[gppk]

What's the problem here? If a drone is flying around you're not exactly allowed to interfere with it anyway?

If it's a drone that crashes or causes an issue, then presumably the Amazon drones will be tracked/registered and hobbyists wil llikely have to be conforming to their local laws wrt registration

[groovybits]

> If a drone is flying around you're not exactly allowed to interfere with it anyway?

Are there laws for this? Why would I not be able to remove a drone (or any other foreign object) from my own property?

[cronix]

Yes, it's under FAA jurisdiction and a federal crime. You own the ground. They own the air basically "from the blades of the grass to space." You really don't want to be shooting down aircraft in FAA controlled airspace. It's the equivalent at shooting at an airplane.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2016/04/13/faa-confi...

[groovybits]

I'm finding conflicting information on this.

According to the FAA's regulations for commericial aircraft[1], it mentions following the rules for 'Part 107'[2].

According to Part 107, under Operational Limitations:

> Maximum altitude of 400 feet above ground level (AGL) or, if higher than 400 feet AGL, remain within 400 feet of a structure.

Under 400 ft is considered 'Class G' airspace[3]. The FAA labels this as "uncontrolled" airspace, and "This is airspace where the FAA is not controlling manned air traffic."[4] Of course, these drones are unmanned. So do they fall under these regulations? Assuming the drone is under 400 ft (ex: on a front lawn), what am I legally able to do?

I'm not sure how most of this stuff works, but it looks like you can also file for an exemption to the rules, which I'm sure someone like Amazon can do. However, from a newbie's perspective, the regulations seems rather confusing.

Edit:

I do not see any information within these pages that say "I, the resident, cannot take lethal action against an aircraft in the event that the aircraft presents a danger to myself/others" or "... in the event it occupies my property without my consent", which is the case that I believe we are discussing here.

18 USC 32[5] states:

> This statute now also makes it a Federal offense to commit an act of violence against any person on the aircraft, not simply crew members, if the act is likely to endanger the safety of the aircraft.

This sounds like sort of a blanket statement, and does not really cover cases such as these.

1: https://www.faa.gov/uas/commercial_operators/

2: https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Part_107_Summary.pdf

3: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim_html...

4: https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_fliers/

5: https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-2-aircra...

[michaelt]

Perhaps Dirlewanger means "drone" as in "worker bee" i.e. delivery driver?

Amazon sometimes uses drivers who don't have uniforms, and who drive private cars.

[dontbenebby]

>What's the problem here? If a drone is flying around you're not exactly allowed to interfere with it anyway?

Why do drones get more protection than people? If a person trespasses on my property and makes me fear for my life I can use force if I'm in a stand your ground state.

A drone may contain bombs or weapons, and a drone that crashes down on you can kill you[1]. It's already violating the law via trespassing, and I'd be willing to bet a thing will get less protection than a living being from a judge.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/nyregion/remote-controlle...

[cronix]

The difference is the drone isn't "on" your property, so technically not "trespassing," unless it lands. Airspace (from the top of your grass on up) is controlled by the FAA and it's a federal crime to interfere with an aircraft of any type. You don't own the air, only real property.

[parrellel]

And yet Robert Duvall lost his case when an angry neighbor shot down hos trespassing drone. No federal charges there.

[rocqua]

The issue is that most forms of interference (shooting it, jamming it) have a tendency to make the drone fall out of the sky. That is rather dangerous.

[towndrunk]

> What's the problem here? If a drone is flying around you're not exactly allowed to interfere with it anyway?

Really? We have already seem people shooting them down when flying near their homes.

[cronix]

Yes, all federal crimes, that weren't prosecuted, although they absolutely could have. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2016/04/13/faa-confi...