The Pitters' Place

http://www.usherald.com/kentucky-man-ar ... -daughter/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kentucky, Tennessee, whatever.

I support this guy 100%

Yeah I actually support him too. More than likely, those 4 guys were perving on his daughter

The drone was shot over the guy's property, so I guess he's in the right.
After all, if a burglar broke into your house with a crowbar, and you chased him away, and he left the crowbar behind; could the burglar sue you for stealing the crowbar?
I hope not.

“Our rights are being trampled daily," he said, the station reported. “Not on a local level only — but on a state and federal level. We need to have some laws in place to handle these kind of things."

He sounds like a fairly level-headed chap.

One thing that's interesting here is the legal question of property in the height dimension. As far as I know, land is distributed only according to the plain of the ground, not in 3 dimensions. So how far up does your property go? Obviously at a certain point you can no longer claim it's your property; if an airplane flies over your house at 40,000 feet, you can't claim that it's on your property. Of course it doesn't sound like this drone was high enough to get into that issue, but it's still something to consider.

It used to be the case that a person's property extended upwards into the atmosphere ad infinitum, but that ended with the advent of air travel, when courts started ruling that the space above a person's property was theirs to the extent that it was usable. So how high the drone was flying is a question for the courts to consider.

Well, I know in my town there are height rules for each type of zoning law. A farm can install a 100 foot silo but a urban home cannot build a building past whatever the rule is (don't remember off the top of my head).

I'm ok with height restrictions as I'd prefer my neighbor not being able to build a 4 story building which could peer every portion of my home etc...I think it should be illegal to film people using drones or helicopters and other such things.

Gypsy-Vanner wrote:Well, I know in my town there are height rules for each type of zoning law. A farm can install a 100 foot silo but a urban home cannot build a building past whatever the rule is (don't remember off the top of my head).

I'm ok with height restrictions as I'd prefer my neighbor not being able to build a 4 story building which could peer every portion of my home etc...I think it should be illegal to film people using drones or helicopters and other such things.

Right, but zoning is a different story. My property is mine, but I can't legally open a public store on it, because it's not zones for commercial. Similarly, the spot 60 feet above my house is probably legally mine, but it doesn't mean I'm allowed to build my house up that tall.

There are numerous accounts of hobbyists' drones massively hindering firefighting efforts here in California. It's been a huge problem, and legislation is being written to combat it.

It should be common sense, though. I mean, Jesus, who thinks to themselves to deploy their toy drone over a fucking fire? Fuckin jackasses are directly contributing to hundreds to thousands of acres of fire and who knows how many lives affected via evacuation or injury. Terrible.

How are the drones causing problems for the firefighters?

Uh no. My counties zoning laws make it very clear what you are entitled to and what you are not.

Gendo wrote:How are the drones causing problems for the firefighters?

This photo pretty much sums it up:



If there's a drone (or any other aircraft) spotted in the area, the helicopters are immediately grounded in fear of a potential collision. They can't fly with drones around.

Eric Sherwin of the San Bernardino County Fire Department told CNN, "Fortunately, there were no injuries or fatalities to report, but the 15 to 20 minutes that those helicopters were grounded meant that 15 to 20 minutes were lost that could have led to another water drop cycle, and that would have created a much safer environment and we would not have seen as many citizens running for their lives."

Etc.

Firefighting helicopters do way more to put out a fire (especially wildfire) than ground crews. They get the big chunks of fire. If they're grounded for any amount of time, that's bad.

There are dozens of stories about it. Here's a few:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015 ... a-highway/

http://www.npr.org/sections/alltechcons ... refighters

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/18/us/califo ... eway-fire/

Gypsy-Vanner wrote:Uh no. My counties zoning laws make it very clear what you are entitled to and what you are not.

Why is that a "no"? I don't disagree; I said that zoning laws do just that. I was just saying that not being able to build way into the air is because of zoning laws, not because a question of property ownership.

There are rewards for up to $25,000 for information that would identify the drone operators who have hindered firefighting efforts. Shit is fucked.