# Would a search warrant be required?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-search-warrant-be-required/825219>\
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion\
**Created:** [November 28, 2018, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-search-warrant-be-required/825219 "2018-11-28T17:35:27Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\
**Post date:** [November 29, 2018, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-search-warrant-be-required/825219/21 "2018-11-29T23:38:28Z")

</div>

> [@muldoonthief](#):
>
> So reading the Section 107 regulations, a “small unmanned aircraft” is “an unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds on takeoff, including everything that is on board or otherwise attached to the aircraft.”
> 
> But is there any exclusion for minimum size? I can’t believe a toy like the tiny [$20 radio controlled flying Superman](https://www.target.com/p/propel-radio-control-toy-vehicles/-/A-52589739) is somehow covered by FAA rules, including requiring a “remote pilot certificate with a small UAS rating”.

> [@Kron](#):
>
> Part 107 certification is only required for commercial operation. Personal use of small drones is covered under hobbyist use, which does not require a cert.

“Drones” under 0.55 pounds do not require certification, a license number, or any sort of license for the operator. So, most likely, based on size, the flying Superman wouldn’t require one.

0.55 pounds is pretty lightweight. About 80% of my and my spouses RC model collection required official numbers after the new rule went through.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\
**Post date:** [November 30, 2018, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-search-warrant-be-required/825219/22 "2018-11-30T23:42:18Z")

</div>

It seems to me to be similar to using an infrared detector to search out grow-ops and then using the information gathered to get a search warrant. It also seems to me that a grower could defeat this by funneling the generated heat 1000’ into the ground using a heat pump. Kind of geothermal in reverse.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![LTU2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/22d042/32.png) [@LTU2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LTU2)\
**Post date:** [December 1, 2018, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-search-warrant-be-required/825219/23 "2018-12-01T03:21:09Z")

</div>

> [@rbroome](#):
>
> I thought the law was quite the opposite. A person does not own the airspace above his property. I have never read otherwise.
> 
> And since you grant exceptions to aircraft, no warrant would be needed.

A person owns the air space above them as noted this is known as “Air Rights”

The SW issue would fall under the “Open Fields”, doctrine, no warrant would be required.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-search-warrant-be-required/825219.md?page=1)