What if I shoot down a PETA Drone?

[Disposable Heart]

We have the mercenaries on standby awaiting coordinates.

Just need a a model Grumman E-2 for AWACS and C&C, a couple Hornets on Ready 5 on the deck, we'll be set for any PETA incursion into our airspace.

Sir, detecting unknown aircraft, range 1000 meters, angels .5.
(yawn) send up the Ready 5, alert Captain Freeman. Oh, (pours coffee) and get that AWACS up. I want a better picture if they are getting into a furball up there. (tastes coffee) And get DH up here on the double, this coffee is terrible.

 

[ghitch75]

So then we're back to a 12ga with 6 or 8 shot. Or maybe 00. GPS that. Sometimes the simple answers are the best.

i like 4 shot for high flying crows......drone crows either one as i see them as the same.....

 

[churchmouse]

Just need a a model Grumman E-2 for AWACS and C&C, a couple Hornets on Ready 5 on the deck, we'll be set for any PETA incursion into our airspace.

Sir, detecting unknown aircraft, range 1000 meters, angels .5.
(yawn) send up the Ready 5, alert Captain Freeman. Oh, (pours coffee) and get that AWACS up. I want a better picture if they are getting into a furball up there. (tastes coffee) And get DH up here on the double, this coffee is terrible.

Negative ghost rider....the pattern is full.........

That is a piece of art.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

This thread has brightened an already bright morning.

Thanks!

 

[JettaKnight]

Not sure. Do we own the airspace over the land we own? Have the controller arrested for trespassing? File a restraining order against all PETA members in our area? I'm sure if we shot it down then we would at least be taken to civil court for destruction of property.
.

Yes, you own 83 feet and below as ruled in U.S. v. Clausby by the Supreme Court back in the forties.

 

[ghitch75]

Yes, you own 83 feet and below as ruled in U.S. v. Clausby by the Supreme Court back in the forties.

i see i own up as high as 4 shot will reach

 

[AngryRooster]

Yes, you own 83 feet and below as ruled in U.S. v. Clausby by the Supreme Court back in the forties.

Thank you, that helps. I had not seen that before. I did read it a bit different though, maybe I'm mistaken. The aircraft flying were at 83 feet thus creating the easement. The paragraph above states:

Thus, a landowner "owns at least as much of the space above the ground as he can occupy or use in connection with the land," and invasions of that airspace "are in the same category as invasions of the surface."

So if I own and use a drone myself to view a vast area of livestock and fly it at 500 feet then that 500 feet is being used in conjunction with the ground. Wouldn't that make anything lower than the altitude I use be in violation?

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

I can occupy and use a heck of a lot more than 83 feet. How's that reconcile with the ruling?

 

[singlesix]

What is more likely that you'll have a drone flying over your property or you'll get Ebola and die so the drone thing won't matter?

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

Anybody comes round here with ebola is gettin shot straight in the face. If nobody wants 'im he can decay on the front deck. He'll stop smellin, eventually. Gawd, I'm gonna be Harleyrider purty soon. Goes with the FLSTF, I guess.

 

[hooky]

I have stumbled across the solution to this vexing problem. The solution? Raptors.

[video=youtube_share;AhDG_WBIQgc]http://youtu.be/AhDG_WBIQgc[/video]

 

[bwframe]

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-fox-59-story-drone-invasion.html#post5416273