# 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:** 15
**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 6, 2015, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/281 "2015-08-06T19:33:41Z")
pfft. [http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/air\_space\_lawyer/2013\_december/ASL\_V26N3\_WINTER13\_Silversmith.authcheckdam.pdf](http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/air_space_lawyer/2013_december/ASL_V26N3_WINTER13_Silversmith.authcheckdam.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/282 "2015-08-06T19:37:25Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Considering the FAA has Federal jurisdiction over the use of aircraft, I don’t find it likely that every town will get to create their own laws on the use of drones, in the same way that every down doesn’t get to develop its own policy on immigration. Really? Are you saying that sanctuary cities aren’t really sanctuary cities? You know, those places where Federal laws regarding immigration do not apply. As far as drone use is concerned, the FAA is just another federal agency which is subject to oversight of the people, by the people, for the people and their elected representatives. Public hearings may persuade the FAA that drones should not be flown over residential areas without having first obtaining written permission of the buildings owners. Or that drone owners must first obtain $50,000+ of liability insurance. Adequate penalties for violations should also be considered. ---
**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, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/283 "2015-08-06T19:40:34Z")
Are there any helicopters involved in this case? And you have yet to address whether states or localities can mandate insurance on drone users. And you have also argued that only the FAA can regulate any aspect of flight. But where do ;state and local’ regulations come from? ---
**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 6, 2015, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/284 "2015-08-06T19:41:45Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Really? Are you saying that sanctuary cities aren’t really sanctuary cities? You know, those places where Federal laws regarding immigration do not apply. You clearly don’t know what a sanctuary city is. It has to do with whether that locality is going to use local police powers to enforce Federal laws. It has nothing to do with making Federal laws subordinate to local law. > [@](#): > > Public hearings may persuade the FAA that drones should not be flown over residential areas without having first obtaining written permission of the buildings owners. Or that drone owners must first obtain $50,000+ of liability insurance. Adequate penalties for violations should also be considered. Well, considering that the FAA is years into its rulemaking process on the use of UAS, these public hearings you propose might as well suggest that monkeys ought to fly out of the butts of drone operators. Unmanned monkeys, that is. And that these levitating simians have permission of landowners to aviate over their property, of course. ---
**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, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/285 "2015-08-06T19:42:54Z")
[https://www.slackdavis.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/mandatory\_aviation\_insurance08.pdf](https://www.slackdavis.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/mandatory_aviation_insurance08.pdf) Oh wait. California mandates mandatory insurance. Inform the FAA!! ---
**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 6, 2015, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/286 "2015-08-06T19:49:14Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > And you have yet to address whether states or localities can mandate insurance on drone users. The FAA is writing to rules on how to use UAS. These rules include how they may be operated in- and out of line of sight, safe altitudes, etc. A state can’t adopt laws under the guise of insurance requirements that alter the FAA’s authority to make those regulations, because the FAA has Federal statutory authority to deal with those matters. It would be like saying that states could use insurance laws to prohibit yellow aircraft from flying in “their” airspace. Your proposal to use insurance laws to regulate drones would be laughed out of court – the general principle of FAA preemption of state laws has long since been established, and while there are gray areas of the extent of the FAA’s preemption authority, your suggestions for state and local regulation are not in that gray space. > [@](#): > > And you have also argued that only the FAA can regulate any aspect of flight. But where do ;state and local’ regulations come from? If the FAA chooses not to regulate something, states may do so. States may regulate the use of state-owned aircraft. A state-owned airport may dictate noise abatement procedures for that particular airport, but it could not pass a law directing noise abatement procedures for a privately owned airport. These are the general sorts of things that a state may do, but it sure as hell doesn’t come anywhere close to regulating safety of flight or getting permission from landowners to overfly real property. Not even close. ---
**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 6, 2015, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/287 "2015-08-06T19:52:25Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > [https://www.slackdavis.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/mandatory\_aviation\_insurance08.pdf](https://www.slackdavis.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/mandatory_aviation_insurance08.pdf) > > Oh wait. California mandates mandatory insurance. Inform the FAA!! That’s not what’s at issue. You said states can use insurance laws to regulate the flight of drones. No, they cannot. States can require insurance on personal property, but that has nothing to do with how the personal property is operated. ETA: If this debate is now to the point of you trying to find the words “insurance” and “aircraft” in a single document, without respect for what you were actually claiming (that states can use insurance requirements to control how drones fly), then this isn’t actually a debate anymore. It’s just barfing up random documents in which you don’t actually care what you’re trying to prove. ---
**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, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/288 "2015-08-06T19:53:51Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > The FAA is writing to rules on how to use UAS. These rules include how they may be operated in- and out of line of sight, safe altitudes, etc. A state can’t adopt laws under the guise of insurance requirements that alter the FAA’s authority to make those regulations, because the FAA has Federal statutory authority to deal with those matters. It would be like saying that states could use insurance laws to prohibit yellow aircraft from flying in “their” airspace. Your proposal to use insurance laws to regulate drones would be laughed out of court – the general principle of FAA preemption of state laws has long since been established, and while there are gray areas of the extent of the FAA’s preemption authority, your suggestions for state and local regulation are not in that gray space. > > If the FAA chooses not to regulate something, states may do so. States may regulate the use of state-owned aircraft. A state-owned airport may dictate noise abatement procedures for that particular airport, but it could not pass a law directing noise abatement procedures for a privately owned airport. These are the general sorts of things that a state may do, but it sure as hell doesn’t come anywhere close to regulating safety of flight or getting permission from landowners to overfly real property. Not even close. Would you provide a cite or two please? ---
**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, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/289 "2015-08-06T19:54:57Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > That’s not what’s at issue. You said states can use insurance laws to regulate the flight of drones. No, they cannot. States can require insurance on personal property, but that has nothing to do with how the personal property is operated. So then they can require insurance on the personal property that is a drone? Gotcha. ---
**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 6, 2015, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/290 "2015-08-06T19:59:55Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > Would you provide a cite or two please? > [@](#): > > By law, the FAA is charged with ensuring the safe and efficient use of U.S. airspace. This authority generally preempts any state or local government from enacting a statute or regulation concerning matters – such as airspace regulation—that are reserved exclusively to the U.S. Government. > > For example, a state law or regulation that prohibits or limits the operation of an aircraft, sets standards for airworthiness, or establishes pilot requirements generally would be preempted. But state and local governments do retain authority to limit the aeronautical activities of their own departments and institutions. Under most circumstances, it would be within state or local government power to restrict the use of certain aircraft, including a UAS, by the state or local police or by a state department or university. [Link.](https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=14153) > [@madsircool](#): > > So then they can require insurance on the personal property that is a drone? Gotcha. Sure, they probably can, to the extent that the insurance requirement is really about dealing with civil liability of the UAS crashing into something or being damaged itself. A state couldn’t impose an insurance requirement that, in order to operate the drone, the owner must get a drone licence from that state, however. That’s only in the FAA’s power to do. ---
**Author:** ![SmellMyWort](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea5d25/32.png) [@SmellMyWort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmellMyWort)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/291 "2015-08-06T20:24:31Z")
> [@madsircool](#): > > Its perfectly reasonable to believe that the daughter of the homeowner suffered emotional distress from the drone hovering above her as she sunbathed on private property and not in public view. > > Im not sure that a law can only protect the children of a class of people. Im not a lawyer but I would like to think the child of any one of us would expect the same protections as the child of a celebrity. Just want to point out that no sunbathing daughters were actually harmed in this incident since there _weren’t_ any sunbathing daughters. The Drone Slayer mentioned that he has two daughters but never says they were sunbathing, just that they were out on the deck. The Drone Slayer’s neighbor says that her daughter likes to lay out by their pool, but never says she was doing so at the time of the incident. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/292 "2015-08-06T20:56:48Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > …Well, considering that the FAA is years into its rulemaking process on the use of UAS, these public hearings you propose might as well suggest that monkeys ought to fly out of the butts of drone operators. Unmanned monkeys, that is. And that these levitating simians have permission of landowners to aviate over their property, of course. Hahahaha. You’re a hoot. Flying monkeys! Who else would have thought of introducing them? 😃 The FAA makes rules. The FAA can change the rules. The FAA holds public hearings to discuss new rules and changing old rules. The public, local, and state authorities have input in publically held FAA hearings. The FAA is subject to oversight from Congress and the courts. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/293 "2015-08-06T21:01:25Z")
> [@SmellMyWort](#): > > Just want to point out that no sunbathing daughters were actually harmed in this incident since there _weren’t_ any sunbathing daughters. The Drone Slayer mentioned that he has two daughters but never says they were sunbathing, just that they were out on the deck. The Drone Slayer’s neighbor says that her daughter likes to lay out by their pool, but never says she was doing so at the time of the incident. Since the drone owner seems to have conveniently lost the video taken on it’s Titanic voyage, maybe the drone owner could share some of the other videos he’s made over residential areas? ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/294 "2015-08-06T21:06:55Z")
> [@SmellMyWort](#): > > Just want to point out that no sunbathing daughters were actually harmed in this incident since there _weren’t_ any sunbathing daughters. The Drone Slayer mentioned that he has two daughters but never says they were sunbathing, just that they were out on the deck. The Drone Slayer’s neighbor says that her daughter likes to lay out by their pool, but never says she was doing so at the time of the incident. Also, the girls are hella hot. ---
**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 6, 2015, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/295 "2015-08-06T22:00:29Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Since the drone owner seems to have conveniently lost the video taken on it’s Titanic voyage, maybe the drone owner could share some of the other videos he’s made over residential areas? Do you even attempt to familiarize yourself with the issues you’re debating? This was the second flight of the drone, which then ended up exploded at the hands of the hillbilly air defense artillery. ---
**Author:** ![Cartooniverse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cartooniverse/32/3084_2.png) [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/296 "2015-08-06T22:31:34Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > When people start flying around weaponzed drones (cuz 2nd Amendment!!!), I wonder how current laws wil change. [Already a thing.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMgRXFvLYKw). Now anyone can fly a drone anywhere and fire a weapon at anyone. Well done, Mrrikkah. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2015, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/297 "2015-08-06T23:45:12Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Do you even attempt to familiarize yourself with the issues you’re debating? This was the second flight of the drone, which then ended up exploded at the hands of the hillbilly air defense artillery. Then you are aware that there were other flights. I see no reason for the drone owner not to share the video his other adventure. The drone owner might suggest that he has a right to privacy. Did the drone really explode? The picture I saw showed damage to 1 blade of 1 of the 4 props. ---
**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 7, 2015, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/298 "2015-08-07T00:21:04Z")
What photos the drone took is completely immaterial to the criminal actions of the homeowner. He has zero right to shoot other people’s property. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/299 "2015-08-07T15:35:03Z")
For reference purposes only - > [@kayaker](#): > > Also, the girls are hella hot. > [@Ravenman](#): > > What photos the drone took is completely immaterial to the criminal actions of the homeowner. He has zero right to shoot other people’s property. It appears that not everyone has the same concerns as you. This is a public board, after all. ---
**Author:** ![control-z](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/eada6e/32.png) [@control-z](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/control-z)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2015, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634/300 "2015-08-07T16:03:20Z")
I still say the homeowner should have used a net or bolas (weights on the end of rope) to take the copter down. No law against throwing a net in the air on your own property. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kentucky-man-shoots-drone-gets-arrested/726634.md?page=16)