuckers may not realize they're doing something stupid by the time someone angry with a gun shoots down their birds.

I shudder thinking of what may happen if such an unlucky fucker is also a /k/ material, carries at the time and decides to make things straight with whomever just dented him for $$$. Especially if what they were doing had nothing to do with snooping (and, see above, it probably didn't).

>>30162794
I'd shoot it down with a net gun and stick it in a Faraday cage so it can't transmit anything then whipe the memory

>>30164539
>So be mad at the jackass flying it like a fucktard, not the hobby
This.

>>30164559
>ok the batteries don't cost 500 but the 500-3k entry cost that any shitkicker can scrape together to do poorfag bitchmode RC is still a lot to n33ts!

>I shudder thinking of what may happen if such an unlucky fucker is also a /k/ material, carries at the time and decides to make things straight with whomever just dented him for $$$.
he'd get fucking shot, just like his drone

>but people are stupid
which is why regulation will either put licenses and documentation in place for drones, ban them entirely outside of RC parks, and/or codify that drone use over private property is a violation of privacy in line with the expanding amount of caselaw

>>30164539
no one has a problem with legitimate RC planes. RC jets are cool as fuck. It's just the insufferable nu male faggots with daddy's credit card fucking around with hobbylobby my first drone kits.

>>30164556
>give one legitimate reason for a gun owner to shoot his assault rifle outside of government approved ranges.

Literally how you sound right now.

You don't need a legitimate reason other than wanting to you socialist piece of trash.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>30162794
You are the worst type of person in this hobby and you are why there is problems now.
Fuck. You.

As a pilot it is your job to be safe and aware, just like being the shooter with a gun.

You be aware of the airspace. You watch for full scale planes. You make sure you have a safe place to take off and land. You go so far that if you lose a $6,000 airframe to avoid hitting some dumbass child on the runways you do it.

>>30164591
This. But as a result of their general shitdick behavior I now have to pay the FAA money and get a registration number or face potential fines and jail.

Hasn't been an issue for years.

Yeah I'm mad.

File: drone.jpg (234KB, 2048x1360px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 2048x1360px

>>30164539
Not me, but pic related. 61" rotor span. Also a "drone" per FAA. Oh, btw, now, unlike guns, has to be registered or you're forfeiting a mandatory quarter mill dollar AMA insurance you must have to fly this.

Fly responsibly. Shoot responsibly. Peace.

>>30164594
>still clinging to the false equivalency
>socialist piece of trash
>because I respect property rights and the right to privacy
wewlad

being an annoying retard with a quadcopter wasn't enumerated in the bill of rights kiddo

>>30164611
Yeah fuck the FAA.
But fuck the unsafe irresponsible fucks more.

File: 4bbb758222b29607034465909006dce4.jpg (59KB, 400x600px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 400x600px

>>30164624

>the air is my property
>my back yard is private even though it can be seen from my neighbors kitchen

Literally crying about a microaggression against your safe space

>being an annoying retard with a quadcopter wasn't enumerated in the bill of rights kiddo

More gun control logic. Neither were 30 round mags and full auto amirite?

>>30164684
>imma all american patriot rallying against the evil communist lie of property rights!
no, you're just a faggot like those "muh right 2 roam!" hippy squatters who don't believe in fences.

>>30161520
Are you stupid?

>>30164684
>you have no right to owning and operating flying cameras
>you have no right to the air above another person's property
>you have no right to photographing anything you want on/over private land
this is how the laws stand right now, deal with it nigger. if you fly your shit over my fence and photograph my property, it will be shot down. If you chimp out on my property over your 'expensive' drone, you will also be shot

BTW, don't even start to talk about expensive if you're flying a camera over my house and it falls and damages my roof, for which you will be fully responsible

you should take a lesson from >>30164604
and learn the responsibility you are undertaking when you fly that shit around

I think there is a vast disconnect between ideas of what a backyars is in this thread. If you make it into backyard I've ever had or have seen, and you aren't a neighbor launching from your own backyard, you are seriously fucking bad at flying holy shit. That's like 50 ft forward and 20 ft up, then the drop down to the yard. If you have a 1000 drone and you can't keep that thing on check maybe just don't fly you expensive thing in a residential neighborhood. Or you know, ask the neighbors if it's okay.

And if there's a lot of land it's worse since you have no excuse to be on the land uninvited in the first place.

>>30156567
I shoot the rotors of my neighbors drone with a paintball gun. He gets SO FUCKING PISSED

File: image.jpg (46KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 480x360px

>>30164684
Yeah fuck you dude.


Please guys, realize we aren't all like this. It's that outside percentage that buys their shit at bestbuy and all that.

The moves transmitter (remote) I have to fly my aircraft cost literally almost $3,000, and most of us don't want to encroach your privacy or land rights.

>pic is one of the jets given to me by my sponsor and my $600 transmitter

File: image.jpg (178KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 960x720px

>>30164759
The most expensive transmitter*


>pic is 150CC engine, goes in >>30164539

>>30164759
mad jelly

what would be a ballpark figure to get a conservatively sized ducted fan jet up and running?

File: image.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>30164769
Depends. Do you have any experience with RC aircraft?

That jet does about 120 mph and it NOT a noob safe aircraft at all.

If you have no experience, there's quite a few steps involved m80

>>30164759
>transmitter almost $3,000
"If it took more than one shot, then it wasn't a Jacobs!"

Oops, sorry. Wasn't a Jeti.

But that's a different tale for a different forum.

>>30156841

>build a backyard jammer
>get absolutely raped by FAA

>>30157008
kek

File: image.jpg (1MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4032x3024px

>>30164805
I have no idea what that is a reference to. I'm sorry

>pic related

Touchscreen, most the switches are 3 position, 100% (I mean 100%) signal reliability w/ futaba receivers, and I can store far more planes than I own on there.

It also has a vibrator motor (like a phone), a camera for plane photo ID, and speakers so you can add your own sound clips.

It's super over the top but god damn does it make me feel like a rockstar at the field

>>30164729
>this is how the laws stand right now

No it isn't?

>you have no right to owning and operating flying cameras

But I do have a right to share and express ideas, and my use of a camera can be protected under that.

>you have no right to the air above another person's property

This depends on jurisdiction, but the FAA has decreed that "navigable airspace" extends down to the ground.

>you have no right to photographing anything you want on/over private land

Communicative photography is emphatically protected by the first amendment. If I'm above your house, filming a police incident down the street, then yes I am absolutely protected by the first amendment. If I'm photographing your back yard for a photo project documenting the changing landscape of suburbia, then yes I am absolutely protected by the first amendment.

Of course flying a drone into someones back yard just to fuck with them is an asshole thing to do. However, suggesting that drones aren't allowed to be over your house for longer than you *feel* is necessary is equally moronic.

>>30164856
>If I'm photographing your back yard for a photo project documenting the changing landscape of suburbia, then yes I am absolutely protected by the first amendment.
>taking pictures of private property that isn't in line of sight from somewhere you're actually allowed to be
>not illegal

you're a tard and obviously not a photographer. if you published "the faggots guide to suburban backyards" you'd be open to a shitload of suits for every photo you didn't have permission to take.

File: JETI_DC-24_06.jpg (124KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 1200x675px

>>30164832
>reference
First is Borderlands, second is pic related. Full duplex telemetry, metal gimbals, dual path transmitter, etc. Dirt cheap in comparison to Futaba, and quite a bit more extensible.

>>30156567
>Get own drone.
>Spy on them spying on you.

We should ban drones, they make me feel nervous (theyre all creeps

We should also ban conceal carry, you don't need a gun when you're not on your private property (they're looney)

Everybody wins

>>30164952
Just make everything scary illegal

>>30164922
>extensible

Elaborate, heathen!

>>30161520

Not according to the FAA, which is the sole governmental authority with the power to regulate airspace. The last time they weighed in on the issue they said:

1) Drones are considered aircraft, and are legally protected as are any other aircraft

2) Property owners don't have a legal right to deny aircraft (drones) the use of air above their property.

There is a judicial precedent that states that property owners have a right to the space above their land such that they can fully utilize and enjoy their land. This means that you're allowed to build structures generally as high as you'd like, and it means that you *might* have legal cause for establishing a no-fly-zone if some aircraft are denying you that full enjoyment.
However, that legal precedent comes from a very specific case that involved a very specific set of circumstances, and there was a nearby airport that was causing the landowner's problem, so there was a specific entity responsible for the aircraft nuisance.

There is zero legal precedent that would suggest that you can blanket-ban aircraft (drones included) from flying over your house. If nothing else it's nigh-on unenforceable. How would a property owner reasonably notify aircraft they they weren't allowed to fly there? At any rate, the FAA and the courts have specifically said that property owners do not have the right to deny aircraft in general, and as long as drones are considered aircraft they're included in that.

There are some states and cities that have started passing laws that restrict the usage of drones. These laws are ostensibly invalid under federal law, but so far they have not been tested in court.

Lastly, regardless of the whole airspace issue, drone operators are not exempt from nuisance laws. Excessive noise or invasion of privacy are grounds for calling the police.

>>30164958
>Just make everything scary illegal

Exactly, for my rights

>>30164900
>taking pictures of private property that isn't in line of sight from somewhere you're actually allowed to be

I'm allowed to be in the airspace, but technically speaking it has nothing to do with where I am, as long as I'm not trespassing.

If they have no reasonable expectation of privacy, then I'm not legally liable. Using a drone is exactly the same as Google photographing your back yard from space, or the news taking a video of your back yard from a helicopter. Photographing a back yard from an aircraft for a purpose that is deemed communicative is protected by case law.

No reasonable person would expect their back yard to have privacy from the public airspace above it.

>you're a tard and obviously not a photographer.

Actually I am.

So... can I shoot hot air balloons if they fly over my backyard?

>>30164978

Yes, you can also shoot at landing aircraft if you live near an airport.

>>30161572

Not true. There have been court cases before involving tall privacy fences and neighbors setting up surveillance cameras on two-story houses or on taller poles. The courts have said that a privacy fence does not give you a reasonable expectation of privacy.

There have also been court cases involving aerial photography and satellite photography as well. Local government used an aerial photographer to look for people who had installed things like swimming pools without permitting or paying property taxes. The property owners said that the aerial photography was an invasion of privacy, but the courts ruled that you have no reasonable expectation of privacy from above.

That rationale applies regardless of whether you're talking about a helicopter, plane, satellite, or drone.

>>30157008
This, best answer so far

>>30164984
I'm also pretty sure some satellites orbit over my house...

>>30164958
>Elaborate
http://www.jetimodel.com/en/Telemetry-Protocol/JETI-Telemetry-Communication-Protocol/
https://github.com/mtbsteve/APM2EX
https://sourceforge.net/projects/jetiexsensorcpplib/
https://sourceforge.net/projects/orbit-ecu-telemetry-sensor-lib
http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/using-jeti-telemetrie-as

and so on and so forth. Sequencers, conditionals, logical switches, timers, telemetry based alerts, I don't even remember what else - I set up mine and haven't touched it since, just do that whenever I get a new bird in, haven't happened in a while.

I bought DS-16 a couple of years back, it had 16 channels out of the box. With the latest firmware upgrade, it now supports 24.

>pay my kid brother who is 16 to go out naked twerking.
>Drone guy is in posession of CP
>Call cops
>??????
>Profit

>>30165023
That could work, but it´s a bit fucked up and you should seek help.

>>30164973
>no reasonable person would take offense at a flying video camera getting around pesky things like "no you can't photograph my backyard"

yes people have an expectation of privacy in a walled and gated, or simply obscured from public property like roadways, setting.

A new chopper and muhgoogle are entirely different. news copters filming crimes, fires, and traffic accidents that occur on private property is entirely different than some asshole with a quadcopter being too much of an antisocial faggot to ask permission to photograph your property. Relying on "no one told me no" is a surefire way to get sued.

>bu..bu...bu...muh FAA down 2 da grass
your house does this thing called occupy space above "the grass". any drone low enough to be a nuisance is within what is considered "your" airspace, as seen by cocksmokers flying drones 5-30ft off the ground and filming people.

File: 1463869639420.jpg (43KB, 592x409px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 592x409px

>>30156567
by frying it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoOT2_Z-GIE

File: 1449384639723.jpg (49KB, 602x655px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 602x655px

>dronefags fly their shitty quadrotors with cameras over peoples houses and shit and being a nuisance
>dronefags go full dindu nuffin when a homeowner forcefully grounds the drone or calls the police on them
>"your privacy don't matter, muh drone cost me $1000!

>>30164964
if you are flying a drone low enough to notice, it's too low somewhere you aren't allowed to be. a drone 200ft in the air isn't what anyone is taking offense at, a drone lower than your roofline at "ha ha you can't touch me!" distance is liable to get a wrench thrown at it and your asshurt dronefagging thrown out of court as you REEEE about how your bestbuy special is the same as shooting down a cessna

>>30165028
Not really, do we want the government and corporations to watch us all the time?

The next we know theyre sending hellfire missiles into your backyard

>>30165030
>"Gee bill that's an aweful neat looking set of horns you got on that there mount, hope you don't make too much noise with it!"
>"Don't want to scare my dog now."
>Spin around on a swivel mount with ten of these strapped to it.
>Something explodes in his backyard.

>>30165041
a news copter can do a wide shot of a suburban area, but can't decide to do a fluff piece about backyard fun by filming people. They can film crimes, fires, and accidents legally but not people in private settings.

Set up twin towers, white people would avoid them, niggers cant fly or afford drones and arabs crasch into them.

>>30161669
>Fun fact: you own the airspace over your property up to whatever you can reasonably make use of. Your claim is about 30 yards higher than the tallest structure on your land.

Bullshit. You don't own airspace. Nobody owns it. All airspace is considered public space, but the FAA has the authority to regulate it.

>Fun fact: it is unlawful to operate a UAV over a crowd

Bullshit. The only body with the power to regulate airspace in this way is the FAA, and they haven't done it. State and local laws attempting to regulate drones are illegal under federal law.

>Fun fact: it is unlawful to operate a UAV above 500ft AGL.

Bullshit. Airspace above 500 feet is completely public with very few exceptions (airports, military bases, etc.) In fact, 500 feet is recognized as the general minimum safe altitude for aircraft in the US. If anything, it's more illegal to fly drones below 500 feet AGL than above.

>Fun fact: it is unlawful to operate a UAV between sunset and sunrise

Total bullshit.

>Fun fact: photography and videography is not protected speech unless whatever is observed is visible from the ground, between the property owners airspace and the flight ceiling, or with the property owners expressed consent.

More and more bullshit. Photography from a public place (i.e. the public airspace around your property, which you do not own) is legal and protected under the 1st amendment.

Other court cases have established that pretty much the only time you have a reasonable expectation of privacy in today's world is when you're sitting inside with the windows drawn. You're bastardizing a common test for privacy.

IF you can see something from a public street outside THEN it is definitely not private. But that implication only goes one way. Something is not automatically considered private simply because it cannot be seen from the ground. The simplest case is when your neighbor has a taller house than you do.

File: IMG_3409.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>30164245
My main issue is safety. These models are not even remotely like certified aircraft; they shit the bed far too often to be flown over populated areas or valuable property. And as both an AMA-card-carrying model aviation enthusiast and a private pilot, it annoys the everloving fuck out of me that they're legally being treated akin to actual fucking aircraft.
>>30164249
>you also own the airspace above your home.
Technically, no.
>>30164351
>They can be over public property or any private property whos owner's permission they have and record whatever they can see, including what they can see of your property without trespassing.
First of all, no. In many states it's illegal to record someone without their consent.
Secondly, these aren't military drones we're talking about. They're not made for spying. They have wide-angle panoramic fisheye lenses for situational awareness and looking at scenery, not telephoto sensors for creeping on people from thousands of feet away. This, combined with the fact that they sound like a fucking hive of bees, means that you'll generally see/hear them LOOOOOOONG before they can see you, much less your naughty bits. So don't assume that a drone is trying to spy on you just because you can see one.
>>30164539
Unfortunately this, but I think public hysteria is also blowing things way out of proportion as well. It's not nearly as bad as it's made out to be.
>>30164759
>Hadron
I had one of those for a while. Munched it on a bad hand-launch a few months ago. They're cheap as fuck right now at my LHS ($109, I think?) but I don't think I'm gonna get another. I never really could enjoy flying it; a bit too nerve-wracking for me (well, the launches anyways - but with only 6 or 7 minutes flight time that's not enough satisfaction for me).
>>30164769
Flyzone also offers a pretty little L-39 for $160 (RX-R): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNBDXF2yv3A
Battery, charger, transmitter and receiver not included.

>>30165074
>Bullshit. You don't own airspace
nice try anon, I almost read the rest of your post

>>30161898

The FAA controls all airspace. You might be thinking of 500 feet AGL, which is the minimum safe altitude over populated areas. It's illegal to fly an aircraft below this altitude unless you're taking off or landing.

File: ss+(2016-06-04+at+02.09.37).png (85KB, 727x761px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 727x761px

>>30165028

>yes people have an expectation of privacy in a walled and gated, or simply obscured from public property like roadways, setting.

No they don't. Pic related- guess who won that suit? [spoiler]not the plaintiff[/spoiler]

>>30162023
>Does a hobby quadrocopter meet the definition of a public aircraft?

Right now they do, technically. The FAA is studying how to write new regulations that specifically cover drones in a different way.

>>30165074
>u lie!
you're just wilfully ignorant so you can be an asshole. You fucks give real RCer a bad name

>flying a drone above 500ft cuz I totes can the FAA totally doesn't say I can't REEEEEEEE!
>cessna crashes following its approved flight plan because of your shitty fucking drone

>>30162068

The ruling is based on the noise that disrupted his farm. The courts then had to go and find out what an enforceable ruling would be.

Rather than saying that planes couldn't be loud and give a decibel limit, which would be retarded, the looked at the situation and came up with an altitude, which makes 10000% more sense.

>>30165062
If you're actually being under surveillance, you will not be able to detect that unless you have your own counter-surveillance equipment. Here's a tip of the iceberg: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/new-surveillance-technology-can-track-everyone-in-an-area-for-several-hours-at-a-time/2014/02/05/82f1556e-876f-11e3-a5bd-844629433ba3_story.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v4PCrl-DJQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN7EFeLlJ30

>>30165084
>helicopter doing panorama shots of a coastline in accordance with standard rules with photographing residences and businesses viewable from public spaces
>anything to do with your dronefaggotry and illegal photography
enjoy getting sued for not getting proper releases. commercial photography tears hipster idiots like you a new asshole all the time.

>>30165090
>real RCer

Literally the airsoft of aviation.

>>30164964
>Not according to the FAA, which is the sole governmental authority with the power to regulate airspace.
Eh. The FAA is just an executive bureaucracy. They only have the authority to enforce the laws Congress makes for them. Granted, FAA authorization acts set fairly broad rulemaking powers and executive discretion, but when it comes to property rights by no means is the FAA the ultimate authority on this matter.

Now, is the FAA pushing for as much control as they can? Well of course they fucking are. The courts have agreed with them to some extent, but not entirely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rights
Congress could sort this particular issue out, but has instead been somewhat silent on the matter.

TL;DR: The FAA might arrest you for shooting an aircraft 10 feet over your backyard, but there's a good chance the courts might throw the case out.

>>30163365
>>30164270

If you want to talk about precedent, let's go look at all those other cases where the person shooting down a drone was arrested and convicted of everything from felony wanton endangerment to destruction of an aircraft.

One court case doesn't create unimpeachable precedent. This is especially true when the judge is a moron.

>>30161853
>https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdf
These apply to commercial/government UAS. The FAA technically has no authority to regulate model aviation, though that won't stop the FAA from trying.
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/media/021515_sUAS_Summary.pdf
>the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft . . .

Ahh, executive overreach at it's finest, huh?

>>30165121
the only time anyone has been charged and potentially convicted/made to pay for anything is when some drunk swats down a drone taking photographs in a public place.
>the judge is a moron for understanding the difference between public and private property ;_;
stop flying your drones at rock throwing distance from the ground and magically these problems stop happening for you.

>>30165107
I fly both full-size and models. Suck a dick, faggot.

>>30165039

You can be a moron if you want, that doesn't make you right.

FYI, nothing about flying a drone prevents you from being prosecuted under traditional laws against being a nuisance or a pervert.

Take pictures, follow the drone back to where it lands, take more pictures, call the police, etc. This is not that hard.

That still doesn't give anyone the right to destroy property. A paparazzi might be trespassing or being a public nuisance but that doesn't give anyone the right to break his camera.

>>30165104
>enjoy getting sued for not getting proper releases. commercial photography tears hipster idiots like you a new asshole all the time.

You don't need a release if you aren't materially benefiting from that image or that image is, or is used in conjunction with material protected by the first amendment.

>>30165028
>yes people have an expectation of privacy in a walled and gated, or simply obscured from public property like roadways, setting.

No, they don't. This has been settled in court hundreds of times. A privacy fence provides privacy, but it doesn't make it a crime to fly a helicopter overhead.

>>30165154
>it's illegal to be a cunt with a drone
>well just follow it back and tell me to stop ;^)
>waaaah u swatted my drone ;_;
what did you fucking expect. you idiots are rapidly making it a case of "whats in my yard I get to keep damn kids!" because amazingly the courts don't like idiots taking photos of kids and sunbathers and shit. flying a drone 300ft above the ground and 30ft above the ground aren't the same thing when it comes to aerial photography and privacy.

>>30165160
>a helicopter following the rules
>the same as a drone that doesn't
photography of buildings and photography of people are entirely different things. being a few pixels in an aerial photograph of your suburb isn't the same thing as some fuckstick flying a drone 30ft above your yard looking through windows and doing flyovers of your pool party