Man shoots down neighbor’s hexacopter in rural drone shotgun battle

While we’ve heard of consumer drones getting in the way of commercial airliners and obstructing firefighting operations, we haven’t heard of many drones being shot out of the sky by a neighbor. But according to one drone pilot, that's exactly what occurred in Modesto, California on November 28, 2014.

That day, Eric Joe skipped Black Friday lines and instead went home to visit his parents. During the afternoon, Joe flew what he described to Ars as a homemade hexacopter drone. His aerial device hovered low and moved slow, logging just three and a half minutes of flight time in total.

Then, bang. A loud boom rang out over the neighboring walnut trees. Growing up on a farm, Joe instantly recognized the sound as a 12-gauge shotgun. The unknown shooter hit his apparent target in a single attempt, and Joe soon watched his drone fall from the sky.

"When I went out to go find it, I saw him come out shotgun-in-hand," Joe told Ars by phone on Thursday. The man found himself face-to-face with his parents’ neighbor, Brett McBay.

"I asked: ‘Did you shoot that thing?’ He said, ‘Yeah, did we get it?’"

Joe claimed that McBay said: "I thought it was a CIA surveillance device." No matter the reason, the drone pilot wanted to resolve this encounter quickly and civilly ("I didn't want to get argumentative with a guy with a shotgun," Joe said). He went back inside and inspected the aircraft. It wouldn't be flying again. Later that evening, the two men exchanged e-mails.

More at Link
including email text

Paranoid that the CIA was watching him? Do people think the CIA randomly visits everyone' place?

1 flight, 1 kill.

originally posted by: roadgravel
Paranoid that the CIA was watching him? Do people think the CIA randomly visits everyone' place?

Hahaha, That's exactly what I was thinking.

Too much technology is coming out too quickly for our very very slow law system.

"Your facts are incorrect. I consider the matter closed"


lulz.

These folks don't seem to be responsible gun owners. Lucky someone has been accidentally shot by them.

What are the legal ramifications of shooting down drones flying above your property? Heck, I would just say I saw a drone and I fired before it shot me...I 'was in fear for my life'.

a reply to: roadgravel

Wow. Now, considering the drone was apparently over the operator's property, that is one thing.

What I find most troubling is the court's rationale:

"Court finds that Mr. McBay acted unreasonably in having his son shoot the drone down regardless of whether it was over his property or not," the Stanislaus County Court Small Claims Division found.

Key phrase underlined. That's BS. I'd like to know how far off the ground "private property" is extended. 1 foot, 10 feet, 100 feet?

Unless he was inside city limits where discharge of a firearm might be illegal, if I noticed a drone hovering on or over my property or around my house (and I live in a mostly rural area; yes I can see 3 neighbors, but they live several hundred yards away) you better believe it's coming down. Not that I'm paranoid enough to think it's CIA or a spy drone, but because A) it's annoying and disturbing my tranquility and B) violating my PERSONAL, PRIVATE airspace at a low altitude.

Unreasonable to shoot it down even it was over my property. Pppffff

a reply to: Liquesence

Unreasonable to shoot it down even it was over my property. Pppffff

Yes, for a few reasons. It's not actually a threat. This would appear to be the first time the issue ever came up, so a more reasonable thing to do would be talk to the neighbor about it. A number of circumstances could lead to the thing unintentionally moving over property, would you shoot at a hang glider that was off course? It wasn't as if it was hovering by the windows "spying" on anyone. These things are basically toys. Remote control flying cars. They're not an instrument of war, or a threat. Yes, if I had advised someone a few times not to fly on my property, I might have a little fun shoot in a safe direction if the proper authorities refused to do anything.

I'm all for protecting one's property and would be pissed too, but I certainly wouldn't shoot down a copter without having had a previous conversations with the owner, and certainly wouldn't shoot toward an occupied home. I do get where you're coming from, but I don't agree.

For what it's worth:

While the Supreme Court hasn't explicitly accepted that as the upper limit of property ownership, it's a useful guideline in trespass cases. Therefore, unless you own some very tall buildings, your private airspace probably ends somewhere between 80 and 500 feet above the ground.

a reply to: roadgravel

Depending on your situation it may be reasonable to assume a drone is trouble. I'm not defending the shooter. It sounds like he'd shoot a giraffe just because it was looking over the fence. But you don't know every detail of a neighbours life and they may be a target.

After 9/11 when it became obvious there were 'lists' we were meant to fear I decided the best course of action was to do the opposite of what was wanted/expected. I decided to try and get to the top of any available 'list' and encouraged others to do the same to clog up the system. It was clear to anyone who was following what I was doing that there was a great big target on my forehead.

So my intuitive sense of danger became the guiding force of my life.

One night I was very aware of a hunter closing in. Although I was dozing when the whirr of a drone reached my ears I was up and flinging the window open in an instant. It was dark. I looked up and around quickly but I saw nothing as the sound of the drone rapidly receded.

If I'd had a shotgun handy and I'd seen the drone it would have been negligent and reckless in the extreme to take a shot. I wasn't living in the wilderness.

Even now I feel anger towards the drone itself and my first thought is to do damage to it. It may be technically an inanimate object but if it behaves like a dangerous life form it's easy to feel aggression towards the object itself.

a reply to: Domo1

What does it being a threat have any relevance? I have 20 acres. There's no reason for anything to come near my house, and if it was elsewhere over my property I wouldn't know. As far as shooting toward another house, that's common sense and not even relevant because it's common sense.

As far as a hand glider, that's apples and oranges. They have people manning them, whereupon I would not even consider shooting, which is why you are correct that they're essentially remote controlled flying toys/cars which have not business *hovering.* If it were a toy airplay that someone is having fun with, that's a bit different, unless they were intentionally buzzing my house or trying to annoy me. There's a fine line there, but that line exists.

And My issue is not with "protecting" my property. If I knew my neighbor was operating such a device I would confront him. If something just randomly appeared, It would come down. Someone wants to fly a RC plane around, cool, I'll watch until it comes too close. If I see a drone sketchily hovering around, that's diff.

I kind of suspected the airborn guidelines were around a couple hundred feet. Personally, I feel if it's treetop level or below it's fair game.

But that's just how I see it in my neck of the rural woods. There's NO reason for anything to come that close to my home.

The operator believed it was no farther then possibly the public road. In my state shooting at it would be breaking a law.
(shooting on or across a public road or property line)

As someone here mentioned, what ever happened to a conversation about neighbor issues.

I would imagine they just liked shooting things and this was new thing to shoot.

a reply to: Liquesence

What does it being a threat have any relevance?

There's no reason to shoot it if it's just slightly annoying without even knowing why it's there. I don't just shoot things unless they're a threat or are my property without a little more info personally.

As far as a hand glider, that's apples and oranges.

Hand glider sounds dirty! But yeah, agree that was a bad example. So let's consider the remote control airplane angle. It's the same thing but it hovers.

If I knew my neighbor was operating such a device I would confront him.

Yeah, that seems reasonable. Far more reasonable than automatically assuming that a copter is some CIA drone bent on obnoxiously and overtly spying on you.

If it were a toy airplay that someone is having fun with, that's a bit different

I don't really see how it's all that different. This is also a toy that flies and is controlled by remote. Yu can easily add a camera to an RC plane too. The only difference is it's mode of flight.

There's NO reason for anything to come that close to my home.

Well perhaps nothing SHOULD, but there are reasons why it could happen accidentally. Inexperienced pilot, large gust of wind, the batteries getting low in the controller... My first thought wouldn't be "blast it out of the sky!", it would be "I bet the neighbor's new toy screwed up, that's irritating, I'll talk to him."

Again, you and I are different, and that's OK. I can still respect your opinion, and am actually pretty understanding of your stance here. I would suggest that anyone who finds themselves in a similar situation thinks about what the courts will say before shooting something out of the sky, rural area or not.

a reply to: Domo1

No, that might not be a reason to shoot it without knowing why it's there, but again, if it's near my house there's no reason for it to be there. Passing by once or twice is different than continuously being present, and that's part of my point and something I guess I should clarify. If it's persistent it goes if I don't know who operates it.

Hey, I never said anything about being concerned about the CIA. In fact, I said if a drone was hovering nearby I wouldn't think that at all. And I'm not even concerned about cameras on it or a RC plane. I'm not paranoid, just easily annoyed. Like swatting a fly, essentially.

To me, though a RC airplane *is* somewhat different. There still wouldn't be a reason for it to be that close to my house, and if the operator's skill is bad enough where he or she can't keep it remotely in his own vicinity, well... If I knew who was operating it, or at least had a good enough Idea, I'd confront. If I didn't, I would swat.

But hey, that's me. My property, my house, my reasonable airspace.

Hey, I know a guy who shot a neighbor's dog who came onto his property. The dog didn't do anything THAT time, but the owner sued for vet bills. This other guy counter sued for the cost of the bullet. True story, although I don't recall how it turned out. Welcome to the south, lol.

ETA:

But yeah, the guy in the OP sounds like he's just trigger happy and irresponsible, so I'm not justifying what he did; my issue was with what the court said in my original response.

originally posted by: Metallicus
What are the legal ramifications of shooting down drones flying above your property? Heck, I would just say I saw a drone and I fired before it shot me...I 'was in fear for my life'.

A drone is a spying device if it has a recorder or live camera attached. If it was over the shooter's property...more power to him.

Even it was still over the adjoining property, that can still fall under a "peeping Tom" argument. New technology makes old concepts unclear and out-dated. But any fool flying a drone around without clearance from neighbors would be the main character to blame for any foolish that resulted. (IMHO)

Even it was still over the adjoining property, that can still fall under a "peeping Tom" argument.

Not being on the others property should remove that concept. Haven't courts ruled on this as far as pictures and views.

Is there anything Americans dont shoot at? lol

Its a shotgun shell, not traceable, just denied it, his word against yours.
No case ! Then turn around and sue him, I got a good shady ambulance chasing lawyer if you need one. lol

originally posted by: roadgravel

Even it was still over the adjoining property, that can still fall under a "peeping Tom" argument.

Not being on the others property should remove that concept. Haven't courts ruled on this as far as pictures and views.

It depends if you can view something that you could normally view. If you look out your second story window and see over your neighbor's fence and see them sunbathing nude--not being a peeping tom.

If you build a scaffolding so you can look over your neighbor's fence and see her sun bathing nude it may be actionable.

I agree, over your property to a certain height it is probably justifiable--not on your property not so cut and dry.

a reply to: NavyDoc

I imagine at some point this type of issue will be addressed. It might have to a degree with aircraft but now that anyone will a bit of money can do it and at lower heights, it's a bit different.

Swooping a plane low over a house is gonna get someone in hot water with the FAA.

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: NavyDoc

I imagine at some point this type of issue will be addressed. It might have to a degree with aircraft but now that anyone will a bit of money can do it and at lower heights, it's a bit different.

Swooping a plane low over a house is gonna get someone in hot water with the FAA.

Yes, which is why, IIRC, what is considered "your property" extends up to FAA minimums.

And another one:

The way William Merideth sees it, it’s pretty clear-cut: a drone flying over his backyard was a well-defined invasion of privacy, analogous to a physical trespassing.

Not knowing who owned it, the Kentucky man took out his shotgun and fired three blasts of Number 8 birdshot to take the drone out.

"It was just right there," he told Ars. "It was hovering, I would never have shot it if it was flying. When he came down with a video camera right over my back deck, that's not going to work. I know they're neat little vehicles, but one of those uses shouldn’t be flying into people's yards and videotaping."

Minutes later, a car full of four men that he didn’t recognize rolled up, "looking for a fight."

"Are you the son of a bitch that shot my drone?" one said, according to Merideth.

His terse reply to the men, while wearing a 10mm Glock holstered on his hip: "If you cross that sidewalk onto my property, there’s going to be another shooting."

The men backed down, retreated to their car, and waited for the police to arrive.

"His only comment was that he hoped I had a big checkbook because his drone cost $1,800," Merideth added.

The Kentuckian was arrested Sunday evening in Hillview, Kentucky, just south of Louisville and charged with criminal mischief and wanton endangerment

Link

Hovering a drone over someone's place seems like an invasion to me. I imagine it will take many more years before it is addressed. Flying around government official house's might speed it up.