Can I stop drone delivery companies flying over my property?

It just doesn't do so directly, so we ignore the number of children who die from pulmonary issues.

Pour encourager les autres and all that.

Parent's point is that you should not apply that methodology in order to test the applicability of castle law in the US, since you might end up dead.

I imagine it will remain ambiguous until a sufficiently public stunt forces the issue all the way up to SCOTUS and they determine a concrete minimum distance that must be maintained from structures.

Drone regulations are solidly established. The law isn't determined by uninformed commenters on a web forum. And "the effective range of a 12 gauge" will result in jail time. I worked for an autonomous drone company that had a price point around $30,000; destroying one of those could be felony-level vandalism.

The media and government tried and tried to paint him as a criminal but ultimately all the kings horses, men, and prosecutors weren't able to persuade a jury.

They offered a plea agreement to the Hammonds (cause d'etre of the whole thing), who were then sentenced for a wildland fire under dubious circumstances.

After the sentencing it was a done deal, it was over. Then Obama's DOJ had to stoke the flames and reneg on it -- IIRC after the sentenced had already been served!

It shouldn't have been a surprise what unfolded after the government reneging, in a way that was so egregious that they (the people that were the cause d'etre for the Malheur occupation) were pardoned with the following remarks during the pardon:

"The evidence at trial regarding the Hammonds’ responsibility for the fire was conflicting, and the jury acquitted them on most (sic) of the charges." According to his spokesperson Sarah Sanders, who read the statement, "The previous administration, however, filed an overzealous appeal that resulted in the Hammonds being sentenced to five years in prison"

So you can see the Malheur occupation was a response to a federal government who engaged in such tyrannical behavior as inducing a plea bargain that gave up right to appeal, then themselves hypocritically appealing the sentence and changing it after the fact to one that was found to violate the 8th amendment by Judge Michael Hogan. The Malheur occupation was a response to this, if Obama had 'done nothing' in the case of the Hammonds or just respected the judge's sentence none of it would have happened. In my estimation Bundy et al was the only thing that brought the Hammonds the visibility to get the justice of a pardon under these circumstances and a restoration of their 8th amendment rights.

The rest still stands, and the following interesting facts

>An Oregon State Police SWAT member, identified in the trial of FBI agent Astarita as "Officer 1", fired three shots with an AR-15, into Finicum's truck as it approached the roadblock.[144]

>While Finicum was leaving his truck, an FBI Hostage Rescue Team member allegedly fired two shots[146] one of which entered the truck and ricocheted, inflicting the minor shrapnel wound on Ryan Bundy.[32]

... and then apparently after all this, then he 'attempted' (lol) to draw after police shot at him multiple times (which would be wholly inappropriate after someone tried to kill him with an ar-15), except I can't find evidence he actually did draw.

In the aftermath, the police had to lie about the event:

> They later determined that an FBI Hostage Rescue Team member fired twice at Finicum, missed him but injured a second militant in the process. The agent, whose identity was withheld, was under investigation, along with four other FBI agents who were suspected of attempting to conceal evidence of the gunshots. They reportedly told investigators that none of them fired a shot during the incident.[40][41]

So they initiated fire, seemingly had a guilty enough conscious about initiating fire that they lied about it, isolated one old man who didn't draw and executed him. Clap, clap, brave men!

> He was literally yelling "shoot me" as they shot him.

... he was yelling shoot me, I am going to see the sheriff -- after actually being shot at. I realize your theory is that anyone who puts their hand near their pocket who is pocket carrying on a cold day is 'attempting' to draw, of course no matter if you actually tried that defense as anyone but the enforcer class you would lose horribly and have years in jail to think about it. You have a murderous interpretation of self defense here.

Bird hunting is handled with #8+ bird shot, which at 45+ degree angle it is essentially at terminal velocity by the time it comes down, considering they are basically BBs it is mildly unsafe coming down (as in you'd have to be incredibly unlucky) anywhere within maybe a couple hundred yards at worst and essentially completely safe beyond that.

> Civilian shootings at drones occur at a rate likely below 15 incidents per year in the U.S., compared to over one million registered drones.

I'm going to have to conclude that this strains and breaks the bounds of the term 'frequently' and the initial term 'incorrect'.

Because AmFam does both!

AmFam, State Farm, et al. suing AMZN for these claims nationally literally makes AmFam money over time. While costing AMZN money. That's what will move AMZN to either cease the practice, or design drones that are resilient to nearly any kind of attack.