# Kentucky Man Shoots Drone, Gets Arrested **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 31, 2015, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634 "2015-07-31T06:38:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2015, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/241 "2015-08-04T22:07:06Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Well, that’s not quite true. You can remove them using physical force if necessary. You just can’t use deadly force. You are right - I was kind of exaggerating. You “can” use physical force, but you’re better off not. You open yourself up to civil damages. You can leave it up to the jury as a matter of law, but the common advice is to just walk away. This is the common advice among my fellow gun rights advocates as well. What if the kids are in the car? What if it’s the reincarnation of Osama Bin Laden!? The point is, the fact pattern matters a whole hell of a lot. ---
**Author:** ![Love\_Rhombus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/love_rhombus/32/10694_2.png) [@Love\_Rhombus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Love_Rhombus)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2015, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/242 "2015-08-04T22:17:31Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > It would also be nice if the drone owner had not lost the video that had been shot by his drone camera. How inconvenient. It was reported that the drone, it’s sim(?) card, and camera had been turned over to the drone owner. Now the drone owner can’t prove that he wasn’t videoing children and bedroom windows. Are you suggesting that the drone operator was indeed spying on the man’s daughter or that he was a creep? If so, why? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2015, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/243 "2015-08-04T22:31:10Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > What if it’s the reincarnation of Osama Bin Laden!? Eh, just unplug his dialysis machine. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2015, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/244 "2015-08-04T23:26:52Z")
If a Amway salesman comes to my door and won’t leave, I think it’s fine to tell him to leave. If he doesn’t, I can grab his arm and walk him to the street. If he gets angry when I grab his arm, I can grab him by the scruff of his neck. If he pushes me away, I can lock his arm behind his back and shove him against the wall. If he headbutts me, I can give him a roundhouse kick to the head. If he runs back to his car and pulls out a machete, I can pull my gun and threaten to shoot him. If he runs at me, I can shoot him. Now, some variation on these steps is totally understandable. But you can’t jump from him getting angry to me threatening to shoot him. It simply isn’t proportional. I think escalation like that is illegal and unethical. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2015, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/245 "2015-08-05T00:26:12Z")
> [@Love\_Rhombus](#): > > Are you suggesting that the drone operator was indeed spying on the man’s daughter or that he was a creep? If so, why? Did you happen to read the OP or the article linked in the OP? 😕 \*WDRB News spoke with Merideth Tuesday afternoon, and he gave his side of the story. “Sunday afternoon, the kids – my girls – were out on the back deck, and the neighbors were out in their yard,” Merideth said. “And they come in and said, ‘Dad, there’s a drone out here, flying over everybody’s yard.’” Merideth’s neighbors saw it too. “It was just hovering above our house and it stayed for a few moments and then she finally waved and it took off,” said neighbor Kim VanMeter. VanMeter has a 16-year-old daughter who lays out at their pool. She says a drone hovering with a camera is creepy and weird. “I just think you should have privacy in your own backyard,” she said.\* > **[Hillview man arrested for shooting down drone; cites right to privacy](https://www.wdrb.com/news/crime-reports/hillview-man-arrested-for-shooting-down-drone-cites-right-to-privacy/article_f22f00b3-b3a1-5e1b-9829-8e7ea914628c.html)** > > "It was hovering over top of my property, and I shot it out of the sky," said 47-year-old William H. Merideth. AFAIK, I didn’t introduce the possibility that the drone owner was a creepy guy. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2015, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/246 "2015-08-05T00:45:16Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > …If he runs at me, I can shoot him. > > Now, some variation on these steps is totally understandable. But you can’t jump from him getting angry to me threatening to shoot him. It simply isn’t proportional. I think escalation like that is illegal and unethical. (post shortened) The lone home owner didn’t threaten to shoot any of the 4 angry men. He said, “If you cross that sidewalk onto my property, there’s going to be another shooting.” You assume that statement means that the lone home owner had issued a threat to shoot/kill/murder one or all of the 4 angry men for trespass. I don’t see it that way. He may have meant he would fire a warning shot. He may have intended for the 4 angry men to notice that he had an open-carry firearm. Whatever his reason was for using that particular string of words, the end result is that the 4 angry men did not trespass on his property and the possibility of a physical confrontation was avoided. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2015, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/247 "2015-08-05T00:50:44Z")
The idea that four men retreated because he said he was going to fire a warning shot is nonsensical, bizarre, an extreme reach, and not worth responding to anymore. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2015, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/248 "2015-08-05T01:03:46Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > The idea that four men retreated because he said he was going to fire a warning shot is nonsensical, bizarre, an extreme reach, and not worth responding to anymore. The 4 angry men didn’t trespass. In the real world, the immediate problem of the possibility of a physical altercation was avoided. Situation diffused. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2015, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/249 "2015-08-05T01:11:45Z")
“Defused.” “Diffused” is what would have happened if he’d used his shotgun to turn the trespassers into a fine, red mist. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2015, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/250 "2015-08-05T01:28:14Z")
Oh, wait! I get it now! When the homeowner said there’d be a shooting, he was referring to a photoshoot! Like a bunch of models were going to arrive and do a Playboy spread if the four guys crossed the sidewalk. The men, being all seekrit homosexuals, fled and called the police. Problem diffused. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2015, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/251 "2015-08-05T01:40:37Z")
Perhaps they were\* very \*angry men, and the homeowner was threatening to shoot himself out of fear. (Puts gun to head) “And you guys are next if you don’t watch it!” But I suspect not. ---
**Author:** ![Love\_Rhombus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/love_rhombus/32/10694_2.png) [@Love\_Rhombus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Love_Rhombus)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2015, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/252 "2015-08-05T02:11:50Z")
> [@The\_Tooth](#): > > Perhaps they were\* very \*angry men, and the homeowner was threatening to shoot himself out of fear. (Puts gun to head) “And you guys are next if you don’t watch it!” > > But I suspect not. Ah, the old “Blazing Saddles” strategem. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2015, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/253 "2015-08-05T22:04:53Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > “Defused.” “Diffused” is what would have happened if he’d used his shotgun to turn the trespassers into a fine, red mist. “Defused” works better in the story line. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/254 "2015-08-06T04:57:21Z")
Anyway … unsure if [this May 13, 2015 Wall Street Journal article](http://www.wsj.com/articles/drones-boom-raises-new-question-who-owns-your-airspace-1431535417) was already linked to here. Note ahead of reading it that right to privacy case precedence includes that anything visible to the naked eye from publicly navigable airspace has [no reasonable expectation of privacy](https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/476/207/). So from the WSJ article: > [@](#): > > … The Federal Aviation Administration restricts private drones from flying near airports and manned aircraft, but says a 2012 federal law limits it from regulating most other aspects of their use. The agency also says that state and local authorities can’t regulate drone flights because it is the sole regulator of the airspace. … > > … The FAA says the advent of drones has extended “navigable airspace”—and thus the FAA’s authority—down to the ground. As long as private drones don’t endanger people, the agency says, they can legally hover just above private property in the U.S. The agency added that many states and cities have “noise and nuisance” laws they can use to prosecute drone users who fly over private property. … the devices are protected under federal law because they are legally considered aircraft, like a passenger jet. > > “There are significant, significant penalties about interference and destruction of civil aircraft,” FAA attorney Charles Raley told law-enforcement officials at a symposium this year. “Before you charge back and say, ‘We’re…shotgunning these things out of the sky,’ talk to counsel.” Here is information [from the FAA](https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=14153) directly (1/6/2014). > [@](#): > > The 2012 reauthorization bill also directed the FAA to “allow a government public safety agency to operate unmanned aircraft weighing 4.4 pounds or less” under certain restrictions. The bill specified these UAS must be flown within the line of sight of the operator, less than 400 feet above the ground, during daylight conditions, inside Class G (uncontrolled) airspace and more than five miles from any airport or other location with aviation activities. > Prior to the congressional action, the FAA and the Justice Department had been working on an agreement to streamline the COA process for law enforcement – an agreement that also meets the mandate. Initially, law enforcement organizations will receive a COA for training and performance evaluation. When the organization has shown proficiency in flying its UAS, it will receive an operational COA. The agreement expands the allowable UAS weight up to 25 pounds. … And for a more in the weeds discussion see [this Brookings paper.](http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports2/2014/09/civilian-drones-and-privacy) In short the combination of considering public navigable airspace as down to ground and rulings that state that that which can be observed with a naked eye from public navigable airspace does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy is an untenable circumstance going forward. And shooting down or otherwise intentionally destroying aircrafts, including unmanned drones, is and should be against the law. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/255 "2015-08-06T06:37:46Z")
Couldnt disagree more. If you violate someones privacy I hope they destroy your drone. Good luck getting a conviction. I would remain silent and not allow access to my property without a warrent. And good luck finding 12 jurers to convict. And your position would also mean that its open season on the famous by the paparazzi. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/256 "2015-08-06T07:46:32Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > Couldnt disagree more. If you violate someones privacy I hope they destroy your drone. Good luck getting a conviction. I would remain silent and not allow access to my property without a warrent. And good luck finding 12 jurers to convict. > > And your position would also mean that its open season on the famous by the paparazzi. As has been explained more than once, if the drone is directly over your house it is almost definitely NOT shooting or recording video of your property. Drone cameras don’t point straight down, the point down at a 30-45 degree angle and usually have wide angle lenses. So unless you have a very large property, if the drone is over your house, its aiming at a property next door. You don’t own the air over your own property, thats well established, and if you damage expensive equipment belonging to someone else because of ignorance and paranoia then you will surely face charges. ---
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 8:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/257 "2015-08-06T08:03:43Z")
> [@coremelt](#): > > As has been explained more than once, if the drone is directly over your house it is almost definitely NOT shooting or recording video of your property. Drone cameras don’t point straight down, the point down at a 30-45 degree angle and usually have wide angle lenses. So unless you have a very large property, if the drone is over your house, its aiming at a property next door. > > You don’t own the air over your own property, thats well established, and if you damage expensive equipment belonging to someone else because of ignorance and paranoia then you will surely face charges. Lets say I want to film a commercial on a street. I would meed to get a permit. Drone owners should also have to get a permit to film in public. Also, in California its illegal to film anyone where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 10:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/258 "2015-08-06T10:09:12Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Pervs/convicted child molesters should not be allowed to own/use drones. I believe laws should be changed to add camera-capable drone ownership to a list of restrictions child molesters must abide by. > > 4 angry men approached the lone homeowner. A man with a firearm diffused the situation without pointing his firearm at anyone. It was sufficient for the lone home owner to make it clear that he would defend himself from any attack by the 4 angry men. There are two things quite wrong with your proposal, first of all how do you define a “perv”? Because I’ve seen on this thread that the bar seems to have been lowered to the point that being able to look into someone’s private property makes one a potential “perv”, and that is reason enough to take drastic actions, like blasting stuff with a shotgun. If I’m on a balcony taking a photo of the city line, am I a “perv” because I can see into next condo’s windows? How about if I have a dash-cam and film schoolchildren crossing the street? Is that pervy? Secondly, you are proposing going after the technology and not the actual offense; by your logic pervs and child molesters should be forbidden from buying cameras, binoculars, telescopes, ladders (to peep over fences), a frikkin’ pole with a mirror taped to the tip, and so on and so forth. You can’t penalize ownership of technology like that, all technology can me misused; it would be the same as banning all firearms because they could potentially be used to commit crimes. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 10:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/259 "2015-08-06T10:53:34Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > Lets say I want to film a commercial on a street. I would meed to get a permit. Drone owners should also have to get a permit to film in public. Also, in California its illegal to film anyone where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Wrong, It’s completely legal for me to go shoot video using a Canon EOS 7D camera on the street without a permit. You only need a permit if you a closing the street down or disrupting traffic. Is it illegal to shoot video in california from a high hill overlooking many houses? Using a wide lens where people are unidentifiable? Again, as I’ve said before drone wide angle lenses mean that from any reasonable height individual people are unidentifiable. Commonly used commercial drones including the one in this case are designed for shooting sweeping dramatic wide shots of landscapes, not for spying on people. It obvious reading the comments here that all the anti-drone people are basing their knowledge on the south park episode and have never looked at the capabilities and what video looks like from an actual drone. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 11:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/260 "2015-08-06T11:06:40Z")
Surely, you can’t say what “drone video capabilities” are, because that depends on the camera, not on the drone, and it would be trivially easy to attach any sort of camera to a drone. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634.md?page=14)