Many people simply do not like drones, let alone drones that hover over their children in their own backyard. If you drove your car onto someone’s property in order to take pictures of their children sunbathing, your car may get damaged, and I doubt a jury would show much sympathy. just sayin’
You may have noticed that the homeowner wasn’t charged with destroying the drone.
Having four angry, verbally-aggressive men advancing on you could be considered a life-threatening act of aggression. Luckily, the four angry, verbally-aggressive men chose not to trespass.
If you think it’s “very low”, then you’re aware that it does happen.
I only have to convince my elected representatives that drones are a menace to airplane and helicopter navigation, dangerous to the people beneath a falling drone’s flight path, and have been used to video children. The FAA already frowns on drone owner/pilots flying over residential areas. It shouldn’t take much persuading to convince local law-makers to ban all drone flights over homes and crowds.
Sticks and stones…
The standard for using deadly force is a reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury. It is not reasonable to use deadly force against someone just because they are pissed.
It’s amazing that the actual video, from the drone, mysteriously vanished.
How does that memory card get removed? Who has it? Who would benefit from having the actual evidence vanish?
It’s messed up.
If it’s 4 angry dudes who’s $1800.00 drone just got shot down? :dubious: Granted, that’s just what this guy in the OPs article said, but I don’t think it’s that unreasonable to postulate that 4 angry guys who just lost a high dollar piece of equipment to gun fire MIGHT do more than put their feet on the offending shooters lawn.
Have you ever had unhappy people approach you?
Did they survive?
In my case, yes, I have dealt with angry people. One time while I was driving in heavy city traffic, I changed lanes. While traffic was stopped, the guy who was then behind me got out of his car, walked up to me, and accused me of cutting him off. He also raised his voice and made frantic gesticulations. I was going to blow his head off, but I wasn’t armed. Amazing how we both lived to tell this tale.
Since Mr. Meredith initiated the violence, perhaps the drone operators should have “stood their ground” and shot him from long range, as opposed to trying to approach him.
If they wanted to go to jail I guess that might be a good idea. I don’t believe that even in some fantasy strawman you could shoot some guy on his own property for destroying your drone, no matter how expensive it was.
But threatening to kill someone for stepping off of a sidewalk – no biggie, I guess.
If you drove it on purpose, you might get worse than a beating. A car is a deadly weapon you know.
Hell, so is a drone if you think about it.
Am I the only one who thought back to when I was a kid, and there was the neighbor whose yard you never wanted the ball or frisbee to go into, because it was GONE! A la The Sandlot? 
Your KILLING me Smalls! 
No - I’ve got no sympathy for folk who want to buzz their drones - or remote control planes - over other peoples’ homes. But you don’t get to just shoot off your shotgun in the neighborhood either.
Well, threatening to kill someone and their buddies who are steeping off the sidewalk onto your property is not as big a deal as your strawman of shooting the guy from a distance and claiming it’s a stand your ground situation, no. I’m surprised you think they are equivalent, to be honest. And, of course, depending on if you believe this guys story, he WARNED them not to step onto his property and then, when they didn’t, he didn’t shoot them, so I’d go with ‘no biggie’ with some caveats and requests for more information.
Strawman is a really odd synonym for comment made in jest.
“I watched Hollywood Squares last night, but the arguments were awful. Everything Paul Lynde said was a strawman!”
[QUOTE=Ravenman]
Strawman is a really odd synonym for comment made in jest.
“I watched Hollywood Squares last night, but the arguments were awful. Everything Paul Lynde said was a strawman!”
Today 07:44 PM
[/QUOTE]
Maybe I’m misunderhearing what you meant by the below then.
This was in response to me saying:
[QUOTE=XT]
If it’s 4 angry dudes who’s $1800.00 drone just got shot down? Granted, that’s just what this guy in the OPs article said, but I don’t think it’s that unreasonable to postulate that 4 angry guys who just lost a high dollar piece of equipment to gun fire MIGHT do more than put their feet on the offending shooters lawn.
[/QUOTE]
If you weren’t offering this as an equivalent course of action I’m seriously confused as to why you posted it or what you intended it to say. Well, and what your overall point is in this. You are obviously angry that this guy ‘threatened’ the drone owner and his buddies with violence if they set foot on his grounds, and you are less obviously saying something about stand your ground and shooting the offending shot gun wielding drone killer, but no idea where you are going or why you think what I wrote was a strawman of your position…whatever it is.
He made it clear that he would DEFEND himself if the four angry, verbally-aggressive men continued to advance and attack him. That warning seems to have stopped the four angry, verbally-aggressive men from advancing.
Wow. You drive like you post. I’m shocked.
In the first place, he did not use deadly force. In the second place, he did not use deadly force. Are you aware that he did not use deadly force?
To be quite honest about it, I don’t see anything here to disagree with. If I had just shot down a drone hovering above my property looking at my daughter, and four pissed off guys arrived asking if I was the son of a bitch that shot down their drone, I wouldn’t be horribly enthusiastic about letting them approach me either.
He threatened to use deadly force and all indications from him are that he would have used deadly force if they stepped off the sidewalk. Are you saying he would have been justified? Was his fear reasonable?