Father shot down drone hovering over his house as his daughters sunbathed

Of course he wouldn't.


They don't do the shoot people if they piss you off thing in Germany afaik.

It's pretty unusual.

Sadly as drones become and more available I wouldn't be surprised if we see a lot of despicable pedophiles and perverts purchasing them and using them in a nefarious manner

The pedo thing is kind of a worst case scenario, but I do not think it ends there.

  • Burglars preparing their deed.
  • The sneaky neighbour who now only watches from the window and would like to know more.
  • Your employer checking what you are doing in your leisure time.

And this is a completely uncomplete list. Drones have some potential use in logistics etc., but the potential for misuse and abuse is endless.
 
War Shotgun guy!

The protection of your family (and that includes their privacy) is far more important than any silly city ordinance.

This is why you always keep a good waterfowl Shotgun handy :icon_chee

This. Waterfowl Shotgun = 3.5" 12g or larger. Fuck that droner.
 
This was private property. If somebody was holding their cellphone over your fence while your daughters were sunbathing would you be OK with that?

I'm gonna guess you wouldn't be.

Yeah I guess some people don't know the difference between public and private property. Or maybe it's all public property now.
 
Admittedly I do not know the details of the situation, so I am making some assumptions here. But if four men (pissed off men) tried to enter his premises without his consent, I do think he had the right to scare them off and wait for police to regulate the matter.

I also agree it doesn't really make him look like a very nice person, but consider the context here. These people - at least in his mind - flew over his house, recorded his daughters sunbathing, and then had the nerve to demand the return of said drone and wanted to enter his premises.

I am sure that is what he thought was happening, that doesnt make him not a crazy asshole. He is the criminal in this situation, not the drone operators.
 
It's pretty unusual.



The pedo thing is kind of a worst case scenario, but I do not think it ends there.

  • Burglars preparing their deed.
  • The sneaky neighbour who now only watches from the window and would like to know more.
  • Your employer checking what you are doing in your leisure time.

And this is a completely uncomplete list. Drones have some potential use in logistics etc., but the potential for misuse and abuse is endless.

Damn that one hadn't even crossed my mind, I do hope that they start working out laws and regulations regarding these drones soon because if not there will be some very serious privacy invasions in the near future

I would absolutely hate my employer being able to monitor my activities outside of the work place
 
I don't really have a problem with him shooting the drone but the guy sounds like a nut. The type of guy that gives SYG a bad rap.
 
I am sure that is what he thought was happening, that doesnt make him not a crazy asshole. He is the criminal in this situation, not the drone operators.

Which is a huge problem. If flying your drone across somebody else's home and film there with your low altitude, HD drone is legal, then the law is horribly, horribly wrong.
 
Pretty sure he wasnt threatening to wound them.

That's your personal opinion, don't argue with it as a fact.

He said if the voyeurs illegally enter his property, there will be another shooting. That's all you know.

There's no need to hyperbolizing it into "murder", or "butcher", or "destroy", or "double-leg takedown".
 
I support this guy. Where's kickstarter or something so I can send him a buck.
 
That's your personal opinion, don't argue with it as a fact.

He said if the voyeurs illegally enter his property, there will be another shooting. That's all you know.

There's no need to hyperbolizing it into "murder", or "butcher", or "destroy", or "double-leg takedown".

There's no need to hyperbolize them into "voyeurs". The article doesn't identify them as such.
 
Which is a huge problem. If flying your drone across somebody else's home and film there with your low altitude, HD drone is legal, then the law is horribly, horribly wrong.

As another poster pointed out, the drone wasnt flying over the guys house. He was just an idiot. Thats part of why people arent allowed to just shoot at things in the sky.
 
That's your personal opinion, don't argue with it as a fact.

He said if the voyeurs illegally enter his property, there will be another shooting. That's all you know.

There's no need to hyperbolizing it into "murder", or "butcher", or "destroy", or "double-leg takedown".

Ah yes, every time I hear someone threaten to shoot another person, i think about how it is not a threat on their life.
 
Yeah I guess some people don't know the difference between public and private property. Or maybe it's all public property now.

735.gif
 

Well, if the drone was at 270 feet, that makes the shooter make a little weird. But there is plenty you can recognize from that far up.



And independent of the current case, cameras will just keep getting better, so we will reach a point where 300 feet would be a totally adequate distance to take halfway decent photos.
 
I completely sympathize with the shotgun guy.

We are gonna get a lot more problems in the next few years. People are already flying drones near airports, are interfering with air rescue helicopters, have been used to scout nuclear power plants (in France, nobody knows who it was)... as these things get more common and cheaper, there will be HUGE problems because a lot of stuff is not regulated yet and / or hard to enforce.

This exact situation is also a nightmare. Imagine your kids playing naked in the (not visible from the outside) garden. Any idiot with a drone can fly over, scout the neighbourhood and transmit the pictures / video. Nothing needs to be stored on the drone (at least I assume that is the case), so there would be no direct evidence.

This is a real legal issue, btw. Does your property also include the airspace above it? And if so, up to what height? I would expect that most legal experts would answer "no" to this question, but I may be wrong.

Yeah, I've seen ones with cameras as cheap as $150. And with Amazon's plan... pretty sure no one wants to look up and see a bunch of drones in the sky.
 
Kentucky laws vague regarding drone use and personal privacy

BULLITT COUNTY, Ky. (WDRB) -- His story made national headlines in less than 12 hours and a lot of people are standing behind the Bullitt County man who was arrested after shooting down a drone.

According to Hillview Police, William Merideth broke the law when he shot his gun within city limits.

Some Kentucky lawmakers and advocates say things need to change regarding his family's right to privacy.

"I agree with the homeowner -- drones are invasive," said Eric Guster of Guster Law Firm. He appeared on the Fox News Channel Wednesday morning after Merideth’s story gained national attention.

"If a drone is hovering over your house, do you reasonably believe that it's invading your privacy, taking pictures of your wife, is it peering into the bathroom? Those are types of things that drones can do," said Guster.

That's what William Merideth says he was worried about. Sunday evening, his daughter noticed a drone flying over their house in Hillview. Merideth got his shotgun and shot it down.

“If he would've just flown over my property there wouldn't have been a word said,” said Merideth. “But when he hovered above my property for more than a few seconds, I feel like I had the right to defend my property."

Merideth is now charged with wanton endangerment and criminal mischief because he fired a gun within city limits.

Defense attorney David Mejia says using a shotgun may not have been the best option, but he would have no difficulty defending Merideth in court.

"He believed it (threat) to be imminent, he believed it to be immediate and he honestly subjectively believed that his right as a Kentucky citizen permitted him to protect his privacy and that's what he did," Mejia said. "He put that gun to the use for which it was designed and manufactured and it worked."

There are video, voyeurism, and trespassing laws -- but there do not appear to be any Kentucky or federal statutes relating to privacy specifically involving drones.

The FAA says it has the responsibility to keep the airspace safe from the ground up. Typically, regular aircraft fly above 500 feet.

According to the Academy of Model Aeronautics Safety Code, drones should not fly higher than 400 feet.

But what about the airspace directly over your home? An FAA spokesperson says he's asking its attorneys for an answer.

"Right now there are no guidelines to these unmanned drones," said Merideth.

Rep. Diane St. Onge, House District 63, is trying to change that.

"I think this is exactly the type of issue that we need to be addressing,” she said.

For the past two years St. Onge has sponsored legislation to regulate drones and protect people’s privacy. Those bills never passed.

"Should this have been passed and heard and passed last session,” said St. Onge, “perhaps this incident that happened with this gentleman -- shooting down a drone hovering over his backyard -- would not have occurred because we'd know the parameters are and what the law is. The law enforcement would know what to do."

Merideth now hopes more politicians take notice.

"There needs to be federal guidelines on the way these people can operate these and collect data,” he said.

A judge will ultimately decide what happens to Merideth.

St. Onge says she plans to reintroduce her drone bill later this summer.

http://www.wdrb.com/story/29665291/kentucky-laws-vague-regarding-drone-use-and-personal-privacy
 
Good. Those pervs were violating his airspace.
 
Back
Top