Town Wants to Let Hunters Shoot Down Drones

Discussion in 'Freedom and Liberty' started by tulianr, Jul 19, 2013.

  1. tulianr

    tulianr Don Quixote de la Monkey

    Forget deer, elk, moose, and bears. Hunters in Deer Trail, Colo., have a new target in the sights: government drones. The town board is considering issuing hunting licenses and bounties for unmanned aerial vehicles, reports ABC Denver. "We do not want drones in town," says resident Phillip Steel, who drafted the ordinance. "They fly in town, they get shot down." The licenses and proposed $100 bounty would be largely symbolic, concedes Steel—drone sightings aren't common in Deer Trail, and destroying federal property is against the law. But he believes the $25 licenses could be a big moneymaker for the little town. "Even if a tiny percentage of people get online [for a] drone license, that's cool. That's a lot of money to a small town like us," says a town board member, who says he's leaning toward voting 'yes' on the drone hunting ordinance on Aug. 6. Other town members have proposed holding a festival with drone-themed skeet shooting. "It's all novelty. Do a little drone fest, get people to come out, have fun," says Deer Trail's mayor. But it's not about fun for Steel. "To him it's a novelty, yes," he says. "To me, I'm serious."

    Town Wants to Let Hunters Shoot Down Drones - Deer Trail, Colo., considers drone hunting licenses

    Mountainman, Motomom34 and Yard Dart like this.
  2. tulianr

    tulianr Don Quixote de la Monkey

    It didn't take long to see an FAA response to this story.

    FAA warns public against shooting guns at drones


    WASHINGTON (AP) — People who fire guns at drones are endangering the public and property and could be prosecuted or fined, the Federal Aviation Administration warned Friday.

    The FAA released a statement in response to questions about an ordinance under consideration in the tiny farming community of Deer Trail, Colo., that would encourage hunters to shoot down drones. The administration reminded the public that it regulates the nation's airspace, including the airspace over cities and towns.

    A drone "hit by gunfire could crash, causing damage to persons or property on the ground, or it could collide with other objects in the air," the statement said. "Shooting at an unmanned aircraft could result in criminal or civil liability, just as would firing at a manned airplane."

    Under the proposed ordinance, Deer Trail would grant hunting permits to shoot drones. The permits would cost $25 each. The town would also encourage drone hunting by awarding $100 to anyone who presents a valid hunting license and identifiable pieces of a drone that has been shot down.

    Deer Trail resident Phillip Steel, 48, author of the proposal, said in an interview that he has 28 signatures on a petition — roughly 10 percent of the town's registered voters. Under Colorado law, that requires local officials to formally consider the proposal at a meeting next month, he said. Town officials would then have the option of adopting the ordinance or putting it on the ballot in an election this fall, he said.

    The proposed ordinance is mostly a symbolic protest against small, civilian drones that are coming into use in the United States, Steel said. He acknowledged that it's unlikely there are any drones in use near Deer Trail.

    "I don't want to live in a surveillance society. I don't feel like being in a virtual prison," Steel said. "This is a pre-emptive strike."

    He dismissed the FAA's warning. "The FAA doesn't have the power to make a law," he said.

    The FAA is working on regulations to safely integrate drones into the skies over the U.S., where manned aircraft are prevalent. The Congress gave the FAA until 2015 to develop the regulations, but the agency is behind schedule. FAA officials have estimated that once regulations are in place, thousands of drones will be in use across the country for a wide variety of purposes, from helping farmers figure out which crops need watering to tracking sea lions in remote rocky outcroppings to aiding search and rescue missions.

    But the Deer Trail proposal is the latest ripple in a spreading backlash against drones. Dozens of laws aimed at curbing the use of the unmanned aircraft have been introduced in states and cities. Privacy advocates have expressed fear that police will use drones to cheaply and effectively conduct widespread surveillance without warrants.

    The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, a drone industry trade group, was concerned enough last year about people threatening to shoot down drones that it issued a statement warning that such comments were "irresponsible, dangerous and unlawful."

    Michael Toscano, president and CEO of the group, expressed similar concerns Friday, saying drones "are being designed to serve the public good....The myriad of important uses will be imperiled if they become targets. ... The suggestion that Americans take up arms against unmanned aircraft also endangers citizens on the ground."

    FAA warns public against shooting guns at drones - Yahoo! News
  3. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    tulianr likes this.
  4. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

  5. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

  6. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

  7. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    I just keep thinking of the TV series "Dark Angel".
  8. NotSoSneaky

    NotSoSneaky former supporter

    If I ever win the lottery I want a WWII P-51 Mustang, fully armed to go drone hunting.

    Now THAT gots to be F-U-N ![OO] biglaff [coo]
  9. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    LOL! just remember those hunting rules like "Your target, and beyond"
  10. DKR

    DKR Raconteur of the first stripe

  11. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    Real question I have, is just how big would a drone have to be, to drop something nasty in a public area? Anthrax, plague? They would be a terrorist weapon of warfare. Even if it had flashing cop lights, and logo, who could tell, until it was too late? The potential for misuse it staggering.:eek:
  12. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    I absolutely hate drones. If I were to shoot one down would I be charged with making an obscene drone fall?:rolleyes:
    oldawg likes this.
  13. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Gator 45/70 and kellory like this.
  14. Gator 45/70

    Gator 45/70 Monkey+++

    Shoot,Shovel,Shut-up !
    Harbin, Motomom34 and oldawg like this.
  15. Mountainman

    Mountainman Großes Mitglied Site Supporter+++

    Your just thinking about Alba!!!
    Brokor likes this.
  16. fmhuff

    fmhuff Monkey+++

    Shooting down drones "l e g a l l y" is never going to happen though I do appreciate peoples legitimate concerns. For one, where do those missed shots come down and if they were to hit somebody a mile or more away the shooter is responsible for the bullet (case law). Heck, the shooter would be responsible for what the drone hit as well. It won't take long before people learn how to blind drones both visually and their communications.

    This drone spying stuff is way out of hand and I doubt anything said by those with the drones will stop many of them being destroyed. You do know there are all kinds of surveillance drones in the world. some mobile, some dropped from planes or planted in areas. Some land based, some air, some water, some amphibious, many programmable and autonomous. Some with weapons of various kinds.The sky's the limit. Any techie with a desire could replicate anything the military has and more. Most of us would be unwilling. I'm not saying you should or that it's legal only warning that it might not be only the government you need worry about in the future. Drug growers, meth-heads, et al are going to figure it out and this is not tin-foil reasoning.
  17. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Hm. Hunter - killer drones ---
  18. Motomom34

    Motomom34 Monkey+++

    The town is so sparsely populated that I don't think they are worried about one falling on a house or much less your bullet falling on someone. I know what goes up, must go down but Deer Trail has a lot of open space. Now regarding blinding one, someone mentioned one of those little red dot things. I have no clue if it would work but I think there was a case years ago about someone blinding a pilot with the red dot laser thing.

    Either or, I think it is a neat way to generate revenue and give the big finger to the gun grabbers in Co and the feds.
  19. BTPost

    BTPost Stumpy Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    First things FIRST.... The Ordinance, as proposed, limits the Weapons used, to Shotguns, loaded with BirdShot, and drones flying at less than 400' AGL...
    This is pretty much the same as Migratory Waterfowl Hunting... and if you have ever done much of that you would understand that out passed 100 Yds... even 12 Ga Magnum Loads, are fairly ineffective, and at double that distance, when they have used up most of their Kinetic Energy, the shot will be falling at Gravity Based speeds, against Terminal Velocity, of the individual shot pellets themselves. Having been peppered with such particles, many times, it is of little consequence.
    Second..... ALL these classes of Drones are REQUIRED to be controlled by a Human Operator, from within a radius of a couple of miles, Maximum, and the Control Links are most likely WiFi Based, or at least 2.4Ghz 48CFRPart15 Certified Transmitters, and that limits them to that same 2 Mile Control Radius. So If a person DOES decide to bring down a Drone, under this Ordinance, if Passed, then the Operator, will be very local, to the Crash Site. If the Ordinance, were to prohibit ANY such Drone Flights inside the Township, then the Shooter could also ARREST, the Operator, under a Citizens Arrest, and hold him for the local LEOs to scoop up and haul off, for violating the Ordinance. The Operator would also be responsible for damage done, by the falling Drone Parts, as he/she would have been in violation of the Ordinance, prior to any shoot down action by the Shooter.
    Third.... If it was during Migratory Waterfowl Hunting Season, the shooter could always claim he was shooting at a Duck, and either misidentified the Target, as a Duck, or missed the Duck, which flew away, and hit the Drone, which failed to fly away.... " I am sorry dude, It looked like a Duck, but it dropped like a Drone.... and those are illegal to fly, in this township. didn't you know that? Oh bye the way, I am placing you under Citizens Arrest, for Violation of the Drone Ordinance, which is a Misdemeanor in this township." ..... Aw, to bad, so sad.....[gun] [lolol]
  20. Oddmar

    Oddmar Monkey+

    kellory likes this.
survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary