by Zeinbrad » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:24 pm
by Azenyanistan » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:25 pm
Zeinbrad wrote:I thought this would be a good peaceful thing to discuss both guns in America and Drones. I understand this probably won't be a hot topic.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015 ... -backyard/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... down-1800/
http://www.inquisitr.com/2297396/man-sh ... echnology/
So basically, a Kentucky man saw a Drone going around his neighborhood, didn't care until he noticed that it was hovering over his backyard were his daughter was sunbathing. So he shot the thing down with a shotgun (birdshot, which is not Buckshot and is harmless compared to buckshot). Then the owner and his buddies came over, asking if "he was the son of a bitch that shot down his done", the drone by the way costing $1800. Feeling threatened he pulled out a pistol and threatened to shot them if he went past the sidewalk.
He got arrested.
So NSG, was the man in his rights to shot down the drone and should it's owner be charged with invasion of privacy? I feel the man was within his rights, used reasonable force and the owner of the drone should be charged.
by Washington Resistance Army » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:27 pm
by Rhyfelnydd » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:27 pm
New Grestin wrote:Welcome to Nationstates Summer.
You can log out anytime you like, but you can never leave.
Charlie Chaplin wrote:Nothing is permanent in this wicked world, not even our troubles.
by Zeinbrad » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:28 pm
Rhyfelnydd wrote:Unless the drone had a gun attached and was aiming it at the daughter, no, he could not have involved firearms in the situation. Now, if it had a camera on it and it was being used to film the daughter, yes he should have done something about it outside of turning it into a shooting issue. This is not a situation the required any type of gun.
by Lockdownn » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:29 pm
Rhyfelnydd wrote:Unless the drone had a gun attached and was aiming it at the daughter, no, he could not have involved firearms in the situation. Now, if it had a camera on it and it was being used to film the daughter, yes he should have done something about it outside of turning it into a shooting issue. This is not a situation the required any type of gun.
Rhyfelnydd wrote:Now, if it had a camera on it and it was being used to film the daughter, yes he should have done something about it outside of turning it into a shooting issue. This is not a situation the required any type of gun.
by Sebtopiaris » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:30 pm
by Baxten » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:31 pm
Sebtopiaris wrote:If you don't want your drone shot down, don't fly it over sunbathing women like a peeping fucking tom. Seems straightforward.
by The Republican United States » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:33 pm
Sebtopiaris wrote:If you don't want your drone shot down, don't fly it over sunbathing women like a peeping fucking tom. Seems straightforward.
by Dooom35796821595 » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:33 pm
by Zeinbrad » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:33 pm
by Rhyfelnydd » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:36 pm
Lockdownn wrote:Totally reasonable. People who use drones should keep it to public or their own property.Rhyfelnydd wrote:Unless the drone had a gun attached and was aiming it at the daughter, no, he could not have involved firearms in the situation. Now, if it had a camera on it and it was being used to film the daughter, yes he should have done something about it outside of turning it into a shooting issue. This is not a situation the required any type of gun.
Hmm, have they come out with drone catching nets or emp guns yet?Rhyfelnydd wrote:Now, if it had a camera on it and it was being used to film the daughter, yes he should have done something about it outside of turning it into a shooting issue. This is not a situation the required any type of gun.
How else would the person know where to fly?
New Grestin wrote:Welcome to Nationstates Summer.
You can log out anytime you like, but you can never leave.
Charlie Chaplin wrote:Nothing is permanent in this wicked world, not even our troubles.
by Zeinbrad » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:36 pm
Dooom35796821595 wrote:The potential for drones to invade privacy is an important issue that needs to be addressed, however shooting down an expensive drone for being OVER your property, then pointing a handgun at the owners when they ask for it to be returned, threatening to shoot them if they return is exessive force. The man needs a psych evaluation and his firearm licence taken away. And probably a lawsuit considering it happened in America.
by Reploid Productions » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:36 pm
Sebtopiaris wrote:If you don't want your drone shot down, don't fly it over sunbathing women like a peeping fucking tom. Seems straightforward.
[violet] wrote:Maybe we could power our new search engine from the sexual tension between you two.
by Daynor » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:40 pm
by Dooom35796821595 » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:41 pm
Zeinbrad wrote:Dooom35796821595 wrote:The potential for drones to invade privacy is an important issue that needs to be addressed, however shooting down an expensive drone for being OVER your property, then pointing a handgun at the owners when they ask for it to be returned, threatening to shoot them if they return is exessive force. The man needs a psych evaluation and his firearm licence taken away. And probably a lawsuit considering it happened in America.
I think that the drone owner knew his drone was destroyed, considered he said "are you the son of a bitch who shot down my drone" I would assume he knew it was done for.
I think he is going to court.
by New Chilokver » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:44 pm
About User Hong Kong-Australian Male Pro: Yeah Neutral: Meh Con: Nah | | [1] | [2] | [3] | [4] | [5] | [HOI I - Peacetime conditions] Head of Government: President Sohum Jain Population: 195.10 million GDP (nominal): $6.39 trillion Military personnel: 523.5k IIWiki | There is no news. | | Other Stuff
|
by Lockdownn » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:46 pm
Dooom35796821595 wrote:The potential for drones to invade privacy is an important issue that needs to be addressed, however shooting down an expensive drone for being OVER your property, then pointing a handgun at the owners when they ask for it to be returned, threatening to shoot them if they return is exessive force. The man needs a psych evaluation and his firearm licence taken away. And probably a lawsuit considering it happened in America.
Rhyfelnydd wrote:Good point, should have realized that. Then I suppose I see where he is coming from. Don't know if I would have shot it down though, most likely would have just pulled the daughter inside and waved it away, if only to avoid creating an incident like what happened. If it continued to buzz around the property after I made it clear to fuck off, or if I caught it doing it again at a later date, then yeah, probably would shoot the damn thing down.
Reploid Productions wrote:Or in the way of firefighting aircraft trying to drop on an active wildfire. We've had issues with that out here in Cali like 3 times in the past month or so.
Sounds like this is going to be a particularly interesting court case. If somebody was flying a camera-equipped drone over my family and I didn't know who was doing it, I'd probably take my dad's really old pellet gun and put a few brass balls into it, too. I mean, what good would calling the cops do? The drone could be gone by the time they show up, and the recreational/civilian ones don't generally have tail markings to help you ID the owner.
by Rhyfelnydd » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:47 pm
New Chilokver wrote:From a purely legal point of view, is the airspace above one's house considered part of private property in America; and if so, to what altitude?
New Grestin wrote:Welcome to Nationstates Summer.
You can log out anytime you like, but you can never leave.
Charlie Chaplin wrote:Nothing is permanent in this wicked world, not even our troubles.
by Lockdownn » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:50 pm
Daynor wrote:I don't think he should go to jail for shooting down the drone. I do think based on the Times story that pulling a gun on the operators and theatening to shoot them too probably is where he screwed himself.
Merizoc wrote:Fine to shoot the drone. Really not fine to threaten the owners with a gun.
by Yedmnrutika Gavr » Fri Jul 31, 2015 6:50 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: 0rganization, Dazchan, Free Radio States, Google [Bot], Himmelland, Ineva, Kostane, M-x B-rry, New Temecula, Soviet Haaregrad, Statesburg, The Vooperian Union, Tiami, Verkhoyanska
Advertisement