Slashdot Mirror
65-Year-Old Woman Shoots Down Drone Over Her Virginia Property With One Shot (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader writes from a report via Ars Technica: Jennifer Youngman, a 65-year-old woman living in rural northern Virginia shot down a drone flying over her property with a single shotgun blast. Ars Technica reports: "Youngman told Ars that she had just returned from church one Sunday morning and was cleaning her two shotguns -- .410 and a .20 gauge -- on her porch. She had a clear view of the Blue Ridge Mountains and neighbor Robert Duvall's property (yes, the same Robert Duvall from The Godfather). Youngman had seen two men set up a card table on what she described as a 'turnaround place' on a country road adjacent to her house. 'I go on minding my business, working on my .410 shotgun and the next thing I know I hear bzzzzz,' she said. 'This thing is going down through the field, and they're buzzing like you would scaring the cows.' Youngman explained that she grew up hunting and fishing in Virginia, and she was well-practiced at skeet and deer shooting. 'This drone disappeared over the trees and I was cleaning away, there must have been a five- or six-minute lapse, and I heard the bzzzzz,' she said, noting that she specifically used 7.5 birdshot. 'I loaded my shotgun and took the safety off, and this thing came flying over my trees. I don't know if they lost command or if they didn't have good command, but the wind had picked up. It came over my airspace, 25 or 30 feet above my trees, and hovered for a second. I blasted it to smithereens.'" Ars goes on to explain that aerial trespassing isn't currently recognized under American law. "The Supreme Court ruled in a case known as United States v. Causby that a farmer in North Carolina could assert property rights up to 83 feet in the air. There is a case still pending on whether or not Kentucky drone pilot, David Boggs, was trespassing when he flew his drone over somebody else's property. "Broggs asked the court to rule that there was no trespassing and that he is therefor entitled to damages of $1,500 for the destroyed drone."
If it's not legal to shoot down drones flying over your property, then people will take the next logical step of simply shooting the drone operators so there is no-one to complain... which is what I expected to happen when a bunch of morons started yelling at an armed 83 year old woman who had already demonstrated herself to be a crack shot at long distance.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The .410 bore is a size of shotgun shell, as is the 20 gauge. There is no decimal in the 20.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
She got to clean the shotgun again.
with one of them blue-tailed whirly birds and see what that will get ya
"Youngman told Ars that she had just returned from church one Sunday morning and was cleaning her two shotguns -- .410 and a .20 gauge -- on her porch"
Yeesh.
Nice shot.
Ask "the same Robert Duvall from The Godfather" if he would be ok with one of those hovering over his home.... I am sure he is fine with the press/paparazzi using those. If it was scaring her cows and invading her privacy... all I can say is "good shot".
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
An abandoned stroller could be a bomb. Better blow it up, just to be safe.
Seems pretty high up in the sky to claim the drone was trespassing. I hope none of the local news helicopters happen to fly over her house.
if its on your property... sure.
And the first drone loving asshole chimes in.
That must have been incredibly satisfying. Any chance the IOC could award here a gold medal?
If you look at this from another perspective, Jennifer Youngman was just in the process of test-firing one of her just-cleaned shotguns, when a drone, flying dangerously low over her property, was unfortunate enough to stray into the line of fire.
I fail to see how this is Jennifer Youngman's problem. Had the drone operator been sensible enough to fly their drone in a public recreation area, or drone park, instead of over private property, their loss could have been avoided.
In a kind-of unrelated comment, how can it be illegal and tresspassing to stand on private land belonging to another, yet legal and OK to be hovering an unspecified distance above the same piece of land? "No, Your Honor, I was *not* tresspassing, I was levitating..."
Hmmm? Oh my ... I need coffee ...
I wonder if the $1500 in damages would even begin to cover his FAA fines.
I suspect the legal gray area for RC aircraft is going to be fixed, and not in the favor of hobbyists. We can thank the many jackass drone pilots for the bad PR that is turning popular opinion against us.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Youngman said the intruding pair quickly brought attention to themselves when they exited their SUV, parked in front of Duvall's residence.
Youngman said a series of burglaries in the area a few years ago, coupled with sightseers, has caused an increase in neighborhood awareness, as well as action by Duvall's security team.
Youngman said she believed in 2nd Amendment rights and also was irritated that people would try to disturb Duvall.
“The man is a national treasure and they should leave him the fuck alone,” she said.
The Fauquier County Sheriff’s Office said it had no record of anyone formally complaining about this incident.
Sounds like a good neighbor.
Preferably with the baby inside it. Makes too much noise...
Give it a few more years, maybe a person or two killed or maimed by an out of control drone at a sporting/large event, and you will see a federal law extending your property rights into the airspace 5000 feet up or so, with easements for commercial and private aircraft that file flight plans. The drones should (and probably will) be regulated with some caveats. National forest, parks with designated areas, the ocean (not the beach, but 50 yards and out) or your personal property are the only places for hobbiest drones. This is just common sense and will happen eventually.
Drones flown for profit or outside those areas should require a simple license similar to a drivers license or hunting license where you take a weekend class and a test. The drone would have to have a license tag as well, something easily visible from 50ft or less (combination of a few letters, numbers in a color), so you can snap a picture and they can lose their drone and license and be charged for misbehavior. Any drone flying over my property should be at least 500ft up and not able to record zoomed in or high resolution photos or video unless I have given written permission.
Idiots buzzing people, their pets, livestock etc. will only hasten and make the laws more restrictive. If the industry were smart they would start an association and privately license all of those who buy their drones and educate them on sensible behavior.
If they won't let you fly a drone over the white house without permissions, then it shouldn't be allowed over my house either without my permission. I think ruling in favor of damages is a terrible precedent.
She better call her NRA rep to get an lawyer on retainer just in case.
Britain: we're desperate for investment money pls buy us up and do whatever you want as long as i get shares.
France: drones may only film half-naked women, as clothed women are an affront to our liberal democracy.
Germany: REGULATE!!!!!!!!!!!1111 but not too much like you know that time. until something scares us, then exactly like that.
China: drone are permitted everywhere, subject to government approval. and control.
USA: i let other people mind their own business. well, until they interfere with my business, then fuck y'all and go with christ.
The US still has the only decent principle of conduct (the go with christ bit is fine as long as i'm not forced), even if it's been bastardised in many jurisdictions.
Someone has to take a stand against these rude people with their privacy-invading toys. I look forward to more property owners protecting their right to privacy on the property they own. The more it happens, the more controversy it'll stir up, and the sooner there will be legislation protecting people's privacy from this airborne menace.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Bull's Eye in the Sky!
United States vs. Causby was decided in '46. Before drones and camera technology had advanced to the point where it became trivial to surveil private property at distances of a couple hundred feet. That decision is about as relevant as the loophole that allows banks to create money out of thin air when issuing a loan because the letter of the law from the 1800s applies only to printed money. Southern ladies apparently know the constitution (4th Amendment) and the range of #7.5 shot (> 500' at sea level).
Umm... you really think shooting at a flying bomb overhead is a GOOD idea? If so, remind me to steer clear of you.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Oh, give it up. You've lost that one.
Things are called what people call them.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Now THAT'S what Gun Control is all about...hitting your target on the first shot, and a kill shot to boot.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Would you mind defining "drone" for us?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Good on her,just a pity she wasn't fireing something a bit heavier,like a 12 gauge Browning 2000,it would make a nice cloud of dust instead of the bits that will now have to be collected before her stock ingest them.
I suggest a Browning 2000 because it's just about the softest shotgun yet made,my mum's friend was 80+,weighed 7 stone and could safely and repeatedly fire my 12 bore,3inch chambered Browning 2000 without a flinch and no problems like bruising..
Why limit such a view to unmanned vehicles? How do I know any aircraft flying over my property is not carrying a bomb?
Time to start shooting at airliners?
No, your right to your property and the space above it does not extend as high as you think it does.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
There's a whole episode in The Good Wife about this, apparently people have a right to the space above their land to about 71 feet, and higher than 500 feet is covered by regulation. The area between those two areas is "the Wild West".
An abandoned stroller could be a bomb. Better blow it up, just to be safe.
If you think there may be a person or baby in the drone, then you have a good comparison, otherwise it is quite stupid.
Some medieval reenactor successful hit a drone with a spear. It must have been flying pretty low.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhbuEUoxntQ
So, you cannot distinguish any differences at all between an airliner passing overhead and a drone, with a camera, hovering low over your back yard?
Maybe your property right extends further upward than you think it does.
Well, at least they got something right.
Too poor to own a drone, so you hate on all owners / advocates ?
"Youngman said that she recycled the drone but managed to still be irritated by the debris left behind. 'I’ve had two punctures in my lawn tractor,' she said."
Um, I'm guessing the 'punctures' did not come from the drone.
I suppose the GP attempts at being pedantic, and wrongfully so, is based on this restricted definition of a drone as an unmanned combat aerial vehicle whereas everyone and their neighbors know that a drone is more generally any unmanned aerial vehicle.
It's a bit like someone believing a vehicle is necessarily a tank. Oh look, I made a car analogy!
An abandoned stroller could be a bomb. Better blow it up, just to be safe.
If it is in my yard, and I was certain there was no baby in it ( as I am with a drone), it would probably be perfectly OK.
She owns two guns and does not have a photo-camera? Not even on a phone? It seems to be a lovely old woman seeking for an attention to her and her wonderful guns. A photo could be at least some proof of that incident.
I remember something similar happened in Rio recently.
Polly want a cracker? They'll be delivering them via *drone* soon, as long as no *hackers* interfere. Yes, I'm alluding to another similar battle that was lost.
"shot down a drone flying over her property with a single shotgun blast."
That line makes me think the writer doesn't shoot.
A single shotgun blast is par normal.
Local TV news interview with woman:
http://www.wusa9.com/news/loca...
She was later quoted as saying, "And I boilt that dern thing for nearly two hours and it never did get tender none. My husband, Cousin Carl, damn near broke a tooth."
You are welcome on my lawn.
I'm betting that there have been more strollers rigged as bombs than non-military drones - but if you see one of the latter, go ahead and unload your shotgun at it and let us know how that worked out.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Okay but to a non dork they are typically referred to as drones. Any AUV regardless of its specific design is lumped into that category. To make the obligatory car reference its like saying "its not a motor vehicle its a truck".
As long as you keep insisting that superstition "is perfectly okay" in various forms of unscientific and bewildered rhetoric, you and yours and everyone else will continue to suffer at the hands of its dogma.
Call theism what it is: superstition. Treat it the way it should be treated: as garbage thinking. Precisely the same amount of evidence exists for "gods" as exist for magical pink unicorns. Which is to say, none.
Since most of them seem to be entitled shitbags who think they can use your property without permission.
Yes.
There seems to be significant overlap between people who think that gun ownership should be endlessly regulated and restricted, and dipshit drone operators who resist any attempt to impose controls on their precious hobby of invading other people's property.
How interesting.
Too poor to own a drone, so you hate on all owners / advocates ?
I own a drone. If I fly it over my neighbors land and end up getting it shot down, I'll be mad at myself for being so stupid.
The key word in that post is "asshole". I doubt he has anything against drone owners. It's the drone loving assholes that he is referring to. Not everyone who loves drones is an asshole.
Liberal rip and alteration from the Wikipedia:
It was during this campaign [in 2015-2020] that I was christened Calmamity Jennifer. It was near Blue Ridge Mountains, northern Virginia where the town of The Plains is now located. Robert Duvall was in command of the neighboring ranch. We were ordered out to quell an uprising of the drones, and were out for several days, had numerous skirmishes during which six of the cattle were disturbed and several severely annoyed. When on returning to the ranch we were ambushed about a mile and a half from our destination. When buzzed upon Mr. Duvall was annoyed. I was riding in advance and on hearing the buzzing turned in my saddle and saw the Mr. Duvall reeling in his saddle as though about to get annoyed. I turned my horse and galloped back with all haste to his side and got there in time to catch him as he was yelling. I lifted him onto my horse in front of me and succeeded in getting him safely to the ranch. Mr. Duvall on recovering, laughingly said: 'I name you Calmamity Jennifer, the heroine of The Plains.' I have borne that name up to the present time.
Your sarcasm detector seems to be broken, you may want to have it checked.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Most of them ? I've been flying for a while and encountered a lot of other flyers, but I've yet to see one of those shitbags you are referring to. I do agree some exists from videos I've seen shared, but the regulations are also much more complex than just 'not over my property'. I've flown both in the US (California) and Canada. No national parks is the only regulation I'm sad about, but I understand that this is needed for now.
Oh well, we will see how that goes :)
Just on the offchance that you're asking in good faith, a drone is an unmanned aerial vehicle. The FAA is generally looking at regulating the larger ones (I don't recall offhand what the cutoff size is). If you make a paper airplane and chuck it over someone's fence, that's a drone but it's not big enough to interest the FAA. If you add a camera and a couple motors to your paper airplane it continues to be a drone. If you buy a $1500 quad-copter, that's also a drone and you may need to fill out paperwork with the FAA. If you take a standard 2-seater helicopter, and rig a robot pilot for it with no passengers, that is also a drone. I have no idea whether it's still a drone if a passenger gets in but I suspect it is.
Hope that helps.
Yeah, I might have misunderstood the depth of his comment - I took the meaning of someone commenting favorably to be instantly setting the bucket to be categorized in. His (?) reply seems to be in that direction too.
How high it extends is defined by law (state by state), but is something like "the higher of 50 feet or the tallest nearby building". TFS says this drone was under 30 feet, which is just obnoxious (especially near livestock).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
A drone is not just any unmanned aerial vehicle. It's an autonomous UAV that can be preprogrammed, sent on its way, and will return safely to ground without any interactive human control. There is no requirement that they be used for, suited for, or designed for combat, making that restricted definition from Wikipedia wrong also.
The things commonly called "drones" are, as the GP said, simply RC aircraft. They cannot be preprogrammed with a flight plan, run unattended, or land themselves safely and consistently. They might be called "drones", but they are not drones.
The MQ-series US military drones are combat-capable, but that isn't what makes them drones. They also can be remotely monitored and controlled, but those interfaces are not required for the normal operation of the drone. Thus, they are drones, not just simple RC aircraft.
TFS says this drone was under 30 feet
No it doesn't, it says "25 or 30 feet above my trees". Not knowing the height of the trees, we have no way of knowing the drone's altitude.
Enigma
If you make a paper airplane and chuck it over someone's fence, that's a drone but it's not big enough to interest the FAA
No, no it is not. Not only is it not a drone by any definition at all, but it's definitely not a drone by the FAA's definition.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
So a buzzing drone scares cows but a shotgun blast doesn't?
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
Umm... you really think shooting at a flying bomb overhead is a GOOD idea? If so, remind me to steer clear of you.
Bomb is extremely hyperbolic. "Incendiary device" is the term you're looking for there. Unless, of course, it runs on compressed hydrogen (or another flammable gas) with a fuel cell.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
when it asked me if I wanted to share my location.
Legal issues aside, if she was aware of the operator's location, it was a dick move to destroy the drone without simply talking to the operator first. Half the drones I see are being operated by kids with their parents standing by as a fun hobby. There's not always nearby or sufficient public land for the activity, and it's normal to want to try out new flying locations. If she had a problem with operating a drone in the area, she could have told them so. 99% of drone operators are going to comply in that sort of situation. If they were rude after being asked to leave, then I can see justification for shooting the drone down.
It was my pizza delivered by drone ... now i'm hangry and hungry
Bingo. And something being 'obnoxious' doesn't magically give the annoyed the legal right to damage/destroy other peoples property.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
All who fly them low enough deserve the hate. You don't see many people upset about drones flying high enough that you can't see them, or they're just a dot. It's the assholes who buzz animals, peek into upper story windows, disturb your family in your back yard, that sort of thing.that draws the hate.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
You seem intelligent and reasonable. Would you do what the drone operators in the article are accused of doing?
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
Next drone has a firearm attached to it....
An unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), commonly known as a drone, as an unmanned aircraft system (UAS), or by several other names, is an aircraft without a human pilot aboard. The flight of UAVs may operate with various degrees of autonomy: either under remote control by a human operator, or fully or intermittently autonomously, by onboard computers.
Youngman told Ars that she had just returned from church one Sunday morning
DRINK!
and was cleaning her two shotguns
DRINK!
She had a clear view of the Blue Ridge Mountains
DRINK!
Youngman explained that she grew up hunting and fishing in Virginia...
DRINK!
Good for her. I totally understand and think people absolutely have a right to protect their homes and privacy.
My neighborhood is in a high-burglary area and there's been a VERY suspicious-looking individual flying a camera drone over homes and in their back yards almost every day for several weeks now. There's a large park right down the street but he isn't going/flying there so my guess is that he's probably found a great way to case potential houses to burgle. Several people in our neighborhood watch have reported that he's crash-landed it in their back yards then he feels free to climb their fence or whatever to get it back.
The cops have been notified several times but they continue to do nothing.
If we weren't inside city limits where there's a no gunfire ordnance I'd have probably already done a very similar thing to his drone.
I don't know about were you live, but trees here are commonly 60-80 feet high ( which is low compared to what they are in other places). Reported height over the trees was 30 feet, and people are very often under-estimating the height the object they see are at. Thus, I'd expect 100+ feet for that drone (which is very easy to hit with birdshots). I do not know about the exact rules in Northern Virginia since I've not flown down there, but in a lot of places that would be totally fine. We do not know the other side of the story either. Also, depending on regulations, it might depend on the drone and camera use. With what I'm flying, I see almost nothing down there at 100 feet when I'm looking forward (you would not recognize someone), so by itself it would be enough to be protected against the most common complaints that can be used around here.
Also, the correct thing to do is certainly not to shoot it off the sky. Call the cops and track down the guy flying. There has been many judgments against people flying without following the regulations, and they are being hit with large fines when found guilty, while you don't risk being in trouble yourself.
It was probably left unattended on a park bench and someone shot it.
I am suspecting more and more Americans are..
So, please tell me about this wonderful country you live in and its castle doctrine.
I am assuming, from your description, that you are perfectly entitled to shoot and kill without warning:
A person who has to execute an emergency landing of their helicopter on your property due to engine failure.
A person who was dragged on to your property by others and dumped there.
A person you invited to visit, but then forgot about.
A person who was supposed to visit the same house number in the next street, but misread the sign and wandered on to your property.
A person who is fleeing someone chasing them, and who happened, in their panic, to enter your property.
A kid who wonders over to pick up their ball that got kicked the wrong way, on to your property.
Must be one hell of a friendly place, what with everyone barricaded in their little castles, shooting at anything that moves.
https://www.google.com/search?...
If you see something, say something, right?
She should stick with it.
She clearly knows how to handle a shotgun.
Do such folks usually clean their guns while loaded?
I think we need some clear court cases saying that this was perhaps not the preferred solution, but was an an acceptable approach to a property violation as long as it did not endanger anybody on the ground or in the air.
Yes, shooting a bomb while it is still far away is a MUCH better idea than waiting for it to get right up next to you before it blows up.
A Gladius from that era is no joke.
Drone haters pre-date drones. "drone" isn't even a very good word for it. RC airplanes have been around for many years. I remember waking up to them on weekend mornings, flying from the school near me (two soccer fields in an "L" shape, space for maneuvers, but in the middle of a residential area.
Today, many smaller drones are insect-quiet battery powered units, but "in the day" all the "drones" were fuel powered. and noisy. I can't say gasoline, or IC, because there were gasoline jet drones, and ones that ran on non-gasoline fuels.
The drone operators deserved the hate they attracted. Then the next generation suffered from it. But it wasn't unearned.
Learn to love Alaska
A shotgun fires "shot" as in plural. 2 3/4" #4 buckshot typically has 27 shots in it. So she quite literally did not shoot it down with "1 shot" and I don't mean that as a play on words. It's just headline bait garbage. A chimpanzee could have shot down that drone if you have him a wide-spread shotgun.
Have the drone play Flight of the Valkrie to ensure a response. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Go light up a cigarette for a job well done.
Ah yes, bigotry by leftists is fine. Especially against those dirty, nasty, incestuous southerners.
As Lynyrd Skynyrd was too polite to say to Neil Young, "Fuck off."
A drone is a musical tone played by some musicians while practicing to improve intonation.
http://www.dronetonetool.com/
You are right, I mixed up the distance and her age!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Another way of looking at this, from outside the borders of the US, is that you're all so comfortable with firearms you're happy to use them to solve minor inconveniences. Can't wait for the massacre tax some European politicians are advocating to be slapped on your weapon exports.
"I love the smell of 7.5 birdshot in the morning".
I was asking in good faith, because that's the definition that I know and GP said it doesn't apply, so I was a bit confused.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Airspace or not, people have a right to privacy in their homes. I don't know what the court would rule here but if they side with the drone owner, it's a miscarriage. But sooner or later somebody will fly a drone to take telephoto pictures of some powerful person's daughter through her window and watch how quickly how politicians change the laws after the sanctity of *their* home has been violated.
... or the present and future version: "Retired Person Shoots Drone"
Just stay the F away from properties or get their owners permission.. How would you like it if I flew a drone over your property and film you running around naked in your home.. I have no problems with property owners shooting down drones if they are over their property, I also don't have any problems with laser protectors which blind camera's that are pointed at your property/home.. People should just respect other people's privacy (and that also goes for famous people, paparazzi should not photograph people on private property, the famous people don't owe you a thing..
Is that this woman didn't shoot like a girl, she shoots like a Youngman.
Legal question. Is it okay to blow stuff up on your property in the US? I guess it varies from state to state, and there is probably some limit to allow for accidentally exploding cans of soda etc, but let's for the sake of argument say a suspicious perambulator/stroller and whatever you need to safely destroy the IED that might be hidden in it.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
RESPECT other peoples property. All OUTSIDE the property line, YOURS. All INSIDE the property line, MINE. Good shot lady!
Shot down is exactly what will happen to any drones that are trespassing with obvious intent. I am a good shot and with the price of ammunition today, it will be "one shot, one drone".
Her drones don't have much computer power and she was flying them over her property when his collided with them.
STFU and get permission first.
I am actually following the "silly wire drone interceptor" discussion (a.k.a: admit you always wanted to build yourself a "Spiderman Gun" !)
If you have problems typing your story on the phone, try using a keyboard (I have an original Think Outside keyboard left from my PalmOS days, that still works perfectly with my current Jolla Phone - Nowadays, the foldable you get from Geyes on Amazon are of slightly less good quality).
externally-powered microUSB OTG hub is another solution that works with any USB keyboard you have around.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Common, this guy is basically inventing a "Spiderman Gun".
Think of the the views his demo could get on Youtube !!!
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Think of it this way. A shotgun with normal single 0 buck shot is good for about 200 feet. Typical tree line is about 250'. If you fly the tops of the tree line and NO LOWER I don't see you invading peoples space. If you drop below the tree line and your not doing it for commercial use over somebody elses back yard YOUR CREEPING. At 250' an HD cam will take a decent shot of something but you wont be zooming in to count the stitching on a persons swimsuit. As a dad, with a drone I keep mine above the tree line and don't purposely send it into other peoples yards. Now if its for commercial use ie Land surveys and such you really have no need to be below 250'. Point is don't be a freaking creep and you wont loose your nice drones. You CAN NOT justify to me flying low enough to take HD shots of my swimming pool close enough to make out faces when I didn't invite you or give you permission. Use some sense people. You don't like the government spying on you so don't be like them.
Demandez un devis totalement gratuit sans engagements pour des interventions esthétiques simples ou envahissantes, faites confiance à nos plasticiens expérimentés.Nos cliniques sont des centres d’accueil des étrangers qui désirent une chirurgie plastique. Avec des blocs opératoires modernes, équipés d’un matériel à la pointe de la technologie de la reconstruction, la Clinique fait toujours de la discrétion et de la confidentialité, une norme indéfectible.
Grâce aux compétences certaines et plurielles de nos chirurgiens, parmi lesquels des spécialistes de la blépharoplastie et d’autres interventions de la chirurgie du visage ou encore la chirurgie de la silhouette , toutes les interventions dédiées à apporter un embellissement, une correction du physique, sont réalisées dans leur ensemble, y compris celle qui concerne uniquement la chirurgie de l’homme. http://chirurgies-esthetiquestunisie.com
I'm sure a signal jammer exists for the frequencies drones run on. Get one, turn it on when you need to and let the drone fall out of the sky (or run out of batteries and fall out of the sky if it holds position). Never admit to the existence of the jammer, and wait for the idiot flying the drone to show up at your property to ask for it back.
Tell the operator you charge storage fees and you'll need those paid first. Set them to the price of the drone per month, paid in full the first second (after 30 days unclaimed, their shit is generally your shit).
Notre agence de tourisme médical en destination de la Tunisie, propose ici, d’obtenir gratuitement son devis pour une chirurgie esthétique en Tunisie. Ce site comprend d’ailleurs les tarifs de chaque intervention qui y est effectuée. Ce tarif est celui du séjour médical et du séjour touristique. Ce qui signifie que le montant indiqué pour une blépharoplastie implique aussi pour lui l’hébergement à l’hôtel pendant la période indiquée. En effet, pour accomplir toutes nos prestations vis-à-vis des patients étrangers qui immigrent en Tunisie dans le cadre du tourisme médical, nous avons entamé des collaborations avec des cliniques et des hôtels sur place, afin que leur séjour médical se déroule dans des meilleures conditions. Aussi, nous leur proposons ici, de prendre connaissance des interventions qui se font au sein de cette clinique dont la réputation transcende par sa qualité, les frontières nationales désormais. Parmi ces interventions, toutes les chirurgies courantes, celles du visage, celles de la silhouette ou celles des seins. Mais pour compléter l’offre esthétique pour ces patients qui veulent des techniques non invasives, c’est-à-dire, qui veulent une augmentation mammaire, une augmentation des fesses, sans se faire opérer, notre Clinique leur propose la médecine esthétique comme une solution efficace à leur demande. Ils peuvent se débarrasser des rides du visage, se faire une épilation, éliminer les tâches et les cicatrices sur la peau, par des méthodes simples comme l’acide hyaluronique, le botox ou le laser.
Imagine many of these 'drones' zig zagging' through suburban airspace to deliver whatever it is they are delivering? The noise pollution would be unbearable. Legislators need to take that into account.
where your bigotry is fine. Here you are, though, bitching that slashdot hasn't deleted a post and blamed the lack of more than YOUR petty whinging in reply to "leftist bigotry being fine", because that makes you feel
a) YOUR bigotry is fine
b) THEIR bigotry is not and you're a good person (tm) for pointing it out
From UNITED STATES v. CAUSBY, (1946):
"We have said that the airspace is a public highway. Yet it is obvious that if the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere. Otherwise buildings could not be erected, trees could not be planted, and even fences could not be run. The principle is recognized when the law gives a remedy in case overhanging structures are erected on adjoining land. 9 The landowner owns at least as much of the space above the ground as they can occupy or use in connection with the land."
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-...
An autonomous unmanned vehicle.
And the GP is wrong, because while these are mostly remote controlled, they do have autonomous capabilities.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
While I agree with your definition, show me an outdoor quad copter that does not have autonomous capabilities.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
That makes every remote controlled aircraft a drone, it also removes any non flying vehicle from being called a drone, yet we have under water drones (http://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/6756/six-underwater-drones-making-a-technology-splash) we have wheeled drones (http://weburbanist.com/2015/11/19/robotic-delivery-6-wheeled-drones-set-to-roll-out-in-london/). So in that way Wikipedia's definition is severely lacking. I believe the autonomous capabilities are required to move from rc device to drone.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
So what your saying is drone only means an unmanned flying vehicle.
I disagree. http://electronics360.globalsp...
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
What I don't understand is WHY these retards keep flying their drones over private property in the first place?? They're gonna get their drones destroyed and there is only a chance a judge is going to rule in their favor. Even if they win, why would they want to go through all that trouble?? Keep your damn drones in public airspace! If I see one over my property and it isn't high in the sky, I'm destroying it too!
I live in a rural area and I fly drones all over the place. This is "gun country" just as much as where this woman is living. I've never been shot down, and here's why: I'm not a douchebag about it. I have permission to fly where I fly 90% of the time. And if I don't, it's usually in a remote field where there is no one around. In those cases, I've had farmers stop and ask me why I'm flying around over their fields. I'm usually testing something, and say so. Again, not a douchebag about it. If I were, I would expect to be shot down.
Also, taking a drone out at that altitude with a .410 using bird shot is pretty good shooting. Nice shot, ma'am.
Things are called what Hollywood and mass media call them.
Don't you know that modern-day language is determined from the top down, not the bottom up? For an exclusive glimpse into the future of American English, simply turn on Entertainment Tonight.
Whatever side you fall on she earned that drone shooting it with one shot at 65.
My hovercraft is full of eels.
If someone starts shooting then this scenario is going to get crazy!
... is the age and gender of the shooter noteworthy?
I have no desire to own or operate a drone. But in the same way I'm not gonna shoot down a kid's kite for flying over my property (or the soccer ball that got kicked into my yard), I don't think that "Maybe it had a weapon on it!!!" is a good reason to shoot down somebody else's drone.
Please note that it takes an astounding amount of paperwork to stop a bullet.
The law might help you in the days after something happens, but it is not much help at the time.
Try bringing rawhides or dog treats with you instead of a gun. You'll make friends with the dogs and possibly the owners and won't get in any legal trouble.
Taker? Oh you're one of THOSE people. Ok champ, tell us what you're "making". I bet the answer is nothing but a goddamned mess!
that would be cool
You hate harley riders (fags) as well?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Any of them less than $1k. Which is 90% of the market.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Anyone with a vehicle deliberately modified to be louder than stock is hated. I don't care if they are on a Harley, or in a Honda.
Learn to love Alaska
Fair enough.
My car is modified to breath better, louder is just a side effect. ;-)
I run mufflers on my glow engine planes and fly at a designated field.
We're not going to speak of the pulse jet though. Even I will acknowledge that's as inappropriate as a GWAR concert at Liberty university. If you lived close, I'd arrange a 5AM low pass for you...kidding.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Some other report told, that Jennifer Youngman complained afterwards about all the tiny debris from the drone scattered over her place, she had to pick up and that some parts of it gave her flat tires on her lawn tractor. Which leads to the obvivous question, whether Jennifer Youngman would take 7.5 birdshot next time again - what would she now propose as best ammo? Apparently even given similar appearance in the sky: drones seem to differ *significantly* from similar sized birds - at least with respect to structural integrity after suffering a shotgun blast. So slashdotters - if you ever go to *pleassssse* invite that awesome lady to an interview don't forget to ask. BTW: given the appearance of Robert Duvall in 2012's movie "Jack Reacher" as owner of a long distance (750 yard) gun range - he might have taken a rifle instead of a shotgun, what'd you think... ;-)
you put the hammer down BETWEEN the chambers. Not too smart are you.