191–200 of 353 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately it runs afoul of the same laws against training apes to steal[1] or pickpocket[2]. 1. Dunston Checks In (1996) 2. Monkey Trouble (1994)
I need to review those references.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting. Malheur was led by the same Amon Bundy.
Amon Bundy was tried on many charges and his case was closed with prejudice. 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.
This is technically correct but is a misleading characterization of the events according to Wikipedia [1].
> The first criminal case resulting from the standoff, against six Bundy supporters, was declared a mistrial by U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro on April 24, 2017.
> The mistrial was declared hours after the jury convicted two men of some of the 10 counts in the indictment.
The case was declared a mistrial with prejudice due to prosecutorial "misjudgement" that prevented a fair trial of the Bundys.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff#Prosecutions_of...
Aside: It's going to be a great time when the crows, raccoons, and other semi-intelligent wildlife discover that these drones have food in them at seemingly random reward schedules. Sure, you can give the drones little tasers to keep the animals away, depending on your locality. But knowing what I know about bears and crows, almost nothing is going to stop them. Especially when some influencer jerk tries tempting a b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you followed the other comments on this post, you will probably realize, that this is about the airspace above ones house. So a neighbor climbing onto my roof is a completely different matter.
what if neighbour is hovering 1 foot above the roof in a small homemade hot air balloon? :)
The current ambiguity will magically find itself disambiguated pretty soon after we have our own drones camp out over politician's own homes, in numbers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
at that point you could just buy cheap drones yourself and ram those into your neighbor's (oops)
Doesn't really sound like a viable solution, as the 10 neighbors have on average 10 times the amount of cash to throw at it.
The current ambiguity will magically find itself disambiguated pretty soon after we have our own drones camp out over politician's own homes, in numbers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What if 10 neighbors collude and start flying drones over my garden and house, only a few meters above ground or my roof, 24/7? What if one of their drones crashes without my doing and hurts _me_? Are you under the impression that either of these things is legal, and that gunplay is your only recourse?
What's the other recourse? Unless you are rich, cops don't care.
How is drone delivery economically feasible? The carry weight is negligible, the range is paltry and they still require operators- whom I'm sure earn more than your average white van man.