[Newsbot]

Title: Dad who shot down drone hovering over his house is arrested and charged with criminal mischief
Category: Tech
Posted By: N_Fiddledog
Date: 2015-08-01 10:34:23

[Benn]

CHeck the video from the drone. If it shows any teens sunbathing charge the owners with some perv law. Guy should have been more discreet in blowing it away.

[Jabberwalker]

I wonder what happens to a Canadian who shoots down a US military Predator drone over Canadian airspace.

[Thanos]

The Predator laughs off the pathetic attempt and drops a Hellfire missile on the moron just to teach him a lesson.

[Public_Domain]

If they were perving on teenagers, fuck their stupid little electronic misquito

[CountLothian]

I think he has every right to shoot it down even if it was taking pictures of his flowers.

[Robair]

Dad of the year.

[Archten]

I would, given the chance...

[Winnipegger]

I've gotten good at looking stuff up on the internet. This is Canadian aircraft regulations...
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-96-433/FullText.html#s-602.14

$1:

Minimum Altitudes and Distances
602.14 (1) [Repealed, SOR/2002-447, s. 2]

(2) Except where conducting a take-off, approach or landing or where permitted under section 602.15, no person shall operate an aircraft

(a) over a built-up area or over an open-air assembly of persons unless the aircraft is operated at an altitude from which, in the event of an emergency necessitating an immediate landing, it would be possible to land the aircraft without creating a hazard to persons or property on the surface, and, in any case, at an altitude that is not lower than

(i) for aeroplanes, 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle located within a horizontal distance of 2,000 feet from the aeroplane,

(ii) for balloons, 500 feet above the highest obstacle located within a horizontal distance of 500 feet from the balloon, or

(iii) for an aircraft other than an aeroplane or a balloon, 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle located within a horizontal distance of 500 feet from the aircraft; and

(b) in circumstances other than those referred to in paragraph (a), at a distance less than 500 feet from any person, vessel, vehicle or structure.

Permissible Low Altitude Flight
602.15 (1) A person may operate an aircraft at altitudes and distances less than those specified in subsection 602.14(2) where the aircraft is operated at altitudes and distances that are no less than necessary for the purposes of the operation in which the aircraft is engaged, the aircraft is operated without creating a hazard to persons or property on the surface and the aircraft is operated

(a) for the purpose of a police operation that is conducted in the service of a police authority;

(b) for the purpose of saving human life;

(c) for fire-fighting or air ambulance operations;

(d) for the purpose of the administration of the Fisheries Act or the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act;

(e) for the purpose of the administration of the national or provincial parks; or

(f) for the purpose of flight inspection.

(2) A person may operate an aircraft, to the extent necessary for the purpose of the operation in which the aircraft is engaged, at altitudes and distances less than those set out in

(a) paragraph 602.14(2)(a), where operation of the aircraft is authorized under Subpart 3 or section 702.22; or

(b) paragraph 602.14(2)(b), where the aircraft is operated without creating a hazard to persons or property on the surface and the aircraft is operated for the purpose of

(i) aerial application or aerial inspection,

(ii) aerial photography conducted by the holder of an air operator certificate,

(iii) helicopter external load operations, or

(iv) flight training conducted by or under the supervision of a qualified flight instructor.

Unmanned Air Vehicles

602.41 No person shall operate an unmanned air vehicle in flight except in accordance with a special flight operations certificate or an air operator certificate.

Whew! And that's just a short section! Lawyers! Ok, wading through all that, did the operator of the drone have a "special flight operations certificate" or an "air operator certificate"? If so, he is permitted to fly low for aerial photography. The maximum penalty for an individual violating the altitude section of the regulation is $3,000; for a corporation it's $15,000. Maximum penalty for operating an unmanned aerial vehicle without a license is $5,000 for an individual, $25,000 for a corporation.

Did the dad consider the drone to be a hazard to a person or property? If so he is permitted to defend his family or property. If not, I would think trespassing laws would apply.

I read an example that is taught to law students. In this example, someone drives a snowmobile across a farmer's property without permission. The farmer doesn't say a word, just grabs the snowmobiler by his jacket, drags him off the snowmobile and throws him off the property. The farmer is permitted to do this. The farmer will have to give the snowmobile back... eventually. Holding the snowmobile on the farm for a couple weeks is equivalent to impounding. Again, the property owner is permitted, but will have to give it back eventually. So a drone would have to be given back... eventually.

However, in Canada you are prohibited from discharging a firearm within city limits. You would get in a lot of trouble for that.

[BRAH]

I fly my drone in open spaces not neighbourhoods for this reason. When Realtors use drones for taking pictures of properties they're selling the neighbours usually know why.

[DrCaleb]

$1:

Sounds can knock drones out of the sky

A natural property of all objects can be used to disrupt a drone's gyroscope with sound

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article ... rones-sky/



No shotguns needed.