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 $1,500 for the destroyed drone."
The .410 bore is a size of shotgun shell, as is the 20 gauge. There is no decimal in the 20.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Were you using a .410 because that is a mighty small gun and pattern to shoot skeet with? You were probably using a 20 Gauge or 12 gauge with a modified choke optimized to give you a wide pattern suitable for clay pigeons. Yeah, I know technical terms but hey you started it.
Who is 83? The woman in TFA is 65. The only place I saw "83"mentioned was the distance....
Note that both my mother-in-law and my both my grandmothers could have made that shot. The one shot skeet with her husband till his friends complained that she always won the pot (they generally bet the price of the range-time, I understand), and the other two shot for the pot....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Local TV news interview with woman:
http://www.wusa9.com/news/loca...
There is never a reason to burgle someone.
You be sure to tell the judge that when it's a cop who stole your money.
(Yes, that's the more likely scenario.)
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
"It's interesting to note that the crime of burglary in Missouri includes the escape of the burglars. In light of this, it is completely legal to combine the burglary statute and the castle doctrine statute to justify shooting a burglar in the back as they flee the scene."
Homeowners here in Arizona have the same right. The SCOTUS has ruled that police, being held to professional rules of engagement, may not shoot a fleeing suspect. Homeowners are not deemed to be law enforcement professionals.
If I fly at 1500ft over your property, I'm not entering your property. In fact, the FARs allow for me to get to 500ft over your property. Below that I'm violating minimum altitude rules.
I suspect that if someone manages to shoot down your drone with a shotgun (which has an effective range of at most 300ft or so), you are violating minimum altitude rules from a FARs (Federal Aviation Regulations) perspective. Besides, the whole FARs point is a bit moot because the new *maximum* altitude allowed for a drone is 500ft (presumably to avoid interference with aircraft at minimum FARs altitude)...
Not that I condone shooting drones...
FAR Sec. 91.119 — Minimum safe altitudes: General.
Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:
(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.
(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.
(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
I'm assuming you are referring to the Martin/Zimmerman case in Florida. You might want to read up on that. Stand your ground laws had nothing to do with it. When someone is sitting on your chest and slamming the back of your head into the sidewalk, you can shoot him in any State, stand your ground or otherwise.
Around here .410 and 20 gauge are not considered lethal weapons. It's what you would give your kid to play with out in the woods.
In New Orleans, if you shoot an intruder in your home and he somehow makes it out the door....the cops will generally help drag the body back across the threshold for you, so that the court case doesn't get "messy" for the home owner.
Very nice of them!!
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........