Well, maybe the label of terrorist is a bit extreme. But why the hell should you be able to maliciously broadcast an incorrect GPS signal with the intent of destruction of property (which may btw, put other bystanders in harms way as well) not be viewed as some sort of... at least incorrect act. It is pretty sad that they jump to the label terrorist. But it's not the least reasonable use of the label.
In any case, such an attack is unlikely to work. The crash into the ground is least likely to work since most drones will likely have an independent altitude information. The stall method may work - if the drone has no INS and the operator is asleep.
Exactly is a constant legal dispute :) However, the FCC pretty unarguably has authority over use of radio spectra, especially when that use is malicious. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC#Regulatory_powers_and_enfo... They get to determine who gets to use what spectrum, where, at what power, and for what purposes.
My point was more that poaching rhinos does not really happen in US territory, and the FCC is an American agency with no international authority that I am aware of.
Yes, of course, I have the same fear. Some might think you a terrorist for merely conceiving of such things. But, I think it's easier to evade detection while making the GPS attack, than by firing at it with a rifle, in which case it could potentially take a photograph of you in the act. Not to mention the possibility of stray rifle bullets flying through the air, and wounded drones crashing uncontrollably.