A proposed bill making its way through the Florida Senate would allow homeowners to use “reasonable force” to stop drones conducting surveillance within 500 feet of their property.
Weather balloons, half a dozen or so should take care of any unwanted drones. Attach 20 feet of fishnet to them. Hopefully the Greenie birders won’t retaliate.
If there is one thing this crowd can hopefully agree upon, it’s that encouraging folks to take down aircraft (possibly with people in them) because they think they might be takin’ pitchures, is an extremely bad idea.
It will end badly, if cooler heads do not prevail.
Evidently NIMBY is not sufficient now to describe these residents in the Sunshine State forever jumping at shadows.
The situation now apparently includes Overhead Little Drones that Floridians are Armed and Ready To Shoot - or abbreviated as OLDFARTS.
Joking aside, this is absolutely nuts! Just one possible terrible outcome of this in Arizona brought forth Shannon’s Law, which makes it illegal to fire a gun into the air for any reason in all Arizona’s cities and towns.
Senate Bill 1422 needs to fail passage. Don’t give the birders a chance to retaliate 
Just when you think the denizens of Desantistan have come up with the worst idea ever, they outdo themselves….
Do these yahoos understand that drones are restricted to 400 AGL?
It’s Florida! What do you expect?
Too much sunshine and not enough cold does strange things to the mind.
Actually, it must be something in the water, assuming there is any potable water left in the state. According to NOAA (which was once a thing) Vermont and Florida are tied for last place in average sunshine…
Well, one possible side-effect of this law, if passed, will mean drones will start to be flown illegally above 500 AGL.
I do not condone shooting down drones, but I had a conversation in Texas last week with a woman who lives near the shore. She has had several instances where a drone with a camera leveled off within 15 feet of her balcony window with the camera tracking her moves from bedroom to kitchen.
Do not presume that all drone activity is innocent. While force should not be needed, there must be a means to track and prosecute voyeurs abusing the drones. I personally use them to track hunters trespassing and poaching on my land and have successfully convinced them they will be prosecuted based on drone acquired evidence.
Anyone have suggestions for dealing with errant drone operators, short of shooting them down? Jamming their RF signals are also illegal, but would force them to return to base, in many cases.
From the article, the distance is 500’ from the property, and does not appear to specify an AGL altitude. One could be at 30’ AGL and 500’ from the property line and be safe. Or 360’ high and 360’ from the property line for that matter.
The article mentions Senate Bill 1422, but that bill was dropped the day before AVweb’s publication. Lawmakers passed House Bill 1121 instead, and it says the same thing.
Homeowners could still use “reasonable force” on drones under 500 feet. But the airspace? Still FAA territory. Shooting at drones is still a federal crime.
Different bill number. Same messy law. 
Theoretically that’s what remote ID is for, but it only applies to UAS 250g or over and there are lots below that.
I have a hard time conceiving of any legal justification for doing anything to a UAS 400 feet beyond your property line, or more to the point, 400 feet inside (for example) the UAS owner’s property line.
And “conducting surveillance” is squishy as hell, too. Suppose I go 400 feet straight up over my own land and do a 360 degree panorama shot. Who do I need permission from - everybody out to the horizon?
Florida last place for sunshine? I hope that’s meant as a joke. I live in W PA where we get 87-89 sunny days a year, and in second place.
I believe the issue arose due to morons using them to spy on private citizens. I have a good friend about 20 mi from me who had a neighbor take one out with a 12 ga. Went to court, he was eventually freed of all charges. Turns out the drone was hovering over the guy’s fenced-in back yard where his daughter wa sunbathing to, uh, avoid tan lines. Drone operator was charged. Problem is, where does it stop? I don’t like your drone flying overhead at 400? It would be a tricky issue at best.
Will the law require use of a rangefinder on your rifle, to ensure you know distance AGL of the perp’s device? :-o)
Jurks abound.
Several years ago, early in the cheap UAV era, police in Victoria BC had to deal with snoopers/voyeurs trying to look into apartments overlooking a big park they launched from.
I forget how police dealt with the perps, probably just watch the park and spot operators with controller.
So your roofing contractor is surveying your roof to give you a quote and out comes Grandma Moses with her shotgun because the drone annoyed her cat. Yeah, I can see where this makes sense.
I use a drone to photograph finished roofs for a roofing company. Duly certificated for commercial work and a compliant drone. No way to take good videos and photos without flying over neighbor’s property. Not taking shots of the other properties, just the customer, but still could be misunderstood and blasted out of the sky. Crazy.