Across California, police departments are rapidly expanding “Drone as First Responder” programs, triggering intense public backlash over warrantless surveillance and corporate overreach.
Time to take up skeet shooting.
That’s a really good way to kill people. They already make non ballistic ways to take out drones.
Maybe if you’re shooting slugs, but I’ve never heard of anyone being dumb enough to go skeet shooting with slugs
You’ve clearly never been to Texas
Ain’t nobody gonna waste expensive slugs like that, plus they are useless against drones. Birdshot is what’s uses for skeet shooting. Any proper Texan would know this.
Source: Lived in Texas for 22 years.
Idk friend. I went to A&M
My condolences.
SOURCE: 🤘
It doesn’t matter if you are using a fucking 9mm even, what goes up must come down and unless you are capable of firing directly up and in no wind it’s going to come down with a ballistic trajectory.
I would advise you look into terminal velocity and see just how much power you’re working with firing 20 guage birdshot. There’s a reason you never see anyone getting injured by crossfire when hunting birds or skeet shooting, it simply doesn’t have the power.
You’ll definitely get rained on by birdshot though, it just won’t hurt.
it just won’t hurt.
I very much want you to try that
I’ve been rained on by birdshot, now go look at what I said
It’s very annoying how nerds who don’t even shoot spout confidently incorrect bs.
You said it won’t hurt.
So like… I chuck a small pellet into the air and it hits some child in the eye. And your claim is it won’t hurt.
And that sounds right to you?
For what it’s worth, I’ve had birdshot bounce off a hard target and hit me in the cheekbone, and it stung but didn’t do much damage
Maybe you should have read what you shared.
The Kim Possible star continued: ‘There was another party with us and they unsafely fired in the wrong direction and shot me in the face.’
The person I am replying to specifically mentioned crossfire… please read before trying to gotcha.
Yeah typically speaking what you shoot at will get hit. This is why gun safety is important, the people who unsafely shot directly at her are a hazard and shouldn’t have guns. She’s especially unlucky in the sense that she was struck in a sensitive area.
That being said, I’ve been rained on by birdshot and I’ve never had something like this happen to me. YMMV, but you couldn’t have found a more freak accident scenario to present.
If you shoot birdshot (small bb gun pellets) up in the air, they will have very little speed on the way down. Birdshot is what is used in skeet shooting.
That doesn’t make it safe to shoot in urban areas.
Warrants required and No general searches!
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”
While one could argue the efficacy of taking out drones with a shotgun, the reality is that if you shoot at ANY drone with a firearm you will have every police force that has jurisdiction chomping at the bit to charge you with a felony. Drones (for now) should be handled with collective passive action. The easiest method that is legal in most places is to tether balloons/kites up to the maximum allowed FCC air space (typically 400feet above ground). A neighborhood of homes all with their own tethered balloons basically creates a no fly zone for drones. And most importantly it’s not a felony.
They do have their place I would argue. I would much prefer cops fly a little drone to follow a car in a high speed chase than pay thousands of dollars for a helicopter. The suspect wouldn’t even be able to tell if they lost it or not if flying high enough.
I agree they have their place. The issue is the governance of that place.
The drones are stated to be connected to the same ALPR network which becomes as troublesome as the the ALPR controversy. The fact that the camera is not static and can be flown around makes it a higher threat to privacy in that regard.
The abuse of such technology could be catastrophic. A warrant wouldn’t be needed to fly over and surveil a neighborhood if they were in pursuit of somebody else. It can absolutely be flown over and around your home without a judge approving it. That’s an issue.
Your place is your mouth around a dirty boot.
