From what I understand, this occurred in a populated area. There should be two separate appearances before the judge over this. For the homeowner: Illegal discharge of a firearm... period. For the drone operator: Invasion of privacy and creating a public nuisance. I'm no lawyer, but this seems fairly common sense. I tend to side with the homeowner. Here in Los Angeles irresponsible drone operators have been responsible for all kinds of (probably unintended) actions, from grounding aircraft to causing bodily injury of innocent bystanders. One cannot just go around flying at low altitude over a populated area without putting others in danger. The laws better start catching up with technology, but in the meantime people need to exercise better judgement (I know the latter is unlikely).
Slashdot Mirror
From what I understand, this occurred in a populated area. There should be two separate appearances before the judge over this. For the homeowner: Illegal discharge of a firearm... period. For the drone operator: Invasion of privacy and creating a public nuisance. I'm no lawyer, but this seems fairly common sense. I tend to side with the homeowner. Here in Los Angeles irresponsible drone operators have been responsible for all kinds of (probably unintended) actions, from grounding aircraft to causing bodily injury of innocent bystanders. One cannot just go around flying at low altitude over a populated area without putting others in danger. The laws better start catching up with technology, but in the meantime people need to exercise better judgement (I know the latter is unlikely).