The 72-year-old retiree who used his 9mm handgun to shoot a Walmart delivery drone hovering near his Florida home has struck a plea deal that could result in the eventual dismissal of felony and misdemeanor counts, court records show.
Pay attention to how this one plays out... FAA and FedSwamp are trying to make shooting drones a federal felony.... You own the sky over your home, same as you own the land beneath it. At the end of the day they will try to abrogate your rights, don't let them!
When it suits the government, you don't own the sky above your home any more than you own the mining rights under your home. In fact you don't own your home. you rent it from the local government, but they call it property tax to make you feel better.
Actually under the common law you owned the sky above your property. But, nowadays you only own the “air rights” up to a few hundred feet. The FAA controls the sky above 500 feet, with respect to flight paths of airplanes and helicopters. In the U.S., the rule often referenced is the "Aerial Navigability Doctrine", which holds that landowners control the airspace above their property only up to a certain point. The FAA defines navigable airspace as generally starting at a height of 500 feet above the ground, with higher altitudes typically being controlled by the federal government.
Below 500 feet: The landowner may have some control, though not unlimited. You may have some legal protections against low-flying aircraft or drones infringing on your airspace. If an aircraft flies below a certain height (often considered a trespass), it might be subject to legal action, but this is highly fact-dependent and not a straightforward issue of "ownership" of the sky.
Also, in cities with high rise structures above 500 feet and radio towers higher than 500 feet, the issue becomes more complicated.
Bogs has it correct. We seem to forget this. But Anon has a point. This drone frenzy hoax is culminating to HR 8610. If you're aware of it, look it up. Just another warm and friendly titled multipage bs to reduce and constrict our rights.
Pay attention to how this one plays out... FAA and FedSwamp are trying to make shooting drones a federal felony.... You own the sky over your home, same as you own the land beneath it. At the end of the day they will try to abrogate your rights, don't let them!
ReplyDeleteWhen it suits the government, you don't own the sky above your home any more than you own the mining rights under your home. In fact you don't own your home. you rent it from the local government, but they call it property tax to make you feel better.
DeleteYep, don't pay the local govt it's money and see how long the house is still yours!
DeleteActually under the common law you owned the sky above your property. But, nowadays you only own the “air rights” up to a few hundred feet. The FAA controls the sky above 500 feet, with respect to flight paths of airplanes and helicopters.
DeleteIn the U.S., the rule often referenced is the "Aerial Navigability Doctrine", which holds that landowners control the airspace above their property only up to a certain point. The FAA defines navigable airspace as generally starting at a height of 500 feet above the ground, with higher altitudes typically being controlled by the federal government.
Below 500 feet: The landowner may have some control, though not unlimited. You may have some legal protections against low-flying aircraft or drones infringing on your airspace. If an aircraft flies below a certain height (often considered a trespass), it might be subject to legal action, but this is highly fact-dependent and not a straightforward issue of "ownership" of the sky.
Also, in cities with high rise structures above 500 feet and radio towers higher than 500 feet, the issue becomes more complicated.
Bogs has it correct. We seem to forget this.
DeleteBut Anon has a point. This drone frenzy hoax is culminating to HR 8610. If you're aware of it, look it up. Just another warm and friendly titled multipage bs to reduce and constrict our rights.
A high power, large bandwidth transmitter that would interfere with the drones flight abilities, causing it to crash would be illegal too.
ReplyDeleteWe need air rights along with our property rights. GTFO!
ReplyDelete