"I must be a good shot."

[Maxrobot]

"The incident, which occurred on June 26, began when Dennis Winn, 72, cleaning his pool, heard a whirring noise. Suspecting surveillance, he retrieved his firearm, aimed, and fired one precise shot, striking the drone and rendering it inoperable.The drone, part of Walmart’s mock delivery trial in collaboration with DroneUp, was flying at about 75 feet when it came under fire from Winn’s 9mm handgun. The former fire captain mistook the drone for a surveillance device targeting his property. When confronted by law enforcement, Winn, initially unaware of the drone’s ownership, quipped, “I must be a good shot,” according to bodycam footage.
The drone, estimated to cost $10,000, was conducting mock deliveries in the neighborhood as part of Walmart’s efforts to expand its drone delivery services. According to DroneUp employees, the drone was operating at legal altitudes and was not capturing video of residential properties. In a recent court agreement, Winn accepted a pretrial intervention program in exchange for the eventual dismissal of charges. As part of the deal, he agreed to pay $5,000 in restitution to Walmart, complete 25 hours of community service, and stay charge-free for six months. Winn’s attorney emphasized that the restitution was not an admission of guilt but rather an acknowledgment of responsibility for the damage.

Retiree shoots down drone, faces legal fallout and $5,000 fine

Can you legally shoot down a drone if it's "bothering" you? A Florida incident has highlighted tensions over privacy and technology.

dronedj.com

 

[whacko]

"The incident, which occurred on June 26, began when Dennis Winn, 72, cleaning his pool, heard a whirring noise. Suspecting surveillance, he retrieved his firearm, aimed, and fired one precise shot, striking the drone and rendering it inoperable.The drone, part of Walmart’s mock delivery trial in collaboration with DroneUp, was flying at about 75 feet when it came under fire from Winn’s 9mm handgun. The former fire captain mistook the drone for a surveillance device targeting his property. When confronted by law enforcement, Winn, initially unaware of the drone’s ownership, quipped, “I must be a good shot,” according to bodycam footage.
The drone, estimated to cost $10,000, was conducting mock deliveries in the neighborhood as part of Walmart’s efforts to expand its drone delivery services. According to DroneUp employees, the drone was operating at legal altitudes and was not capturing video of residential properties. In a recent court agreement, Winn accepted a pretrial intervention program in exchange for the eventual dismissal of charges. As part of the deal, he agreed to pay $5,000 in restitution to Walmart, complete 25 hours of community service, and stay charge-free for six months. Winn’s attorney emphasized that the restitution was not an admission of guilt but rather an acknowledgment of responsibility for the damage.

Retiree shoots down drone, faces legal fallout and $5,000 fine

Can you legally shoot down a drone if it's "bothering" you? A Florida incident has highlighted tensions over privacy and technology.

dronedj.com

How does one acknowledge responsibility for damage but not admit guilt?

 

[pupchow]

It's time.

The Mysterious Story Behind Tesla's Lost 'Death Ray' Particle Beam Weapon - SlashGear

Nikola Tesla was an eccentric inventor, but not everything he envisioned made its way into practical reality.

www.slashgear.com

 

[Choctaw]

How does one acknowledge responsibility for damage but not admit guilt?

Just one example;

Alford Plea Definition​

The Alford plea is a type of guilty plea in criminal court where the defendant does not admit to committing the crime, but acknowledges that the prosecution has sufficient evidence to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Alford plea is a complex legal concept that allows defendants to plead guilty while maintaining their innocence. It is a strategic option for defendants who face strong evidence against them and wish to avoid a harsher sentence.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

How does one acknowledge responsibility for damage but not admit guilt?

IDK, I was wondering that myself. Must just be some legal semantics.

 

[sshamrock]

Said the drone doesn't record video, but they still found him? Sounds like a case of stfu and prove it was me.

 

[cockpitbob]

Said the drone doesn't record video, but they still found him? Sounds like a case of stfu and prove it was me.

Or they're lying about it not recording video.
Sadly, these days if one of the possible explanations is lying, that's my first guess.

 

[Sunny]

The charges are: "criminal mischief and discharging a firearm in public".

Ok, discharging a firearm in public (within 500ft of building or road) is a crime, but what about the case for self defense? FL has a "stand your ground" castle doctrine. Was his property not being invaded? Was his "intent" to recklessly discharge a firearm in public or to simply defend his property from an unwanted invader?

Also, what's the "criminal mischief"? CM means to act in a malicious way that would damage or endanger the public and their property. Where's the malicious intent? He was defending his property. There was no warning that a drone would be coming over.

Currently, federal law says it's illegal to shoot at a drone (we don't want bullets flying everywhere I suppose). So what are citizens supposed to do? Just sit there and let an unknown unwanted drone have its way? The law needs to be really clear about this because there is a major conflict of interest.

 

[pastera]

How does one acknowledge responsibility for damage but not admit guilt?

Guilt implies one was not justified in the action that resulted in the damage.

If I delete an armed home invader, I may be responsible for his achieving room temperature but also carry no guilt for having done so.

 

[namedpipes]

According to DroneUp employees, the drone was operating at legal altitudes and was not capturing video of residential properties

And anyone that believe that Walmart / Amazon etc would not eventually begin taking video and marketing the data is nuts. They'll absolutely make that extra margin on every delivery. Once it is established and the sheep too complacent to object, anyway.

Even Orwell would be horrified.

 

[sshamrock]

Or they're lying about it not recording video.
Sadly, these days if one of the possible explanations is lying, that's my first guess.

100% it's recording video. There's no other way it can confirm address and delivery.

 

[M1911]

Sounds like he was charged by the locals and not the feds. Shooting at a drone has the same federal penalties as shooting at an aircraft. It’s a felony.

 

[Dennis in MA]

With all of the New Jersey (and Taunton - ???? LOL) drone issues, seems like maybe drone delivery of ANYTHING might be a massive mistake at this point.

 

[tuna]

Sounds like he was charged by the locals and not the feds. Shooting at a drone has the same federal penalties as shooting at an aircraft. It’s a felony.

I know that technically you're correct. But this argument against shooting at drones sounds to me like the "tampering with a mailbox is a federal offense" line you use to scare kids that smash the neighborhood Karen's mailbox. I think whatever agency is in charge of that has more pressing things to do than see who broke a toy.

 

[HorizontalHunter]

"The incident, which occurred on June 26, began when Dennis Winn, 72, cleaning his pool, heard a whirring noise. Suspecting surveillance, he retrieved his firearm, aimed, and fired one precise shot, striking the drone and rendering it inoperable.The drone, part of Walmart’s mock delivery trial in collaboration with DroneUp, was flying at about 75 feet when it came under fire from Winn’s 9mm handgun. The former fire captain mistook the drone for a surveillance device targeting his property. When confronted by law enforcement, Winn, initially unaware of the drone’s ownership, quipped, “I must be a good shot,” according to bodycam footage.
The drone, estimated to cost $10,000, was conducting mock deliveries in the neighborhood as part of Walmart’s efforts to expand its drone delivery services. According to DroneUp employees, the drone was operating at legal altitudes and was not capturing video of residential properties. In a recent court agreement, Winn accepted a pretrial intervention program in exchange for the eventual dismissal of charges. As part of the deal, he agreed to pay $5,000 in restitution to Walmart, complete 25 hours of community service, and stay charge-free for six months. Winn’s attorney emphasized that the restitution was not an admission of guilt but rather an acknowledgment of responsibility for the damage.

Retiree shoots down drone, faces legal fallout and $5,000 fine

Can you legally shoot down a drone if it's "bothering" you? A Florida incident has highlighted tensions over privacy and technology.

dronedj.com

Good thing he wasn’t in Mass. he would never see a firearm again in his life

 

[Drix]

These drones need to stay over streets not buzz through yards.

I'm ok with the home owner having some culpability here, it could have been incredibly dangerous had he missed and the bullet continued to travel.

 

[M1911]

I know that technically you're correct. But this argument against shooting at drones sounds to me like the "tampering with a mailbox is a federal offense" line you use to scare kids that smash the neighborhood Karen's mailbox. I think whatever agency is in charge of that has more pressing things to do than see who broke a toy.

Federal prosecution does appear to be rare.

 

[M1911]

These drones need to stay over streets not buzz through yards.

I'm ok with the home owner having some culpability here, it could have been incredibly dangerous had he missed and the bullet continued to travel.

My 249g drone flying 200’ over someone’s yard is no threat to anyone.

 

[Drix]

My 249g drone flying 200’ over someone’s yard is no threat to anyone.

Me and my shotgun will decide that, not you.

We're not a threat to anyone either.

 

[M1911]

Me and my shotgun will decide that, not you.

We're not a threat to anyone either.

And you'll end up in jail. Enjoy.

 

[Coda]

Good thing he wasn’t in Mass. he would never see a firearm again in his life

My thoughts exactly........

 

[Coda]

As much as a feel good moment it would be, shooting at a drone (in any state) is a really bad idea.

Besides the laws against it, unless you are in the middle of nowhere you need to be concerned where those bullets are ending up when you shot towards the sky.

 

[whatluck]

My 249g drone flying 200’ over someone’s yard is no threat to anyone.

lol i knew you were a peeper

 

[Wickedcoolname]

If I was the judge I would order the defendant to use a shotgun rather than a handgun for all future drone eradication events.

 

[Drix]

And you'll end up in jail. Enjoy.

Really depends on the scenario, doesn't it.

This guy isn't serving a day in jail.

I sit on enough land to have a private trap range, I was following all laws when this drone got in the way while I was tracking. Drone didn't see the clay? Maybe it was pointed the other way or the clay was just too small for the camera.

Walmart isn't using a 250g drone for home deliveries though, they're using bigger and commercially, they should be over established routes and not cutting through back yards. The rich can get richer another way or just cut that profit margin a bit, they'll have plenty of it go spread around when they start sacking drivers and vehicles.

Edit- the Walmart delivery drone clocks in just short of 5,000 grams, so 20x heavier than yours.

 

[namedpipes]

As much as a feel good moment it would be, shooting at a drone (in any state) is a really bad idea.

Besides the laws against it, unless you are in the middle of nowhere you need to be concerned where those bullets are ending up when you shot towards the sky.

Your point is on target, so to speak but... (there's always a but)

SKEET!

Or even better, Skeet with a Yeet!

 

[M1911]

lol i knew you were a peeper

No, I'm a landscape photographer. I'm not taking pictures of houses and certainly not pictures inside windows. Yes, there may be a house incidentally in the picture, but that's not the subject of the picture. To frame the shot, I may well be over your house. My drone is so small you probably won't even see it and it is also quiet compared to most drones, so you may not even notice it.

I can take pictures of the exterior of your house from the street with a regular camera. I won't, but that is legal, and you can't shoot me for doing that either.

 

[ThePreBanMan]

Said the drone doesn't record video, but they still found him? Sounds like a case of stfu and prove it was me.

The guy went flapping his gums on a police body cam. Yeah so he incriminated himself pretty quickly.

 

[paul73]

Currently, federal law says it's illegal to shoot at a drone

real law is brutal, as any registered drone is factually legally equal to a real aircraft. and it is a federal crime to shoot down airplanes. so, well. tbd.

there were interesting threads about it on drone forums, of who factually owns the airspace above the land you falsely presume to be your property.
the legal BS in this country now is beyond any comprehension.

 

[badshot101]

My 249g drone flying 200’ over someone’s yard is no threat to anyone.

I think most of us would rather shoot it down to be sure.