Homeowner Claims Airspace Up To 500 ft Above His House - Legal?

[hibby]

Hi there,

A local resident of my community forum (Nextdoor.com) has posted that no one has the right to fly a drone over his property under 500 ft. He is pointing people to the US "Bundle Of Rights" law, which I Googled, which states that private property owners must grant an easement to anyone flying any sort of aircraft over their property under 500 ft in an urban or suburban areas and 360 ft in rural areas.

I objected to his statement, and pointed out that the FAA does not allow UAV flight over 400 ft, effectively making it impossible to fly a drone over private property in any urban or suburban area of the US, according to his assertion. He said that is correct. He maintained that he has the full right to sue any drone flyer for "trespassing" if they fly over his property. I asked him to present legal precedent for this and he said there soon would be. He claims that the FAA has no right to violate a homeowner's property rights by granting an "easement" over their property.

Has there been any legal precedent for a property owner claiming "Bundle Of Rights" laws against a drone flyer? I'm sure violation of privacy is common, but could someone actually sue me for trespassing just for flying over their property under 500 ft? If not, what is the legal limit for flying over someone's property, provided you are not violating their privacy?

Insight appreciated!

Fellow droner. Unsure of laws regarding 500 ft. I explicitly respect other people's property lines and wouldn't think of flying my drone over their property as I have acres and acres to fly. Someone flys a relatively low drone over my property and I have time to grab the right device, that drone is coming down.

 

[hibby]

Yes you would.. unless by neighbor you mean that some that is directly adjacent to yours. I'm willing to bet you have flown "over" someone's home at some point. Same thing as we are discussing here.

People are 'willing to bet' in Vegas all the time and still lose. You shouldn't claim to have omnipotent knowledge over someone else.

 

[hibby]

I guess since we are flying the mavics he would not be able to hear it once it flys more than 30 ft off the ground anyway. Perhaps fly full sports mode over his house hahaha. [emoji23]

Are you hard of hearing?

 

[Vmaxhp]

If someone does shoot down a drone in a residential neighborhood, they will likely be in violation of laws pertaining to illegal discharge of a firearm. If there are children in the area, the shooter could also be charged with child endangerment.
I am not a lawyer, nor is this intended to express a legal opinion.

Good advice Rob. The thing is, this is a neighborhood website which actually covers my entire city and he riled up a bunch of other people saying they would shoot down the next drone they saw etc. So I have no idea where he lives but just resented his reflexive drone-hating paranoia. He also claimed that he was being spied on from 150 yards away and that you can zoom drone cameras into his bedroom, so he might have just been on commercial break from Alex Jones but he set a tone for the city and I found myself the only person defending drone fliers.

 

[flipside05us]

Are you hard of hearing?

I live in a built up area in the city and at 200' I can definitely hear the mavic. I have flown my mavic around my neighborhood at this height and have not had any negative comments. I have flown it around video taping my kids playing on the street in full view of everyone and so far no response so I guess I'm pretty fortunate but that isn't to say that everyone here is okay with it.
I have awesome neighbours on my street but not sure about the other streets though.

 

[hibby]

I live in a built up area in the city and at 200' I can definitely hear the mavic. I have flown my mavic around my neighborhood at this height and have not had any negative comments. I have flown it around video taping my kids playing on the street in full view of everyone and so far no response so I guess I'm pretty fortunate but that isn't to say that everyone here is okay with it.
I have awesome neighbours on my street but not sure about the other streets though.

My argument was with the implication that one can't hear a mavic pro above 30'

 

[benjaminkan]

Are you hard of hearing?

Hold your horses old boy. If you live in the city, it's quite hard to hear the mavic. Come, let try to be more helpful to the OP with our comments. Cheers

 

[The MAV]

I don't know why this is often repeated. I can clearly hear my Mavic even when it is at 200 ft and goes over my head.

You must have real good hearing

 

[EMI326]

Hi there,

A local resident of my community forum (Nextdoor.com) has posted that no one has the right to fly a drone over his property under 500 ft. He is pointing people to the US "Bundle Of Rights" law, which I Googled, which states that private property owners must grant an easement to anyone flying any sort of aircraft over their property under 500 ft in an urban or suburban areas and 360 ft in rural areas.

I objected to his statement, and pointed out that the FAA does not allow UAV flight over 400 ft, effectively making it impossible to fly a drone over private property in any urban or suburban area of the US, according to his assertion. He said that is correct. He maintained that he has the full right to sue any drone flyer for "trespassing" if they fly over his property. I asked him to present legal precedent for this and he said there soon would be. He claims that the FAA has no right to violate a homeowner's property rights by granting an "easement" over their property.

Has there been any legal precedent for a property owner claiming "Bundle Of Rights" laws against a drone flyer? I'm sure violation of privacy is common, but could someone actually sue me for trespassing just for flying over their property under 500 ft? If not, what is the legal limit for flying over someone's property, provided you are not violating their privacy?

Insight appreciated!

I'm pretty sure that would be a civil trial, not criminal and would be very difficult for them to prove you were actually above their property, and that they suffered any damages. For the morons claiming they will shoot down drones, remind them they are risking actual lives in their community in response to a perceived threat that has very little actual risk. (oh, and committing an ACTUAL crime for discharging a weapon within city limits)

 

[Hauptmann]

Did he have aluminum foil wrapped on his head?

Doesn't everybody? Cranial foil is the ONLY way to prevent space aliens from bombarding us with amnesia rays.

 

[jwblair]

Congress is already proposing changes to 336. See this thread:
Congress Updating 336

Senator Feinstein's bill to modify 336 is rather draconian, taking away the FAA's control below 200' and giving it instead to state and city governments! Here is my post from that thread:

I think you are misreading the law. It does not say that we have the right to fly 200 feet above private property. It says that local governments can make their own rules for drones flying below 200' AGL (which can include taking off and landing) or within 200' of any structure (there is no qualification of public or private land or structure in the text) without having to worry about the FAA claiming that such laws are preempted by FAA regulations. 336 only restricts the FAA from regulating recreational drone flights, not local governments. In the past the FAA claimed that local governments could not regulate any aircraft operations in the air as that was the sole purview of the FAA. This language explicitly states that local governments can make their own rules for the airspace below 200' AGL and that such local rules have precedence over the FAA rules. I see this as a bad thing.

 

[Bennett Deckard]

if he shoots down your drone and you are flying within limits established by the FAA it is the same as shooting down any FAA licensed/sanctioned/etc. aircraft. Federal crime. Not civil court, federal, prison for him. After he is found guilty he will not be able to vote for the other aluminium wrapped heads that he thinks support him.

 

[maximeeso]

if he shoots down your drone and you are flying within limits established by the FAA it is the same as shooting down any FAA licensed/sanctioned/etc. aircraft. Federal crime. Not civil court, federal, prison for him. After he is found guilty he will not be able to vote for the other aluminium wrapped heads that he thinks support him.

So why is the "drone slayer" not in federal prison? He shot down a drone that was flying 200' up and the court ruled in his favor.

 

[Bennett Deckard]

Because he didn't shot down mine. I have the resources to bring such reckless endangerment, and violation of airspace to its legal end.

 

[Bennett Deckard]

Also, what year was it that this slayer did this? Things have changed lately.

 

[maximeeso]

Because he didn't shot down mine. I have the resources to bring such reckless endangerment, and violation of airspace to its legal end.

I do not believe there are any states left in the U.S. where it is legal to get revenge by shooting someone who has harmed or destroyed a piece of your property.

 

[maximeeso]

Also, what year was it that this slayer did this? Things have changed lately.

Judge dismisses charges for man who shot down drone

2015.

"He had a right to shoot at this drone, and I'm gonna dismiss this charge," said Ward.

Judge Ward dismissed both charges against Merideth including criminal mischief and wanton endangerment.

 

[maximeeso]

All the judge needed was two witnesses to claim that they had seen the drone below the tree line (Probably taking off???).. While the flight logs showed that he was never below 200 feet over the drone slayer's property. (But she didn't even look at this evidence) ... Not only that but the drone slayer had stolen the SD card and either lost or destroyed it so there was no way to look at the footage.

 

[Bennett Deckard]

It is a federal crime to shoot down aircraft, the FAA confirmed that that includes drones. This is great news for anyone who has a drone, and for anyone who doesn’t want errant bullets falling from the sky, and it’s bad news for anyone eager to pump a quadcopter full of lead.

Look it up.

 

[CaveDrone]

Are you hard of hearing?

I resemble that remark!!! Spelling intentional. [emoji12]