[maxerickson]

That's fine. My point was that he was not arrested for property damage.

If you want to rephrase it and say How come discharging a shotgun over property you don't own is criminal when all it does is a little bit of property damage?, then I'm not left with anything to be pedantic about.

[JoeAltmaier]

Thanks. I noticed there's nothing in the article that says where the shotgun was discharged; nor where the drone was when it was damaged. Also, magically the drone owner was able to point out where the shotgun was discharged. That is notoriously difficult to do - echoes, shotgun noise similar to car backfires etc.

I think its all made up.

[maxerickson]

I'm comfortable with the assumption that the drone operator was close enough to the drone to discern betwixt a gun discharge and other loud bangs. It does say they were focusing the drone on a house under construction (and even if they were flying all over the neighborhood, they would still likely end up keeping a short distance to the drone).

Edit: I'm also comfortable with the assumption that the police took the location of the firing and such into account when they made the arrest.