Virginia woman blasts trespassing drone out of the sky with her shotgun

[faithbane]

Castle Doctrine Law says hello.

Castle doctrine (self-defense in your property law, lets say for non fancy pants people) only applies if you can prove without a reasonable doubt that the intruder is there to inflict harm on you or that you were in fear for threat of serious danger/fear for your life etc..

I doubt "while I was cleaning my shotgun I saw a drone flying over me and you know how much I love to shoot things so I aimed at it right away" holds up in court for castle doctrine. Not to mention it is not a common defense since whenever its used there is controversy..

[Ghostpanther]

Good for her. Last time I checked, drones do not have rights. These damn things should be illegal to fly close over a person's property.

- - - Updated - - -

Castle doctrine (self-defense in your property law, lets say for non fancy pants people) only applies if you can prove without a reasonable doubt that the intruder is there to inflict harm on you or that you were in fear for threat of serious danger/fear for your life etc..

I doubt "while I was cleaning my shotgun I saw a drone flying over me and you know how much I love to shoot things so I aimed at it right away" holds up in court for castle doctrine. Not to mention it is not a common defense since whenever its used there is controversy..

Depends on the State. In Ohio, the law authorities has to prove the circumstances did not warrant deadly force. You have the right to use deadly force on anyone breaking into your home or vehicle and can assume your life is in danger because there is no way you can know for sure if the intruder is armed and means no harm to you or your family.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Its funny to me how many people scream about rights to privacy etc.... except when it comes to guns. We get it guys, guns are the devil no matter what. If she used a grenade, that'd be okay though.

[cuafpr]

at some point they will likely have to rule so many feet above your property is your air space.... don't blame her though.

[zenkai]

at some point they will likely have to rule so many feet above your property is your air space.... don't blame her though.

They already do

[cuafpr]

They already do

oh cool! any idea what it is? /lazy.

[zenkai]

oh cool! any idea what it is? /lazy.

Yeah, this guy posted it, I knew about the 500ft but not about the other areas...

US Courts at a height of 500 ft in urban or suburban area and 300 feet above the surface or tallest structure in rural areas. In 2016, The FAA set regulations that "allow" drones to fly below 400 feet to prevent interference with planes above that height, and makes it a felony for a landowner to block drones flying through the lower altitudes regardless of ownership.

https://www.faa.gov/news/press_relea...m?newsId=20515

[cuafpr]

Yeah, this guy posted it, I knew about the 500ft but not about the other areas...

thanks!
/10char

[Powerogue]

She definitely could've warned them first, since she knew who was piloting the thing. Still, they were more in the wrong, or at least were in the wrong first.

[Blueobelisk]

Clearly they were trespassing. Honestly she could have called the police, maybe even shot them...you don't just go around with a drone in other peoples property.

[TirielWoW]

Castle doctrine (self-defense in your property law, lets say for non fancy pants people) only applies if you can prove without a reasonable doubt that the intruder is there to inflict harm on you or that you were in fear for threat of serious danger/fear for your life etc..

I doubt "while I was cleaning my shotgun I saw a drone flying over me and you know how much I love to shoot things so I aimed at it right away" holds up in court for castle doctrine. Not to mention it is not a common defense since whenever its used there is controversy..

This entirely depends on the state. You don't have to prove much at all here as long as they're on your property, or made an attempt to get into your car.

[josykay]

This entirely depends on the state. You don't have to prove much at all here as long as they're on your property, or made an attempt to get into your car.

And they did neither. Plus her statement about how she loves shooting and killing makes the "Self defence" argument prettymuch void. She is a very dangerous woman, and the only good thing is, that nobody got hurt.

[Zeta333]

Good for her. Last time I checked, drones do not have rights. These damn things should be illegal to fly close over a person's property.

- - - Updated - - -



Depends on the State. In Ohio, the law authorities has to prove the circumstances did not warrant deadly force. You have the right to use deadly force on anyone breaking into your home or vehicle and can assume your life is in danger because there is no way you can know for sure if the intruder is armed and means no harm to you or your family.

Its also illegal for her to shoot it down.

[hydrium]

"I like to shoot and I like to kill"

Yeah, people like that surely should have guns. I'm sure some gun nut would like to explain again how they aren't drooling and waiting for a chance to kill someone with flimsy excuse.

Do you enjoy arguing your own delusions?