SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
El Reg reports
A father who shot down a drone that was hovering over his family home in Kentucky has been cleared of all charges.
Dad-of-two William Merideth thought the quadcopter was spying on his daughters in their yard in Hillview and blasted the gizmo out of the sky with a shotgun. That earned him the title "Drone Slayer" from pro-privacy quarters.
Merideth was arrested shortly after in July and charged with criminal mischief and wanton endangerment.
He appeared before the Bullitt County District Court on Monday this week and after a two and a half hour hearing, Judge Rebecca Ward dismissed the case against him.
"I was in my right to protect my family and my property", said Merideth.
The judge agreed, telling the court: "He had a right to shoot at this drone."
David Boggs, who owned the downed drone, was hoping to get the cost of the machine in compensation and said he will ask the Commonwealth's Attorney's office to take the case to a grand jury--or consider pursuing a civil case against Merideth.
Previous: Man Arrested for Shooting Down Drone Flying Over His Property
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by cloud.pt on Thursday October 29 2015, @04:51PM
More guns to you then.
I hope some day somebody decides to shoot your beautiful Ford Mustang because it was stepping in 1 inch of his lawn. I just hope your family isn't inside the car at the time. Maybe that day you will grasp the amount of 'muricanism you should be saving for times that really matter, instead of being "perturbed" by something you clearly don't understand. Maybe that time you will care about the numbers and the deep level in which they are not broken, because numbers don't lie to defend themselves, unlike weak human beings.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2015, @05:14PM
OK, let's take this slowly. Breathe deeply, and follow closely:
The claim (by the drone operator) is that the altitude of the drone over ground level was at least two hundred feet. Let's take that at face value, with maybe a couple of feet of grace. This claim is disputed, but let's just suppose that he's telling the unadulterated truth on all counts because that's the friendliest possible position to his case.
The undisputed claim is that the drone was grounded after being shot with birdshot.
In the real world, birdshot at 60 yards horizontal might possibly chip paint. Nobody is claiming that the father shot with some kind of Texas-powered supercannon, just a regular old shotgun. At 40 yards, it's well known to shotgunners that it's too darned far to hope to reliably break clay pigeons, and 60 yards makes it that much worse.
Therefore: there is a disconnect between the claims of the drone operator, and the physical reality of the drone's fate. Until that is cleared up, there is no reason to believe those claims, and since civil cases work in terms of the preponderance of evidence, the rational step is for that case to be tossed.
See? No NRA flags waving (I'm not a member) nor even Old Glory (I'm not 'merkin, nor even american, and I'm surprised that you assumed any different), just plain old physics and courtroom logic.
Now, please explain again precisely how this shotgun was fired with magic birdshot that wrecks machinery at distances far beyond those of the expected effective range of normal birdshot. Details, and specifics, if you please.
And no, outrage about guns and obfuscations about what constitutes trespass don't count as details and specifics. I expect to see an analysis of the ballistic coefficient, perhaps mediated by a reasonable guess at air pressure, sectional density, penetration rates, and work of fracture.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Thursday October 29 2015, @05:32PM
Sounds like another "Magic Bullet" scenario to me. Now all we need to do is come up with a good conspiracy theory.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 4, Funny) by khallow on Thursday October 29 2015, @05:54PM
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 29 2015, @07:58PM
Seems like a pretty clear dichotomy to me. Either the drone was flying close enough for the birdshot to down it in which case the shooting was justified and Merideth doesn't owe Boggs compensation or it was flying as high as claimed in which case the birdshot couldn't have brought it down and Merideth doesn't owe Boggs compensation.
(Score: 2, Touché) by khallow on Thursday October 29 2015, @05:58PM
I hope some day somebody decides to shoot your beautiful Ford Mustang because it was stepping in 1 inch of his lawn.
And I hope someday you get mugged by common sense. Earlier, you had written that you own firearms. I think given the number of times you've shot yourself in your foot with your keyboard in this discussion, maybe you should give up those weapons before you hurt yourself with them.