It is well established that when a person purchases a home they do so in what's termed a - Fee Simple ownership - which sounds simple. But it is anything but.It Guarantees ALL Bundles of rights concerning that Home.From water rights to easements.It's your Home.Just watch most any - Judge Judy - and see how vociferously she defends the rights of Renters. You rent an apartment or unit in a home and it's YOURS ... Period. The person renting or the Landlord CANNOT evict you or touch your property or even enter the rental unit w/o proper notice.It's Law. So when I see where this current Government is now bragging about their ability to Drone someone and the FAA { Federal Aviation Authority } claiming that " every inch above the tip of your grass blades is the Government's jurisdiction " I become a little skittish. Now I see where a Louisville man who used his Benelli shotgun loaded with birdshot and aimed at a Drone hovering on his property and fired 3 shots is now being questioned as to this act. The man,was grilling dinner for his family when he saw a Drone hovering over his land.Obviously not within the city limits but further out in the countryside.The quadcopter { with camera } was shot down. There is lawsuit pending.The Drone's owner claims he was taking pictures of the scenery.The man claims to be a Hobbyist. The lawsuit filed by the Hobbyist claims the landowner had not the right to shoot down the Drone aircraft Because the Government controls every inch of airspace.
I don't know the laws as they apply to RC drones, but with regards to manned aircraft, they must maintain a minimum altitude of 2,000' when over "densely" populated land, and 1,000' for other land, except when maneuvering to take-off or land. So while I can't speak for "inches", if homeowners owned all the airspace above privately owned land, modern air-traffic, whether private or commercial, would not be possible.
This also goes to the way this Government is abusing Eminent Domain. Plus the way Obama seems real confident he can just mandate the shutting down of Power Plants.Which is what's he been doing and going unreported. Plus the way regulations now exist where Smart meters are now installed on homes w/o need for the homeowners approval.Those Smart meter have the capability to turn On and Off home appliances.They can be used to manipulate electricy in the house.General Petraeus openly declared a few years ago that many home appliance { new ones } have the ability to spy on you. It's here folks.Big Brother.No need for Animal Farm.
I believe the FAA is going to have to amend some regulations when it comes to private use drones as they become more and more common among the citizens. The problem I see arising is that these personal little drones can't fly that high so the rules regarding where your property ends vertically are going to spark a big debate. As with anything this could easily be solved without actual government intervention if people would just have some common courtesy. But of course people don't have that so it forces the government to make rules about it. Such as the case with the story in the OP. This could have been easily solved by the guy flying the drone going to his neighbors house and asking him if he minded that he fly his new drone over there to take pictures of the scenery. And if for some reason the neighbor said yes he does mind then the guy flying the drone could have simply not flown it over there, the thing can fly, in the air, it has options... It's called having respect for other people. Something that a lot of people seem to lack believing they should be able to do what they want and to hell with you if you have an issue with it. This past Christmas my neighbors kids across the street got a few of those drone things you can control with your smartphone. I saw them outside playing with them with their father and I thought they were cool, Id never seen one in action before. As I leave for work and walk outside the dad waves to me and shouts "Hey man, do you mind if the boys fly their toys in your yard while you're gone? They don't have much room over here for them" I said sure no problem they can fly them over here even when I'm here I don't mind, let them be kids, if I had a cool RC helicopter thing I'd hate to be restricted to just flying it up and down in my tiny front yard. See, common courtesy, he was respectful and ASKED me. Now granted I wouldn't have minded either way if I walked outside and saw the kids toys flying around my yard, but him having the common decency to ask me beforehand is respectable and appreciative. Now if I would have said I had an issue with it then I would expect him to respect my wishes and not allow his kids to fly their toys in my yard. But what I have noticed is that if you extend people some basic common courtesy they tend to respect and appreciate that and more often than not have little issue with whatever it is you are doing. Now granted there are a handful of bitter people out there who would just flat out say no, but in those cases you should just respect their wishes. I'm an Astronomy nerd and I have a nice telescope that I like to watch the stars with pretty often. There is a huge ass tree in my backyard so I can't see much so when I moved here I asked my neighbors if they would mind that I set up my telescope in their backyard on occasion. My neighbor on the right side said sure no problem, anytime you like. My neighbor on the left side said he would rather I not because he likes to keep his blinds open and doesn't really feel comfortable with me being in his yard able to look into his house. I said sure no problem. There are no fences in our backyards they are all one big yard. After looking up my actual property lines I found that my yard actually extends way past where the line of bushes are that separate me and my left neighbors yard. My property actually extends about 10 feet or so into what I thought was HIS yard. I could set up my telescope over there and see past the big tree in my yard. But instead of being an ass about it and doing that I simply comply with my neighbors wishes and don't venture into MY yard that extends pretty much up to the edge of his house. Some people would tell the guy to go to hell and go walking over there just out of pure spite for him daring to have an issue with it. But me I'm not like that. And that is why we are forced to create so many damn laws, people just simply can't respect each other half the time.
The obvious problems with drone use is On It's Face it no different than being a Peeping Tom.Drones have been used out west by Sheriff dept.'s to spy on Ranches and get evidence.That is Unamerican.Would someone like Roy Rogers and Dale Evans do that sorta stuff { be Peeping Tom's }. Eminent Domain is being corrupted.It is to be used strictly for a Public good. Something that benefits a Society.Like a needed bridge or new highway. Stronger Power lines or bigger school. I mention Eminent Domain because Water rights ARE being corrupted. Tom Selleck was a victim.Ranches out west are being harassed over their streams.Or Ponds.Selleck was harassed over his seeking water from a local source during a water emergency.Ventura County Water District accused him of stealing water from a public fire hydrant during a serious drought. Selleck was probably guilty but for a good reason.He needed to save his avocado farm during a drought.It goes back to the Old West. Every Man,woman and child for themselves. Not so with Drones.
I think there have been court cases about this in which property owners tried to force airlines to pay them a toll for flying over their property or some similar type case. IIRC, it comes down to the owner owns what is usable, which basically leaves it in the hands of local law. Like if you cannot build a building over a certain height, what is usable is different than if it allows your to build a building 3 times that height. In other words, they decide these cases on the facts and punt on what the law actually is for all intents and purposes.
