• seathru@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    72 years old and one shots a drone with a 9mm.

    As dumb and dangerous as that is, I’m pretty impressed. That’s a hell of a (lucky?) shot.

  • JimmyBigSausage@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    Good aim! The privacy concern with these things is real. The full opportunity is now there to have these fly up to your window and look into your house. Hard pass on drone deliveries.
    Drones can also carry weapons, biohazards, waste, endless possibilities of exploitation, imho.

    • Noblesavage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 hours ago

      How is this different from a delivery person looking in your window when they drop off something to your house? Can a delivery person also just as easily “carry weapons, biohazards, waste”? Why would a drone want to carry those things? Why would Walmart want a drone to carry those things and cause harm, as you seem to be implying here, to their customers? A drone company can be regulated and audited to make sure privacy laws are being followed.

      Will an infraction occur with a drone? Probably. And then people will have grounds to sue and laws will be built to protect people and their privacy (I hope!).

      Drone delivery is coming - how do you want to see this tech being used responsibly?

      • JimmyBigSausage@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        I don’t see it. We are now in crazyland times where the rule of law somehow doesn’t seem to apply any longer. Read the news headlines if in doubt.

    • BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I fly drones for about 12 years. I flying (racing) drones. It’s fun and an interesting hobby. But i absolutely hate the thought of these delivery drones. I honestly don’t think looking into windows and stuff like that is a concern.

    • Droggelbecher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      There’s plenty of great applications, but it needs to be heavily regulated to not be a privacy nightmare.

      Maybe also give certified drones a specific bright colour that privately owned ones can’t have so you know it’s not some creep or creepy advertising company operating it.

      Because it’s much better to deliver like this than have the city clogged up and polluted by cars delivering a tiny bag of food. Even more important, medications that are needed urgently or just for someone that’s too sick or elderly or disabled to comfortably pick it up themselves.

    • RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      And how do I know this drone above my house is legit? Do i get airspace traffic control over my house? If someone is flying a drone near my roof it’s going to explode for sure.

    • TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      They physically can, but spying on you via drone in someplace you have a reasonable expectation of privacy (I.e. your house, not the sidewalk or public space) is already illegal.

    • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      An RC plane could do the same. How often in history did someone drop a bio weapon with an RC plane?

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        You ever try to fly an RC plane?

        Let alone one with enough payload to do anything?

        How about an RC helicopter, which is a better comparison. They’re a real bitch, way harder than RC planes.

        The RC world has been somewhat exclusive for a long time - these things weren’t cheap, and not easy to fly.

        Any idiot today can fly a drone and hover where they want - just direct it where you want to go, with a camera on board. Just look at the number of drones in the last 10 years - I frequently hear them around the city, while I’ve never seen an RC plane flying around the city.

      • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        How many times have multiple billion-dollar businesses had a fleet of RC planes at their disposal?

        We’re all in uncharted waters here. And if the people responsible for ensuring an environmental disaster doesn’t strike after a train derails can’t be trusted to protect the environment or accurately disclose shipments, I don’t have faith the #1 food stamps employer is going to be much more scrupulous with their transportation safety.

  • ooli@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    If he got caught, the drone was probably really spying on him

  • Veraxus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    You don’t shoot at things in public, you don’t shoot into the air near populated/occupied areas, and you don’t shoot at things that don’t belong to you or you aren’t licensed to shoot at. Clearly the thing wasn’t anywhere near his property, so he’ll probably get off light considering how reckless and irresponsible this was.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      You sure about that “getting off light” part? The article says he was charged with a felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

      • frunch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Yep, according to the article shooting the drone carries the same sentencing as shooting at a commercial airliner 👀 they are taking that shit very seriously

        • Kiwi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          I wonder how that works in Deer Trail Colorado where they legalized drone hunting?

          • prayer@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            If you mean “hunting and downing drones” then it doesn’t matter. Federal law should trump county law.

      • Veraxus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I mean, we’re talking about Florida.

        But given that fact, it’s probably more dependent on whether it was a white or black drone.

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      Shooting at a drone has the same classification as shooting at a passenger plane. He’s been charged with a felony, up to 20 years in prison. As it should be. We don’t need fucking idiots shooting into the sky in residential areas, regardless of what they think they’re shooting at.

      • FuzzyRedPanda@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        You think someone shooting a drone – a thing that by definition doesn’t have any people in it – should have the same law and sentencing applied as shooting a plane full of people? That seems pretty different to me.

          • FuzzyRedPanda@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Oh absolutely it can be. I think most people shooting at a drone aren’t intending to hurt anyone, and the possibility of anyone being seriously hurt is largely dependent on how populated the area is if the drone crashes.

            Shooting at an occupied aircraft though? The likelihood that someone could be killed goes way up, right? The intent has probably also changed: for a drone it’s property destruction, for occupied aircraft it’s most likely murder.

            Some people believe that intent doesn’t matter and that it’s the results of the crime that matter. I don’t subscribe to that reasoning because then the sentencing of a crime focuses on punishment instead of rehabilitation, and I think intent should have influence on if and how we rehabilitate people, but that’s getting into a whole different discussion.

            • Noblesavage@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              23 hours ago

              I’m not familiar with drone laws in the US, but in Canada (and from what I’m understanding from the article and other people’s comments) drones are regulated by the federal government and also classify drones in the same way as airplanes. To be able to be a certified drone pilot you also need to know a lot about piloting an aircraft and we get some training in that regard to be able to be certified to fly drones. How we are supposed to fly a drone is similar to flying a plane in some respects, and we need to know how planes with people in them stay in the air. Don’t get me wrong, we are not “real pilots” in any way, shape, or form, but we’re flying in the same airspace as real planes full of real people. If we fuck up a flight - there can be very serious consequences for a drone pilot. Revoking our pilot certification, hefty fines, and even jail time.

              On the surface of things, it might just look like property damage of a drone, but, as people have said elsewhere, we can’t have people shooting drones out if the air when they feel like it - this could set a dangerous precedent where simple “property damage” of a drone could cause harm or even kill someone, or many people.

        • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yup. Because whether there are people or not, I don’t think, is actually relevant to the crime being committed.

          I also think attempted murder, and successful murder should have the same sentence. Whether it was successful shouldn’t matter for the punishment. They shouldn’t get off with a lighter sentence just because they did a shit job, or because the person was too tough to die.

  • thegr8goldfish@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    2 days ago

    He doesn’t even need a lawyer. As long as he gets a jury trial he could plead his own case and get acquited. No one wants these things hovering over their property.

        • FuzzyRedPanda@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          What do you say when the cops first pull you over? “Why’d you pull me over?”

          And when they start asking questions? “I’m not discussing my day.”

          And if they keep asking questions? “Am I being detained, or am I free to go?”

          And if detained, what do you say? “I invoke the fifth.”

          And then what do you do??

          • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Shut the fuck up.

            Yep, that’s what you do. Don’t answer questions.

            If they were going to arrest you, they’ve already made that decision and there’s nothing you can do about it. Let it get settled in court.

    • remer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Lawyers know courtroom procedure. The defendant may have a valid argument but navigating the court process really does take an attorney.

  • YourPrivatHater@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Just put up a drone delivery! it’s so stupid they shouldn’t be allowed to fly over living areas in general.

    • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      FAA controls airspace from the blades of grass up. Airplanes are legally allowed to fly over private property, and drones are legally allowed to fly over private property. This is the current legal standing in America. I’m not saying it’s right, but that’s what it is.

      • YourPrivatHater@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I don’t think thats right, otherwise you could sit in a drone and harass people on their property as long as you don’t land there… That doesn’t sound right. And i know its not legal in Germany, i hope its not actually like that in USA

        • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Harassing people violates local law, and reports of harassment and such are the only way local law enforcement can respond to drone issues since local law enforcement does not have the jurisdiction to enforce the federal statutes where the FAA regulates drones.

          Drone law is crazy. There are lots of unintuitive things about it. It needs an overhaul.

          • YourPrivatHater@ani.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Ok but what classifies as harassment? For me it would be seeing, hearing or feeling intrusive behavior by airborne objects in the airspace directly above my property.

            • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              What you describe is common. If you see a drone, you call your police and tell them you feel threatened or harassed. They will deal with it.

              FYI all drones are required to broadcast a remote id that is registered to the drone device which is registered to a drone pilot. Your phone can receive that remote id signal, which you can give to law enforcement so they can find the pilot. Not having remote id on a drone is a felony, because once again, drones operate in federally controlled airspace.

              https://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/remote_id

              • YourPrivatHater@ani.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                What you describe is common. If you see a drone, you call your police and tell them you feel threatened or harassed. They will deal with it.

                if thats how it works, thats ok.

                FYI all drones are required to broadcast a remote id that is registered to the drone device which is registered to a drone pilot. Your phone can receive that remote id signal, which you can give to law enforcement so they can find the pilot. Not having remote id on a drone is a felony, because once again, drones operate in federally controlled airspace.

                https://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/remote_id

                Interesting

        • Voyajer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          It is correct, you can even land there if you must and you’re allowed to retrieve it. I’ve had to explain this to a farmer once while recovering a hot air balloon at gunpoint.

          • YourPrivatHater@ani.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            The emergency landing is one thing but just flying directly over private property (as in living areas and industrial complexes) is just crazy to me, agricultural areas are a different thing threre is nothing privat happening there and there are no possible industrial problems (security, safety…)

            • chunkystyles@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              There is so little unoccupied or public land in places where people want to live. It would be impossible if that was the rule.

              • YourPrivatHater@ani.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                I said agricultural areas are fine cause nothing is happening there, Forrest as well and yes thats basically how it is in Germany.

                • chunkystyles@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Forests don’t need deliveries. And good luck flying planes anywhere over just forests.

                  There’s a reason the FAA has the regulations it has.