Drone - Above Neighborhood

[Low Saturn]

Funny thing is, if one is over your property, the one thing it most likely CAN'T see if it has a camera is your property. The very expensive ones have gimbals that allow camera movement. The majority of owners of quadcopters have cheaper quads that can't do that. If someone really wants to see what is on your property, satellite view on Google maps is much easier and provides a better view.

[PT145SS]

Originally Posted by Steve Dallas

The reasoning is the noise bothers some animals, and though I can see that....I'm not really sure it has more of an effect than driving through a state park, riding motorcycles, etc.

Because people are paranoid, you see this push against drones.

It's the same argument that people have regarding guns, and I'm willing to bet some people wouldn't want guns taken away because PEOPLE are the issue here, not the tool. Drones are a tool that can be used for good and bad (Mostly good).

Let's just say that if you are for responsible gun ownership and you take a stance that all drones should be banned because some people are idiots...then you're a hypocrite.

Under property owner rights we have the right to allow guns or not allow guns on our property. The laws are usually pretty clear. And if someone trespasses on private property with a gun for nefarious reasons, the property owners has a right (at least in Texas) to take care of business. Not so cut and dry with drones. Is there defined airspace above private property that would constitute trespass? Should there be... I don't know. Airplanes travel overhead every day.

Someone sunbathing in a backyard behind a privacy fence may or may not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. It’s a lot harder (not impossible) for someone with a camera and telephoto lens to obtain a point of view that sees into a backyard with a privacy fence. A drone can allow someone a point of view that otherwise would not be accessible by other/more common means. Then there are issues like you mentioned... noise. If I'm trying to enjoy my backyard and someone flies a drone nearby all day long, they could be interfering with the enjoyment of my backyard. Most noise ordinances not only have decibel and time components, they also have annoyances/nuisances elements as well. Kind of like a barking dog. They may never reach decibel levels to warrant a ticket but if they are incessant with their barking, a ticket could certainly be issued. I could see this as an issue with noise from a drone.

Model RC planes have not had this issue because they require (in most cases) space for runway and etc. As a result they fly in suitable and designated places, but they can still enjoy their hobby. Drones/mutlichopers on the other hand are not restricted in this manner and are being flown in places that may or may not be appropriate. Regardless of technology, property owners still have property rights and individuals still have a reasonable right to privacy and in most regards those rights outweigh your right to fly drones.

At some point, the legislature or the courts will need to strike a balance between those rights. Just like guns. You can have and carry a gun all you want, you just can’t do it on my property if I don’t want you to.

BTW, on a side note… I own and carry a gun every day. I respect the rights of property owners who post the correct signs to keep me from carrying on their property. I usually choose to not do business with them if I can but I respect their rights. Public places, they should have no right to tell me I cannot carry there because my right to self-preservation and defense outweighs the public’s right to keep me from carrying. The same with drones… There are no property ownership rights in public places and no reasonable expectation of privacy and unless there is some safety concerns about flying that outweigh your freedom to do so… than I say fly on.

[Steve Dallas]

Originally Posted by PT145SS

Under property owner rights we have the right to allow guns or not allow guns on our property. The laws are usually pretty clear. And if someone trespasses on private property with a gun for nefarious reasons, the property owners has a right (at least in Texas) to take care of business. Not so cut and dry with drones. Is there defined airspace above private property that would constitute trespass? Should there be... I don't know. Airplanes travel overhead every day.

Someone sunbathing in a backyard behind a privacy fence may or may not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. It’s a lot harder (not impossible) for someone with a camera and telephoto lens to obtain a point of view that sees into a backyard with a privacy fence. A drone can allow someone a point of view that otherwise would not be accessible by other/more common means. Then there are issues like you mentioned... noise. If I'm trying to enjoy my backyard and someone flies a drone nearby all day long, they could be interfering with the enjoyment of my backyard. Most noise ordinances not only have decibel and time components, they also have annoyances/nuisances elements as well. Kind of like a barking dog. They may never reach decibel levels to warrant a ticket but if they are incessant with their barking, a ticket could certainly be issued. I could see this as an issue with noise from a drone.

Model RC planes have not had this issue because they require (in most cases) space for runway and etc. As a result they fly in suitable and designated places, but they can still enjoy their hobby. Drones/mutlichopers on the other hand are not restricted in this manner and are being flown in places that may or may not be appropriate. Regardless of technology, property owners still have property rights and individuals still have a reasonable right to privacy and in most regards those rights outweigh your right to fly drones.

At some point, the legislature or the courts will need to strike a balance between those rights. Just like guns. You can have and carry a gun all you want, you just can’t do it on my property if I don’t want you to.

BTW, on a side note… I own and carry a gun every day. I respect the rights of property owners who post the correct signs to keep me from carrying on their property. I usually choose to not do business with them if I can but I respect their rights. Public places, they should have no right to tell me I cannot carry there because my right to self-preservation and defense outweighs the public’s right to keep me from carrying. The same with drones… There are no property ownership rights in public places and no reasonable expectation of privacy and unless there is some safety concerns about flying that outweigh your freedom to do so… than I say fly on.

I agree that you have a right to guns on your property.

Strictly speaking, though...you do not own the minerals under it NOR the air over it. That is called airspace, and is regulated differently. A drone or plane over your property is technically not ON your property. There are exceptions to this, as some airspace is restricted or military.

That being said, there are laws against encroaching or bothering people...shooting at air traffic above your house, however, is against FAA regulations. If a helicopter was hovering 1000 feet over your property, would you shoot at it? No, and it's likely you would go to prison for a LONG time if you did so. The better option is to call police (or the FAA) and report it.

Just shooting at ANY aircraft over your house would be risky as far as as how they could and would penalize you. Even the guy that shot at that quad had to go to court and pay fines over what he did. The pilot is currently suing him for the damages to his quad, and is likely to win that since he has evidence he wasn't even over the guys house.

http://www.cnet.com/news/man-shoots-...ng-over-house/

[Tenring]

Well we can certainly see who has a dog in this fight!

My question still has not been answered with any valid points (and it has nothing to do with responsible gun ownership) ...............what good reason would a person have to fly their drone hover/over someones house?

[SeaCompiler]

What is disappointing in this thread is the posts afraid of the government.

[Low Saturn]

Originally Posted by Tenring

...............what good reason would a person have to fly their drone hover/over someones house?

If it has a camera, to view the scenery out in the distance. Like I mentioned in one of my posts, if I'm hovering above my property, I can't see my property. I can't even see my neighbors to my left, right or behind me. And the higher up I go, my view get more skewed of what is off to each side.

Something that I like to do when we are at our families cabin is fly up and hover just above the trees. You'd never know there were houses below. It's a beautiful sight.

[Donald]

Originally Posted by Steve Dallas

I agree that you have a right to guns on your property.

Strictly speaking, though...you do not own the minerals under it NOR the air over it.

Not 100% accurate. Mineral rights typically have to be signed away for you to not own them.
http://www.zillow.com/blog/does-prop...e-land-143382/

Originally Posted by Steve Dallas

That is called airspace, and is regulated differently. A drone or plane over your property is technically not ON your property.

Property Rights of Airspace for Dummies disagrees:

Originally Posted by Dummies

An entry into another’s airspace is a trespass even if the trespasser doesn’t touch the surface of the earth. Airplanes may trespass by flying low over a person’s property, for example. An airplane trespasses by flying low enough over the surface to interfere with the owner’s reasonable use and enjoyment of her surface.

They go on to mention that if you don't have restrictions to build to a certain height then you own that air up to public air space (mentioned in the article).

Originally Posted by Steve Dallas

There are exceptions to this, as some airspace is restricted or military.

Public airspace is mentioned in the above referenced article.
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/conten...-airspace.html

Originally Posted by Steve Dallas

That being said, there are laws against encroaching or bothering people...shooting at air traffic above your house, however, is against FAA regulations. If a helicopter was hovering 1000 feet over your property, would you shoot at it? No, and it's likely you would go to prison for a LONG time if you did so. The better option is to call police (or the FAA) and report it.

Agreed, but that's in public airspace.

Originally Posted by Steve Dallas

Just shooting at ANY aircraft over your house would be risky as far as as how they could and would penalize you. Even the guy that shot at that quad had to go to court and pay fines over what he did. The pilot is currently suing him for the damages to his quad, and is likely to win that since he has evidence he wasn't even over the guys house.

http://www.cnet.com/news/man-shoots-...ng-over-house/

If I am understanding the For Dummies article correctly, then you are correct for this case... Since the drone was not over the property it was not trespassing and the shooter is at fault there.

[Low Saturn]

An whats really unfortunate is that the opinion of the misinformed public about quadcopters and the .0001% of quadcopter owners who do stupid stuff is going to ruin the hobby for the rest of us.

The vast majority of us just want to fly around and have some fun. Basically play with our toy. Since humans can't go out, flap their arms and fly and very few people can actually afford a real plane or helicopter, this is the next best thing.

[PT145SS]

I was not advocating shooting anything. I was saying that the issue is not cut and dry. There needs to be a balance of your freedom to play with big kid toys and property owner rights to enjoy their property and privacy. As a property owner I could not hang a camera from a pole and reach into my neighbors yard and claim that I'm not invading their privacy and I have every legal right because they don't own that airspace. Now if my security camera is on the eve of my house and happens to capture my neighbors backyard there is probably nothing they can do. But the difference is that is within a standard vantage point. Fly a drone to a place that is not a normal vantage point.

Others have pointed out the fallacies in arguments about mineral rights and etc. All I want to point out is that sooner or later it will take legislation or court rulings to strike the balance of your right to fly and my property and privacy rights.

One other thing... Do these drones record sound? If so, what state and or federal laws are being broken under wiretap laws? I have not read the TX laws in a long time, but I believe recording audio of a conversation that you are not a party to can be a violation of law with recent exceptions of recording law enforcement acting in the line of duty.

Again, I think you have the right to fly your toy on your own property or public property. I think it might be questionable to fly the toy over my property at low altitudes to some degree. I also think recording images and or audio at a vantage point that could not otherwise be obtained through normal reasonable means where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy is questionable as well.

[Steve Dallas]

The one I'm using to take the high quality shots doesn't have sound.

I do have some drones that use a GoPro though, and the GoPro records sound. It is, however, largely drowned out by the motors. I videoed the Camaro5 drags in Baytown, and to some great footage. You can hear the cars as they go off the line, and it's still pretty much drowned out. I did, however, have a part that detached from the quad, and caused it to crash on the track, fortunately when no cars were running.

Here's some footage from that event.

[Steve Dallas]

Originally Posted by PT145SS

Again, I think you have the right to fly your toy on your own property or public property. I think it might be questionable to fly the toy over my property at low altitudes to some degree. I also think recording images and or audio at a vantage point that could not otherwise be obtained through normal reasonable means where someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy is questionable as well.

The law on recording video and sound from your own private property or public is pretty much open. Cops can't even legally stop someone from recording from their phones, as that has gone to the Supreme Court. Some cops have tried to restrain or stop people from recording, and have been sued for violating a citizens rights to do so.

[PT145SS]

Originally Posted by Steve Dallas

The law on recording video and sound from your own private property or public is pretty much open. Cops can't even legally stop someone from recording from their phones, as that has gone to the Supreme Court. Some cops have tried to restrain or stop people from recording, and have been sued for violating a citizens rights to do so.

The exception here is that officers are working for the public and is an exception to the rule. Not that the law is used a lot but a private citizen recording audio (video is different) of two other citizens without their knowledge is questionable at a state level (all states have different laws in this regard).

I think drones are pretty cool and as with anything inanimate object the object itself is not the issue. The intent of the operator is. I would imagine that 99% of operators are just having fun and no ill is intended. But undoubtedly you will have that 1% of aholes who abuse it intentionally or out of ignorance or out of lack of respect. We have laws about where and how to carry firearms mostly because of the 1% of aholes who abuse them purposely or out of ignorance. In regards to guns in TX, the legislature went to great lengths to balance self protection and property rights. As drones become more advaced e.g. easier to fly and less expensive, we will see more clashes between your freedom to fly and property rights and sooner or later there will be laws to try and protect both.

[VTSummit]

Originally Posted by Steve Dallas

Actually, the same FAA laws apply until drones are placed in a seperate category, which they really aren't.

Point is, that a shoot first and ask questions later policy by people may not be the best idea. At the very least, if you did this while I was flying legally...would make you liable for about 3000 dollars of damage to replace the copter. And I would go after the person in court and press charges if such a thing happened. Shoot my copter down, and you won't have a very good day. I'll have logs and video showing EXACTLY what I was doing.

I disagree- a land owner in Virginia shot down an R/C aircraft claiming the noise bothered him and claimed it was over his property. He had just moved in to a house bordering an established R/C flying club. FAA wanted nothing to do with it.
I was flying my IMAA legal Sukhoi at the very same field about an hour before Elmer Fudd took out a Cub.

[Tenring]

Originally Posted by Low Saturn

An whats really unfortunate is that the opinion of the misinformed public about quadcopters and the .0001% of quadcopter owners who do stupid stuff is going to ruin the hobby for the rest of us.

The vast majority of us just want to fly around and have some fun. Basically play with our toy. Since humans can't go out, flap their arms and fly and very few people can actually afford a real plane or helicopter, this is the next best thing.

I have no problem with people flying drones or quadcopters. I think it would be a blast to have one and fly it in an appropriate area, responsibly (not over someone's home). In fact if my Camaro mods slow a little, I will probably pick one up.