Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by MrInquisitive
Here is the actual US laws, so you can check it out.
US airspace regulations
Also each state has so called ' Peeping Tom ' statutes, so you need to look those up too.
They are pretty explicit about what is prohibited in relation to spying on your neighbors property.
edit on 22-11-2012 by muzzleflash because:
(no reason given)
Thank you for the link; however, some of the terminology is VERY vague, such as "navigable airspace". I found this definition:
above a prescribed minimum altitude of flight. The following is an example of a federal statute defining navigable airspace.
According to 49 USCS § 40102 (32), ‘navigable airspace’ means “airspace above the minimum altitudes of flight prescribed by regulations under
this subpart and subpart III of this part [49 USCS §§ 40101 et seq., 44101 et seq.], including airspace needed to ensure safety in the takeoff and
landing of aircraft.”
Well, first off, does this apply to balloons -- say balloons too small to carry human passengers -- kites and small radio-controlled planes? I'm not
trying to be a smart aleck; I genuine do wonder. As airspace is about safety, if one has a small balloon that would not harm anybody or anything if
it fell out of the air, so it falls under no safety guidelines, would this be regulated? Can a person fly a kite over someone else's private
As far as peeping tom laws, what about police helicopters flying over one's house and looking down on persons in their private property? Don't they
need a search warrant, yet clearly cops aren't getting search warrants to fly over every property in town, so evidently this is not considered
protected from viewing. So why can't a private individual do the same thing? In fact, privately owned helicopters can fly over private property and
peep on it as well. So what's wrong with someone flying a drone, or small remote-controlled airplaone over someone's property? I really fail to
see the differences. And, again, if the US government has spy satellites that can see just about anything, don't they also then need search
warrants to fly over and view private property in th US?
I imagine a lot of these issues remain unsettled law, and that's why I question what these pigeon protectors were doing was illegal. And if it is
illegal, then I would imagine charges will be pressed, but nothing was said about the ensuing legal scuttlebutt of this case, as I remember, in the
To be clear, I'm not saying that what was done was legal, but I am not confident it was illegal either, so claiming this was clearly illegal and
should be punished criminally seems to be an overreach.