Hacker News Reader

Comment by vmarsy | Hacker News Reader

If you're legally allowed to destroy a drone on your property, then instead of using another drone why not just use a shotgun?

Right now you can't : http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/10/03/new_jerse...

View on HN

I wouldn't feel comfortable using a shotgun. I'd use one of those net throwing guns instead.

Almost across the state Jersey municipalities have no discharge laws preventing from shooting on your property so this is more about discharging a firearm than drones. Now if you had some type of EMP device that wasn't covered under firearm laws...

shotgun is a bit overkill for sub/urban environments, although i agree it would be especially effective. i've never shot clay before and i was able to hit multiple times on my first clay outing.

however i imagine it would be no more than a weekend job to design a net-firing sabot or perhaps some kind of plastic scatter shot that could launch out of a t-shirt cannon.

The issue is that there is no defined elevation above land you own that is designated part of your property.

My understanding (from an undergraduate US law class) is that you actually own the column defined by your property lines up into the heavens (and down into the Earth). You implicitly grant an easement (a formalized privilege allowing someone else do something with your property) to aircraft and other things like that. I imagine that this easement doesn't extend to drones doing something they're not supposed to.

Slate: How much of the airspace above your home do you own? http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/20...

In Jersey, one of the worst states for private firearms ownership in the country.

"Unlawful weapons" isn't a crime in the vast majority of free states (excluding NFA items and the like.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com