Is Destroying Someone’s Drone Illegal?

[JAW]

That landowner doesn’t own the air over his property. The FAA does.

True on paper but very different in practice.

 

[warloc66]

And just remind these guys, you're out in public, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy

 

[DeeRose]

Nope not considered that and I’m not aware of that anywhere for railroads...

Why are there so many drone haters on a drone website? Lol I’m done mistake posting about it.

There are a lot of "lawyers" in these forums that like to point out what they think everyone else is doing wrong instead of worrying about their own house.

 

[GFields]

I was standing next to railroad tracks on a public street flying over a freight train yard. I got some great video of a train coming in. I never flew directly over the train or any of the three rail workers. I realized when I reviewed the video that one of them picks up a rock and throws it at my drone. I don’t think there is anything illegal about flying over a train yard. Is destroying my drone illegal? Should be. I guess they aren’t worried about damaging their train cars. Luckily he missed but the only reason I ascended at that moment is because my battery was low.

I’ve also had people in boats cast at me twice luckily I’ve been far enough away.. this has happened while I was following a moving boat coming into the marina. I could understand if they were enjoying the peace and quiet of fishing but they weren’t.

Thoughts?

It is illegal according to the FAA in the USA that is. If you're outside the USA check with your Airspace Governing Authorities.

The FAA considers unmanned aircraft of any size to be covered under Title 18 of the United States Code 32, which describes “sabotage to include the destruction of any aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States.” Violation of this code carries a maximum prison sentence of 20 years. In other words, it’s illegal to shoot down any aircraft in the U.S., including a drone, according to federal law. And lest you decide that simply jamming or intercepting control of the offending drone might be more your style, know that the FCC considers any form of “jamming” or otherwise interfering with radio transmission to be a violation of the Communications Act of 1934. Between these two federal laws, most anti-drone technology on the market (including net guns and jamming guns) could put you into some legal hot water.

Source

 

[sdold]

There are a lot of "lawyers" in these forums that like to point out what they think everyone else is doing wrong instead of worrying about their own house.

After a quick read I don't think the OP did anything wrong, but generally speaking we need to police ourselves because the actions of the idiots lead to laws that affect us all.

 

[Outback Joe]

SO, If I fly over a railroad yard in my light aircraft "Cessna 140", am I in danger of being shot down? I think we know the answer here.

Funny we had a problem with a adjacent land owner of a private airport that did shoot a hole in an aircraft wingtip. Things didn't go very well for him.

Bad actors on the ground or in the air can be prosecuted to the limits of the law and should be.

No one has the right to damage or otherwise interfere with any flight operations EVER.

 

[sdold]

SO, If I fly over a railroad yard in my light aircraft "Cessna 140"

Good eye, there! Or an amazing coincidence.

am I in danger of being shot down? I think we know the answer here. Funny we had a problem with a adjacent land owner of a private airport that did shoot a hole in an aircraft wingtip. Things didn't go very well for him.

Exactly, I don't see any distinction between manned and unmanned aircraft in this case, except that the unmanned sUAS isn't required to maintain the 500 foot separation from people, vehicles and structures.

I forget who posted it but someone compared this situation to a person riding a mountain bike on someone's property illegally. If the landowner catches that person, is he allowed by law to destroy his bike? Of course not. And in that case he really is trespassing, where the aircraft is not.

Kinda off topic, but is that you and your Piper Cub in your avatar? I love seeing those fly by on their way in to our local airport, they fly so slow and low they are really fun to watch. Aren’t you ever afraid of people throwing rocks at it too?

lol...that's not the Cub, it's a Cessna 140 that I recently sold. I had the Cub before that. I have a 150 now but it doesn't look as good in pictures.

 

[Bob1956]

Something for me to think about. My “test track “ is literally a natural gas rail road. It goes 3000 feet straight out before it turns. I use it to test updates after the backyard low/slow tests. Also used for any new ideas I get from this forum. It cuts thru the woods but has wide shoulders if I have to put down unexpectedly. Have to yet to catch a train on it. I’m usually at 250 feet.

 

[AMann]

Good eye, there! Or an amazing coincidence.


Exactly, I don't see any distinction between manned and unmanned aircraft in this case, except that the unmanned sUAS isn't required to maintain the 500 foot separation from people, vehicles and structures.

I forget who posted it but someone compared this situation to a person riding a mountain bike on someone's property illegally. If the landowner catches that person, is he allowed by law to destroy his bike? Of course not. And in that case he really is trespassing, where the aircraft is not.

lol...that's not the Cub, it's a Cessna 140 that I recently sold. I had the Cub before that. I have a 150 now but it doesn't look as good in pictures.

But all yellow airplanes are Cubs, right?

 

[The Rolling Drones]

A good judge would take into consideration that a person throwing a rock could damage the Drone causing It to go out of control and possibly doing damage to persons or property. Even if the Drone was where it was not allowed, throwing rocks at it is hardly the appropriate response.
This rock throwing nonsense seems to be happening more and more, hopefully this will be looked at and legal protections for drones made more clear. This would be in the interest of not only drone pilots but anyone in the vicinity.

 

[tleedom]

From what I understand railroad property like a freight train yard is deemed private property and recording video on private property is up to the discretion of the property owner, private security, or police. So reporting the incident may open a can of worms for you. I would leave it and put it down to experience.
Just my thoughts.

A drone wouldn't be on the property.

Property owners may legally prohibit photography on their premises but have no right to prohibit others from photographing their property from other locations. Like legally flying over, key word being legally.

 

[Thinkinginpictures]

What? I don’t believe it’s legal anywhere to shoot a drone.

I am in Europe right now flying in Italy, which is pretty drone friendly. But a week ago in Basel, Switzerland, I was warned that it IS LEGAL to shoot and destroy someones drone if you see it flying overhead. I decided not to take any chances there. I haven’t looked it up to confirm it yet, but I heard that it is a new ruling there.

 

[Thinkinginpictures]

I am in Europe right now flying in Italy, which is pretty drone friendly. But a week ago in Basel, Switzerland, I was warned that it IS LEGAL to shoot and destroy someones drone if you see it flying overhead. I decided not to take any chances there. I haven’t looked it up to confirm it yet, but I heard that it is a new ruling there.

We can only hope that, that kind of mentality doesn’t spread.

 

[Aussie Oldtimer]

I love reading these stories from people who think they can do whatever they want just because they have a drone.
IF YOU WERE WITHIN RANGE OF SOMEONE THROWING A ROCK, YOU ARE TOOOOOO CLOSE
We wonder why new regs are introduced all the time to stop us from enjoying our hobby.
PS, send your pics to the rail co and expect a bill from them

 

[WithTheBirds]

Property owners may legally prohibit photography on their premises but have no right to prohibit others from photographing their property from other locations. Like legally flying over, key word being legally.

Don’t bet on it. You have a reasonable expectation to privacy within the confines of your property. Obvious exception being areas that are in clear view from a public space.

Flying up and taking footage/images of your neighbours in their back yard shouldn’t seem reasonable to anyone regardless of what the FAA might say about the legalities of the flight.

 

[sdold]

Don’t bet on it. You have a reasonable expectation to privacy within the confines of your property. Obvious exception being areas that are in clear view from a public space.

Flying up and taking footage/images of your neighbours in their back yard shouldn’t seem reasonable to anyone regardless of what the FAA might say about the legalities of the flight.

This is covered elsewhere, California AB-856 for example.

 

[Dougcjohn]

As we know, this is not an absolute. A person may have a right to stop an illegal act. So, for example, if you are in KY and flying way up over someone's property, that person may have the right to shoot your done. Find the wrong judge who does not care what is right or wrong and this may be the outcome.

That’s interesting, I understand the argument of trespassing, unwarranted surveillance, etc.; but I haven’t heard / read anything where a property Owner has any trespassing enforcement rights X above their property. Especially the right to shoot at property. If a lost driver finds themselves on private property, the Property Owner doesn’t have the “legal right” to use firearms toward trespasser or their property. The debate on altitude & private property, and the height of X has been debated from 1-30 ft above their highest property (roof line) but beyound that, Unless specified by FAA as NFZ or TFR, there aren’t any trespassing violation or justified shooting of aircraft. If so, at what altitude would it stop... FAA governs the Airspace, not individual property Owners or Local Authorities... although new regs are giving more latitude to local enforcement, but that too hasn’t been challenged in court. Several State & City regulations or laws that are focused on sUAV when challenged; most will be easily defeated if they attempt to govern on FAA Airspace.

Now, that said... I wouldn’t fly above a KY Distillery, or purposely fly over property out of pure legal challenge... that too is wasted energy. Because it’s also been shown in recent cases that if no bodily harm or threat to infrastructure, the FAA and Govt Prosecutors aren’t going to pursue the case. It would then go Civil and that does introduce a different challenge, not recommended for the drone Owner in unfriendly territory of various cities.

 

[WithTheBirds]

This is covered elsewhere, California AB-856 for example.

Covered elsewhere? I’m sure the same simple principals are covered in every jurisdiction. I’m not familiar with AB-856 however to the extent it relates to privacy rights and trespass and acquiring images/video it can do so and be applicable to drone flights that satisfy FAA or other aviation authority requirements.

If someone is flying low and slow with their camera equipped toy over someone who isn’t expecting to be photographed within the confines of their own private property and the drone ends up in a pool net or hit with a rock, sand shoe or other convenient projectile I’m not expecting the operator to get a lot of sympathy.

That was the point I was making. And one I expect you understand and perhaps agree with given your earlier comment that we all have the chance to contribute to the community perception of our hobby.

 

[Racin8de]

Well if someone is in a boat fishing and they dont want to be followed or filmed then be the bigger man and back off... Even though you're not breaking any laws but situations like that just are not worth risking your investment over

 

[Phantomrain.org]

I have found that there are 5 fundamental laws of human nature:

If a person is caught off guard by your drone !

You can expect to get the finger, from a man , woman or child.
You can expect a someone to throw something at you with a meek attempt to hit you , but one thing is for you need to leave.
You can expect some people will wave back and if you wait to long , get the finger,
You can expect them to take a picture with there phone.
You can expect someone to call the police.

Thus its the People that have the power. You dont have to like it but you should respect it.

One thing that no one ever mentions : I have never in the last 2 years of flying gotten into any altercation when my drone is in fact flying in the air forward or backward. .

I cannot say the same for when my drone is in the Hover Position This can really cause problems , something to be considered
when flying over any kind of people area or near a house. A flying drone is simply not a threat , but hover and it changes everything.

Given just the railroad law its become evident to me that even the best of us our going to break laws and have no idea that we are doing it, thus Common Sense will always remain the KINGS LAW.

When one of us truly gets into trouble , its going to be because we threw common sense out the window.

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly your Mavic in and out of the Storm
Maker of the Lunar Landing Pad for the Mavic series.
Coal