U.S. Representative Tim Burchett (R-TN-02) introduced a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives that would allow property owners to shoot down drones flying over their land.
The three-page bill, filed as H.R.1907, is called the Defense Against Drones Act.
The ceiling is 400 feet, so it's your airspace to defend.
ReplyDeleteI think putting some anti-drone flack is great, but missing rounds will go way higher and come down somewhere....Right shyster lawyers?
DeleteAnything above your actual ground level is controlled by the US Aviation Airspace laws... also, the limit is 400 ft (to fly a drone) ABOVE whatever it is you are flying over, so you can fly a drone UP TO 400 ft above the empire state building for example....
DeleteI've seen anti-drone ammo online that throws out a net to trap the drone, so if your aim's any good you shouldn't have to worry about errant pellets injuring anyone when they come down. The drone on the other hand...
Delete-lg
Use anti-drone drones. -Joely
DeleteThis will end up ugly. We just came out of 3 months of collective psychosis about "chinese", "alien", "unidentified" school bus sized drones flying over NJ. Turns out it was a nothing burger.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.fox5ny.com/news/trump-mystery-drones-answers-latest
This will end up with people shooting at helicopters and other aircraft and countless stray bullets finding targets on the way down.
Super idea! Great practice for trap.
ReplyDeleteSomebody is going to be pissed off about not getting their Amazon delivery. Drone delivery is already active in our area.
ReplyDeleteI've never seen a drone.
DeleteI sympathize with the intent. I want to be able to shoot down drones over my property. Unfortunately, I think the FFA might have something to say about it.
ReplyDeleteThe Feds (specifically the FAA) view it differently. I do not recommend shooting down drones no matter how fun it may be. Feds have no sense of humor whatsoever.
ReplyDeleteIf it were to pass, fat chance, the ammo companies will make net rounds and market the piss out of them.
ReplyDeleteJpaul
I'm just going to say that this is one bill that won't fly.
ReplyDeleteIf someone could market an adjustable signal scrambler similar to a radar detector for over your property that would be the way to go... It could actually like a roadblock or privacy fence
ReplyDeleteJD
Those have been against they law, with good reason, for decades.
DeleteWhat's been against the law ????
DeleteRadar detectors are legal here and I'm not aware of anyone attempting to market a signal scrambler for drones...
Also what's this good reason you're advocating for ??
JD
The difference is that radar detectors are a receiving antenna, not a transmitter.
DeleteIt's illegal to cause harmful interference. The FCC is adamant about that. Even your microwave has an FCC approval on it.
All that is negotiable, simply require all drones to work on a small frequency range that's not used by the government or garage doors. Then the jammers can be limited to that frequency range... It's not an impossible issue to resolve ...
DeleteAnd I still see your " with good reason " point...
JD
Pretty sure this is in response to the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency's (Fish Cops) attempts to enter property without a warrant, and failing that, surveil your property with drones.
ReplyDeleteRussians knock drones out of the sky with a stick tied to another done. If drones are a problem, just use another drone.
ReplyDelete-Arc
I wanna know how all y’all here who are in favor of this law find yourselves so besieged by drones? Me personally, I’ve never seen a drone flying over my home or land, ever. Like, ever-ever. Are y’all really seeing drones flying over your property on a regular basis? I mean, you must be, if you wanna be able to shoot them down. Because if you weren’t ever seeing them, it seems like a silly thing to get so enthusiastic about. So I wanna hear about all these drones y’all are seeing, and why I’m never seeing them over my land.
ReplyDeleteDo you find yourself repeating the same thing over and over very often? Early stages of Alzheimer's possibly?
Delete