Don't Do This!

[IronMonster]

Actually, I believe it's already illegal for a non-licensed civilian to mount ANY kind of firearm to an aircraft, piloted or UAV.

I am just about positive this is the case, You cannot hard mount a firearm to a vehicle (car/truck/boat) I dont know why a unmanned vehicle would be any different

 

[rdb241]

Actually, I believe it's already illegal for a non-licensed civilian to mount ANY kind of firearm to an aircraft, piloted or UAV.

According to the Federal Aviation Authority, current rules already prohibit prevent any weapons being attached to any kind of aircraft.
In 2013, the Washington Times reported that an FAA officials told industry leaders: 'We currently have rules in the books that deal with releasing anything from an aircraft, period.'Those rules are in place and that would prohibit weapons from being installed on a civil aircraft.' He was apparently referring to part of the FAA code labelled 'dropping objects'. The agency can impose large fines for breaking the rules.

 

[The Heretic]

Actually, I believe it's already illegal for a non-licensed civilian to mount ANY kind of firearm to an aircraft, piloted or UAV.

They do remove hard points from mil-surplus aircraft - I think because of treaties. But I don't think small drones like come under the definition of an aircraft - although the FAA does try to regulate them.

Just the same, I would like to see the cite of the law that people thinks makes this illegal.

 

[SynapticSilence]

In less than a week, Skynet will take over all of the armed drones and turn them against their human operators. Then it's all downhill from there.

 

[rdb241]

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...mc=true&node=pt14.2.91&rgn=div5#se14.2.91_115

 

[The Heretic]

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...mc=true&node=pt14.2.91&rgn=div5#se14.2.91_115

"However, this section does not prohibit the dropping of any object if reasonable precautions are taken to avoid injury or damage to persons or property."

At various airshows, they often have a competition to see who can drop a bag of flower on a target.

 

[rdb241]

I

"However, this section does not prohibit the dropping of any object if reasonable precautions are taken to avoid injury or damage to persons or property."

At various airshows, they often have a competition to see who can drop a bag of flower on a target.

I am sure a live firearm does not compare to a bag of flour.

 

[The Heretic]

I

I am sure a live firearm does not compare to a bag of flour.

The point was an example of taking "reasonable care" being allowed.

Shooting a firearm from a drone, if done safely with "reasonable care", would seem to not be prohibited.

 

[45alive]

Anything that's fun has to have a law against it would be my guess.

CORRECT ! It goes way beyond just fun, It is going against OUR RIGHT to LIVE ! There are so called'' Laws'' in Oregon NOW, that say you can not collect Rain Water. The ODFW and the Oregon Mafia are working together to sell OUR water to ''Nestle.'' Like Mr. George Carlin would say, ''Well, F$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$CK YOUUUU !''

 

[pdrake]

Actually, I believe it's already illegal for a non-licensed civilian to mount ANY kind of firearm to an aircraft, piloted or UAV.

Did not know that. Source?

 

[Stomper]

Google it.

 

[Ttuck]

Marble mouth says:
"The technology in this baby isn't going to be available for at least another decade"
Uh, sort of appears to be here now - and this is most likely 'old' tech..........

That video was CGI made. The quadcopter he's using doesn't exist.

 

[RicInOR]

I saw the video from the TV Show where they built one, I bet they got talked to.

 

[Stomper]

Before or after the pedophile got caught?

 

[lowly monk]

c4?

 

[Sgt Nambu]

Regardless this could have some very ugly outcomes - armed drones than can be launched quickly, in numbers and can do a lot of damage before they can be downed.

I can see the threads on here as to "Which OC Shotguns For Self Defence Against Armed Drones, Riot Guns Or Goose Guns?"
I'm going for a goose popper!

Guys it was just a matter of time. Is anybody surprised?

 

[DuneHopper]

Well there we have it folk. 1. its cool. 2. its easy to built. 3 it includes a firearm

There for they will ban it, I wonder why this does not fall within the operations of remote devices.
I couldn't quote the exact law. But remote control or none person control firearms . Perhaps because it is being controlled by a human but remote firing has some major limits.
A while back there was a controversial "hunting" opportunity offered - a guy hooked up a firearm to a camera, mechanical actuators, and the Internet, and offered "hunting" experiences for people all over the country; if you had an Internet connection, you could hook up to his website, pay a fee, and control his autogun to shoot some game. (Notice I put "hunting" in quotes; this isn't hunting to me.)
I would think that even someone with a serious disability who needed computer/mechanical assistance to control a firearm would want to be out in the field, rather than at home watching a video display . . .

As for defense use . . . Texas as an example outlaws a "mechanism" that could kill someone automatically, so rigging a gun as a booby trap is illegal. But here's where it gets interesting - Texas law does allow the use of lethal force for certain crimes committed at night; IANAL, but my layman's reading of the law suggests that using an autogun under manual control to shoot, say, a burglar at night would not be illegal. This has been under heavy discussion for near a decade its not new, are remote vehicles with firearms have been around a very long time, however drones and cameras remotely and stealthily done brings up questions.

 

[rdb241]

rigging a gun as a booby trap is illegal .

In the state of Washington, ANY "booby trap" is illegal period. The state says that you have rigged a device with the fore thought of causing bodily harm to another person. It is a felony to rig a booby trap.
On a side note, this video has now hit the news media. I saw this video on the evening news tonight and they said that this video is now under investigation. The authorities are now trying to figure out who made the video and who made the drone shooting a handgun. Big brother see all when it comes to the net.

 

[The Heretic]

"Booby trap" implies a mechanism that is triggered by the victim, not remotely by the shooter.

There are electronic triggers for firearms. "Remote" is a matter of definition - I am betting that the controller of this particular drone was within a few feet of it and could see it without remote sensors.

 

[deadeye]

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/07/20/drone-fires-gun-viral-video-federal-investigation-underway