I am guessing you are not a photographer else you would be pretty adamant about protecting your FIRST amendment right to free speech.
I don't even have a drone but I respect someone else's right to practice theirs.
The 1st Amendment applies to government suppression of speech.
Why is this still so widely misunderstood?
You can only suppress my speech as long as I am on your property. If I am taking and sharing pictures and am on your property you have every right to suppress this by asking me to leave and I if I do not comply I am liable for trespass. If you and I are in public and on public land you have no legal method to suppress my speech.
I've had several drones pass over my property just in the last god damn month; soon they're going to be "accidentally" destroyed on sight if I'm there to catch them.
Last year, happened once that I know about; this year, so many times already that I've using my security cameras to count and ID them. There are seemingly 3 dumbass culprits and I'm now trying to track them down.
I'm not going to stand having swarms of giant mosquitoes flying by!
You must have an amazing security system if you are able to spot these things in the sky. *rolls eyes* How effective is it at security if it's pointed up? * rolls eyes*
Here's the thing. If they are passing over your house, it's no different than cars driving past your house. Have you ever seen the footage from a consumer drone? Anything higher than 50 ft and you look like ants anyway. If people REALLY wanted to spy on you (and do you *really* think that highly of yourself that you are interesting enough to be spied on) do you think they'd use a contraption that make a lot of noise, has blinking lights, and might as well scream "hey, look at me up here!!!"? No, they would use a DSLR camera with a telephoto lens. They would use binoculars. They would use a smartphone. They would use hidden cameras. You wouldn't even know they're there.
Modern satellites can already see the tiniest of details. You are on camera every time you go out in public. Hell, even my car has front/rear DVR as will most other cars in the future. The places to be nervous about are the places you think you aren't being watched, like changing rooms and bathrooms.
And if you do decide to take matters into your own hands, you're in for a world of legal hurt as drones have the same protection as commercial flights.
If someone is hovering 20 feet over your property, that's a different matter. I'd follow it back to its owner and let them know the concern. They'll either stop flying over your house or they can show you what the drone sees to put your mind at ease. But if it's just passing over your house to get from point a to point b it's probably just some kid (like me) just flying around.
You can roll your eyes all you want, I'm using a few 4K cameras with good lenses on custom rigs and those things are sometimes less than 30 feet away, sometimes less than 10 feet off the ground. They.re not in outer space and they don.t move that fast.
They don.t have the same rights if they,re right over your property. Air rights apply under 500 feet not just for building Near airports and the like there are special cases in regulating air rights under 500 feet.
so you telling me a drone with no license at all (most are like that) flying 6-10 foot above my property has more protection than if someone throwing a football right over my yard. You pulled that straight out of your ass didn't you.
if it drone falls on your head, or a blade hits a child, or the noise drives someone mad, the faa' going to save everyone?
You drone idiots are the reason why these things will be regulated to death soon I'm part of the crowd pushing for that.
You must have an amazing security system if you are able to spot these things in the sky. *rolls eyes* How effective is it at security if it's pointed up? * rolls eyes*
Here's the thing. If they are passing over your house, it's no different than cars driving past your house. Have you ever seen the footage from a consumer drone? Anything higher than 50 ft and you look like ants anyway. If people REALLY wanted to spy on you (and do you *really* think that highly of yourself that you are interesting enough to be spied on) do you think they'd use a contraption that make a lot of noise, has blinking lights, and might as well scream "hey, look at me up here!!!"? No, they would use a DSLR camera with a telephoto lens. They would use binoculars. They would use a smartphone. They would use hidden cameras. You wouldn't even know they're there.
Modern satellites can already see the tiniest of details. You are on camera every time you go out in public. Hell, even my car has front/rear DVR as will most other cars in the future. The places to be nervous about are the places you think you aren't being watched, like changing rooms and bathrooms.
And if you do decide to take matters into your own hands, you're in for a world of legal hurt as drones have the same protection as commercial flights.
If someone is hovering 20 feet over your property, that's a different matter. I'd follow it back to its owner and let them know the concern. They'll either stop flying over your house or they can show you what the drone sees to put your mind at ease. But if it's just passing over your house to get from point a to point b it's probably just some kid (like me) just flying around.
You can roll your eyes all you want, I'm using a few 4K cameras with good lenses on custom rigs and those things are sometimes less than 30 feet away, sometimes less than 10 feet off the ground. They.re not in outer space and they don.t move that fast.
They don.t have the same rights if they,re right over your property. Air rights apply under 500 feet not just for building Near airports and the like there are special cases in regulating air rights under 500 feet.
so you telling me a drone with no license at all (most are like that) flying 6-10 foot above my property has more protection than if someone throwing a football right over my yard. You pulled that straight out of your ass didn't you.
if it drone falls on your head, or a blade hits a child, or the noise drives someone mad, the faa' going to save everyone?
You drone idiots are the reason why these things will be regulated to death soon I'm part of the crowd pushing for that.
Your understanding of airspace is still incorrect, even though you have obviously done some more reading. Your rights of development above your property are not the same as having authority over traffic in that airspace. And the 500 ft navigable airspace criterion isn't about what you control, it's about the expectations of air traffic that there will be no unauthorized flight obstacles above that altitude. It's very simple - you have legal remedies to air traffic above your property if it constitutes a nuisance by virtue of local laws on privacy and noise, for example. You do not have a right to interfere with it in the air. A drone is currently classified as an aircraft. A football is not. Whether or not that makes sense to you, it is the current state of Federal law on the subject.
Originally you simply referred to drones flying over your property. Then it was 16 ft, for some reason. Now it's 6 - 10 ft, and you are conflating simple overflights with the aircraft causing personal injury, as if that we somehow the inevitable result of such activities. Please stop with the ridiculous fallacies. You could try speaking to the operators about it or, if that doesn't work, report them to the FAA (if they are unlicensed or breaking any aviation regulations) or to the local police (if they are breaking nuisance laws). Or you can insult everyone who tries to educate you, break the law and probably end up in court yourself.
Comments
They don.t have the same rights if they,re right over your property. Air rights apply under 500 feet not just for building
Near airports and the like there are special cases in regulating air rights under 500 feet.
so you telling me a drone with no license at all (most are like that) flying 6-10 foot above my property has more protection than if someone throwing a football right over my yard. You pulled that straight out of your ass didn't you.
if it drone falls on your head, or a blade hits a child, or the noise drives someone mad, the faa' going to save everyone?
You drone idiots are the reason why these things will be regulated to death soon
I'm part of the crowd pushing for that.
Your understanding of airspace is still incorrect, even though you have obviously done some more reading. Your rights of development above your property are not the same as having authority over traffic in that airspace. And the 500 ft navigable airspace criterion isn't about what you control, it's about the expectations of air traffic that there will be no unauthorized flight obstacles above that altitude. It's very simple - you have legal remedies to air traffic above your property if it constitutes a nuisance by virtue of local laws on privacy and noise, for example. You do not have a right to interfere with it in the air. A drone is currently classified as an aircraft. A football is not. Whether or not that makes sense to you, it is the current state of Federal law on the subject.
Originally you simply referred to drones flying over your property. Then it was 16 ft, for some reason. Now it's 6 - 10 ft, and you are conflating simple overflights with the aircraft causing personal injury, as if that we somehow the inevitable result of such activities. Please stop with the ridiculous fallacies. You could try speaking to the operators about it or, if that doesn't work, report them to the FAA (if they are unlicensed or breaking any aviation regulations) or to the local police (if they are breaking nuisance laws). Or you can insult everyone who tries to educate you, break the law and probably end up in court yourself.