Man shoots down drone, film at 11!

Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

joether -> Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (6/30/2015 11:39:43 AM)
Ok, maybe no film on this one.... Sort of related to the story to follow... Many years ago I recall hearing about a guy flying an R/C B-17D that was 1:8th scale. A BIG craft. He selected an area with low trees and open area. Everything was fine until he heard a thundering sound and the left wing was blow off. The craft fell to the earth. Apparently some hunter was out there, completely camouflaged and got annoyed by the R/C device. When the two met up, the hunter actually apologized and offered to pay for damaged. He realized his fit of 'mindless rage' did more damage than simply standing up and calmly walking over to the individual to ask if he could go else where. They actually became good friends after that. What follows as I state, is not this same happy ending. No, this story involves a guy flying a drone copter over his property while testing it out. His neighbor, shot the thing down with a shotgun; believing it to be a CIA surveillance device spying on him. Can you say 'not with it in reality'? The owner of the drone decided to email his neighbor about the issue. He included the damages and asked for the sum of $700. The neighbor (whom had fired his gun off two times before and hitting the first person's house) said 'No'. What makes this case amusing is the 'dude with the shotgun' spews forth 'responsibility and accountability' with power as it concerns government. Oh yeah, he's a REAL wingnut. An actual Tea Partier! In other words, others have to be fully responsible and accountable over what they do and don't do, but he doesn't. Particularly were it concerns his fragile mental state or his shotgun. An this idiot is on the local school board. Is it intelligent or wise to have a loose cannon of an individual with a gun as it concerns a school? It should be noted that the first neighbor has the GPS course of the drone. The entire flight from start to crash took place on his property and 203 feet away from his neighbor's property. It should also be noted that the copter did not have any kind of surveillance equipment, nor a basic camera on the drone at the time. So the first neighbor took his shotgun-wielding neighbor to court. The court awarded the first neighbor with $850 in damages. The second neighbor as of this article, has refused to pay. Should the shotgun wielding neighbor be forced to pay the damages? Could the first neighbor contact the police and have the neighbor arrested for reckless endangerment with a firearm? SOURCE

MercTech -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/1/2015 8:39:20 AM)
Rural area and no firearm directly aimed at a person ... no ground for reckless endangerment. And, yes, the wing-nut should pay damages. He damaged another person's property and should be accountable. But, being out in granola country (full of flakes, fruits, and nits) it may drag out for a decade in court. Dang, I wish I could find that court case from the 70s. Fellow with a camera in a RC aircraft was sued for taking pictures of a neighbor's property. It was legal as long as the aircraft didn't drop below a certain height for an overflight and the pictures taken were for personal use and not for publication. I remember it because I was doing rocket launched photography back then.

kdsub -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/1/2015 9:21:33 AM)
Here are a couple of my shots from a Phantom 3... do these look intrusive? I wonder if on my own property if the gun laws in Missouri allow me to protect my property with force...lol... I hope so that asshole would get a butt full of buckshot. The first is a family farm in rural Missouri and the second is from my backyard overlooking my highschool. Butch [image]http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k69/Daviskw2004/DJI-cemetery1small_zpsfdq4o6yx.jpg[/image] [image]http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k69/Daviskw2004/DJI_0013small_zpsuhm9anr4.jpg[/image]

joether -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/1/2015 2:45:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech Rural area and no firearm directly aimed at a person ... no ground for reckless endangerment. And, yes, the wing-nut should pay damages. He damaged another person's property and should be accountable. But, being out in granola country (full of flakes, fruits, and nits) it may drag out for a decade in court. Dang, I wish I could find that court case from the 70s. Fellow with a camera in a RC aircraft was sued for taking pictures of a neighbor's property. It was legal as long as the aircraft didn't drop below a certain height for an overflight and the pictures taken were for personal use and not for publication. I remember it because I was doing rocket launched photography back then. The article does explain that the owner of the drone copter has received shots at his house from his neighbor's direction. But the guy has no right to fire his shotgun towards....ANYWHERE....on his neighbor's property without a REALLY good reason. Shooting a drone that doesn't have a camera mounted, because he fears the CIA is secretly observing his property.... ....Is just not a good enough excuse to warrant shooting the gun, or having the gun in the first place. That's not the argument of a rational, responsible person with a firearm. That's a gun nut whom is a few clowns short of a full circus! You sure you want a 'loose cannon' that has problems with reality, owning and using a firearm indiscriminately, representing 'honest and law abiding firearm owners' to the public? Particularly after some mass shooting nearby?

MrRodgers -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/1/2015 4:58:36 PM)
The courts will have to follow through on this nut. I am thinking punitive damages should have also been included in the lawsuit. Maybe he wouldn't be so trigger-happy if they were.

thishereboi -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/2/2015 3:20:27 AM)
Yups from the article it sounds like the guy with the shotgun was a real asshole. But I couldn't find the part where they tell us he was a tea party member. Perhaps you could point out that part for me?

bounty44 -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/2/2015 4:57:31 AM)
I was wondering the same thing and after a search on the guy, didn't find any evidence indicating as such. it seems the op has a pathological hatred for people who want the government to lower taxes, practice fiscal responsibility and limit themselves to what is expressly written in the constitution that every so often some such nonsense just seems to slip out. I imagine its like Tourette's syndrome for him. but lets imagine for a moment the guy is a member of a tea party group---there must be something essential in that consistent with the events of the story in order for it to be relevant. like, well everyone knows tea party folks own shotguns and refuse to pay for damages caused by them. or his tea party views were the sole motivation for the shooting in the first place. I also wondered why the story is in the political and religious discussion area. the questions of "Should the shotgun wielding neighbor be forced to pay the damages? Could the first neighbor contact the police and have the neighbor arrested for reckless endangerment with a firearm?" just don't seem to qualify it, at least the way the questions are posed, or without having to go layers deeper. I rather imagine it as an opportunity to bash gun owners instead. but then, while I could be genuinely mistaken on both accounts, I also recently learned my posts are devoid of intellect and so maybe the op knows something here I don't.

joether -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/2/2015 3:53:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Yups from the article it sounds like the guy with the shotgun was a real asshole. But I couldn't find the part where they tell us he was a tea party member. Perhaps you could point out that part for me? Ah, that is what is called institution. To find insight on something that is not obvious. The behavior of the shotgun wielding person's view towards the drone's purpose is one clue. The second is this man's interaction with the drone operator/owner. The third is the ARS Technica posted the shotgun wielding owner's name, Brett McBay. By itself that name means nothing relevant to your question. However, the name in the article is a web link. Right now it goes to a page that doesn't exist. That page that doesn't exist, explains Mr. McBay was on the school committee. Further it has his 'viewpoints' towards government. Let's just say the 'ranting' was very pro-libertarian, pro-Tea Party in nature. That was the biggest clue. Why doesnt the page exist right now? Maybe it got to many hits. Maybe Mr. McBay took it down on advice of a lawyer or friend. Maybe the federal government took it down in a conspiracy?

thishereboi -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/2/2015 3:55:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 but then, while I could be genuinely mistaken on both accounts, I also recently learned my posts are devoid of intellect and so maybe the op knows something here I don't. well unless he comes back with some kind of proof then I am going to have to assume he's just talking out of his ass again. Why am I not surprised?

Kirata -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/2/2015 11:40:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Yups from the article it sounds like the guy with the shotgun was a real asshole. But I couldn't find the part where they tell us he was a tea party member. Perhaps you could point out that part for me? Ah, that is what is called institution. Well in all fairness to boi, you've had the benefit of an Intuition of Higher Learning. K.

bounty44 -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/3/2015 4:19:12 AM)
don't you mean "the power of knowing or understanding something immediately without reasoning or being taught?"---you know, "institution." never mind the blatant lie, or willful misrepresentation, or at the very least, poor enough use of rhetoric such that the reader thinks he is being literal as opposed to figurative. I suppose I might be piling on there... I sometimes wonder why he doesn't just stick to his blogs where there is no critical opposition and the majority of people reading and commenting are fawning sycophants.

thishereboi -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/3/2015 4:22:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Yups from the article it sounds like the guy with the shotgun was a real asshole. But I couldn't find the part where they tell us he was a tea party member. Perhaps you could point out that part for me? Ah, that is what is called institution. To find insight on something that is not obvious. The behavior of the shotgun wielding person's view towards the drone's purpose is one clue. The second is this man's interaction with the drone operator/owner. The third is the ARS Technica posted the shotgun wielding owner's name, Brett McBay. By itself that name means nothing relevant to your question. However, the name in the article is a web link. Right now it goes to a page that doesn't exist. That page that doesn't exist, explains Mr. McBay was on the school committee. Further it has his 'viewpoints' towards government. Let's just say the 'ranting' was very pro-libertarian, pro-Tea Party in nature. That was the biggest clue. Why doesnt the page exist right now? Maybe it got to many hits. Maybe Mr. McBay took it down on advice of a lawyer or friend. Maybe the federal government took it down in a conspiracy? so in other words you have no fucking clue if he is or not but don't have a problem lying and claiming you do. Got it [8\|]

bounty44 -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/3/2015 5:31:18 AM)
quote: However, the name in the article is a web link. Right now it goes to a page that doesn't exist. That page that doesn't exist, explains Mr. McBay was on the school committee. Further it has his 'viewpoints' towards government. Let's just say the 'ranting' was very pro-libertarian, pro-Tea Party in nature. That was the biggest clue. Why doesnt the page exist right now? Maybe it got to many hits. Maybe Mr. McBay took it down on advice of a lawyer or friend. Maybe the federal government took it down in a conspiracy? or perhaps the page doesn't exist mr whiz for the most simple explanation, because the election has long since been over and the existence of the page had solely to do with that particular schoolboard election.

Lucylastic -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/3/2015 5:50:17 AM)
I actually dont give a shit one way or another, another paranoid twat with a gun...but ...heres some links ...to the story just to be helpful like... i dont care what kinda idiot he is... https://news.google.com/news/story?ncl=dXsauc4Cw93mH_MKTC_oNrMB-tLNM&q=Eric+Joe&lr=English&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OYSWVYf3F4b7yAT1sIL4CQ&ved=0CCEQqgIwAQ

MercTech -> RE: Man shoots down drone, film at 11! (7/5/2015 6:56:59 AM)
I decided to look up the regs for hobby aircraft vs drones. I'm starting a different topic on hobby vs drones as it is a sidebar issue on this topic. But, it looks to me that if the fellows hexacopter was close enough to be taken out by bird shot; it violated the FAA reg about not flying hobby aircraft near people. See "droning clarity" for links

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

8.007813E-02