Philadelphia - drone owned by animal-rights group is shot down at pigeon shoot

[ATCclears]

Flying Camera From Animal Rights Group Shot Down at Pigeon Shoot | NBC 10 Philadelphia

Read More

 

[Redcap]

Good shoot.

 

[hermannr]

And they expected what??? You fly something like that at a pidgeon shoot? Shot with a rifle???..single shot, first shot...ya right.

 

[Swedish K]

Lets see - pigeon shoot where the idea is to shoot a moving pigeon out of the sky. Activity is performed on private grounds surrounded by trees away from prying eyes. Activity is legal. Animal rights group decides to put a flying object over the target area to "secretly" film the "evil" activity that is occurring. "flying camera" gets shot down and causes $4k in damages.

End result - a $4k stupidity tax on the animal rights activists. - well they did succeed in one thing- I now have more respect for the pigeons than I do for stupid activists and will be sure to shoot down their drones over pigeons, ducks, geese, doves, etc.

 

[22many]

What a bunch of idiots! Says it's the 4th drone that has been shot out of the sky, yet they still continue to put a new one in the sky.

Kinda like getting the clap from a hooker, complaining about it, and then going back 3 more times to do her! HELLO????....

 

[Sgt Nambu]

The gentleman says that they are more determined than ever to do more aerial surveillance. I guess that the club will have to waste more cash on shot shells! That was great fun! Great post!

 

[safetyman]

Surprised they didn't shoot it down. That's a crazy expensive UAV so it would put the hurt on the activists financially.

 

[jimwsea]

Put one of these on your windshield...

 

[ZigZagZeke]

I'm surprised the AR group isn't being charged with trespassing, which they are clearly doing. They are voluntarily sending an object they own into the usable airspace above the land owned by another person. It's clearly trespassing, and they can be charged with a misdemeanor criminally and they can be sued in civil court. What's wrong with the DA?

 

[westy39]

Damn, that is most unfortunate. Guess dad was right bubblegum happens.

 

[deen_ad]

Something flying in the shooting zone and it gets shot?

The DA is right, they do need to stop it. Charging SHARK with trespassing should do it since that's what they're doing.

I think I'd hold a pigeon shoot and pay a bounty for downing the illegal flying object over their shooting clubs property! Make sure it comes down on their property and not let SHARK retrieve it. A couple of times like that should discourage the illegal flyovers.

Good shooting!!

 

[MikeSettles]

Ha Ha Ha Ha! This one is an absolute Hoot!

 

[Pogue_Mahone]

That is great! I'm surprised it did get dropped on the spot! Pigeons are just rats with wings anyhow, rats that poop on your car.

I'm surprised the AR group isn't being charged with trespassing, which they are clearly doing. They are voluntarily sending an object they own into the usable airspace above the land owned by another person. It's clearly trespassing, and they can be charged with a misdemeanor criminally and they can be sued in civil court. What's wrong with the DA?

Is it trespassing? I'm not sure how that works. Flying over property in an airplane isn't necessarily trespassing. Maybe it is due to intent? I'm no lawyer tho.

 

[Dave Workman]

biggest danged grouse I ever seen, officer!

Shucks, I wuz a'feared it was gonna swoop down and grab the baby, so's I jes leveled ol' Betsy at that thang and cut loose! You can't imagine my surprise when I discovered it weren't ready for pan fryin!

 

[WhyteCheddar]

It was not damaged nearly enough.

 

[oknow]

That is great! I'm surprised it did get dropped on the spot! Pigeons are just rats with wings anyhow, rats that poop on your car.

Is it trespassing? I'm not sure how that works. Flying over property in an airplane isn't necessarily trespassing. Maybe it is due to intent? I'm no lawyer tho.

don't try and fly over area 51

 

[longcolt]

Hilarious!

I suspect those little drones would be fun targets for skilled hunters.

Hummmmmmmmmmmm............................modified choke, full choke, IC................#6 shot? Lots of questions?

 

[Key-Hay]

Cool!!!! Non Biological reactive flying targets. Animal Rights groups shouldn't have a problem with this...Octocopters are not Animals.

 

[RVTECH]

They are voluntarily sending an object they own into the usable airspace above the land owned by another person. It's clearly trespassing,

Heck I agree with this but it is a case of technology moving faster than the law. A good example of this was when jet skis started getting real popular. Look how long it too the state to pass no-closer-than restrictions on them. Regardless though if the flying of the drone interfered with a legal activity on private property then I think there could be some legal recourse considering the intent had already been established by the group who flew it having admitted doing so. I mean what happens when drone-nerds start flying them over nude beaches, or for spying on people who are, say, trying to have a little 'privacy' in the woods (stay under the tree cover I guess!) Aside from the sexually voyeuristic how about when people start looking for game animals with them then trangulating the location to the ground pounders with the tags? This whole drone thing is going to be a bigger problem when the 'toy' drones are capable of what was once classified.

 

[4NONISSUE]

If it flew back to the idiots they only winged it, not a good enough shot! Down and in pieces is the only way to claim your points!