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."

13 of 644 comments (clear)

  1. No such thing as a .20 gauge by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.
    1. Re:No such thing as a .20 gauge by s122604 · · Score: 5, Informative

      .410 is a measurement of the diameter of the bore.
      "gauge" is a measurement how many lead balls, cast into balls the size of the bore, you would need to equal some weight ( a pound I think, I refuse to google it...).

    2. Re:No such thing as a .20 gauge by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Informative

      The OP is correct in saying that the ".20 gauge" mentioned in the summary makes no sense, since it would suggest a shotgun large enough to fire lead balls that each weighed 5 pounds. We'd practically be talking about small cannonballs at that point.

      Both ".410" and "20-gauge" (with no decimal) are valid ways to refer to a shotgun. The former does so directly by telling you that the bore size is .410, as you said. The latter does so indirectly, since you can use the gauge to calculate the caliber (as you alluded to, shotgun gauges tell you how many lead balls you'd need at that caliber to equal one pound). In the case of a 20-gauge shotgun (i.e. a shotgun that has a caliber the size of a lead ball that is 1/20th a pound), it's a .615 caliber. But few people refer to 20-gauges that way, so far as I know.

      All of which is to say, while ".410" and "20-gauge" are valid ways to refer to shotguns, ".410-gauge" is not (because .410 is a bore size, not a gauge) nor is ".20-gauge" (because it's supposed to be "20-gauge", not ".20-gauge").

  2. Re:25 to 30 feet above the trees? by asylumx · · Score: 4, Informative
    If news helicopters are flying that low, they are violating FAA minimum altitude regulations anyway (91.119).

    (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.

    (d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface—

    (1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and

    (2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.

  3. Re:Next Phase by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 2, Informative

    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.

  4. Re:Next Phase by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Informative

    She is 83, not crazy.

    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"
  5. Trees look pretty tall to me by JoeyRox · · Score: 4, Informative

    Local TV news interview with woman:

    http://www.wusa9.com/news/loca...

  6. Re:Next Phase by Pseudonym · · Score: 4, Informative

    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});
  7. Re:Next Phase by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 4, Informative

    "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.

  8. Re:Next Phase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  9. Re: Next Phase by Bartles · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  10. Re:America in one sentence by tazan · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  11. Re:Next Phase by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Texas and ISIS are the only places in the world where you can just shoot down anybody who enters "your" property.

    Depends how good you are at disposing of the body after.

    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.........