Former Member Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 It is perfectly legal, there is no law against it(not yet anyway), to photograph anyone or anything in/from a public place. You could be infringing other laws if you used a telephoto lens to spy on your neighbours in their bedroom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lima Hotel Foxtrot Posted June 6, 2019 Share Posted June 6, 2019 All this talk about jamming, long poles, water guns... Probably not a good idea to advocate criminal damage chaps. I honestly can’t tell when it’s tongue in cheek or not on here anymore. Also, what’s the OP doing in his back garden to be so embarrassed about...? 😁 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Norris 1 Posted June 7, 2019 Author Share Posted June 7, 2019 Posted by Stephen Smith 14 on 06/06/2019 19:25:47: The origanal question was about being photographed, I'm not sticking up for idiots but what's the concern about photography, I regularly use a camera and get people I don't know in photos and not one person has ever been bothered. Millions of people have camaras phones and take millions of photos often of strangers but no one complains about that, and before you say there invading your privacy take a look on Google earth where you can look in everyone's garden. Is it the camaras or is it the multirotor (not calling them drones don't want to sound like the BBC) you are bothered about? A good friend of mine who was once a professional freelance photographer, he drummed it into me not to photograph strangers unless I had their permission and something in writing such as a model release form due to possibly being sued. People today are far too relaxed over filming or photographing strangers. Also consideration of children must be taken into account. A few years ago at Christmas I visited the Gloucestershire and Warwickshire Railway with the intentions of doing some photography.One of the volunteers told me that I couldn’t take any photographs as there were far two many children around and they didn’t allow it. I have learned that in was a professional company imaging a crop. I don’t particularly want to report it but I think that’s what I will be doing as it wasn’t just one single invasion it was possibly six times within forty minute period,not just by accident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaun Walsh Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Posted by Doc Marten on 06/06/2019 19:47:35: Posted by Stephen Smith 14 on 06/06/2019 19:25:47: The origanal question was about being photographed, I'm not sticking up for idiots but what's the concern about photography, I regularly use a camera and get people I don't know in photos and not one person has ever been bothered. Millions of people have camaras phones and take millions of photos often of strangers but no one complains about that, and before you say there invading your privacy take a look on Google earth where you can look in everyone's garden. Is it the camaras or is it the multirotor (not calling them drones don't want to sound like the BBC) you are bothered about? .....so someone snapping photos of you in your home using a long stick from the fence of your garden would be nothing to be concerned about or someone buzzing a quad around in your garden at low level? Edited By Doc Marten on 06/06/2019 19:51:07 If I m in a public place then there is no "expectation of privacy" and anyone can take my photograph or video me with no repercussions but if I am in my back garden which is surrounded by a high hedge then I have some expectation of privacy and the law would not take kindly to any attempts to take a photograph or video. The issue is where might one reasonably expect privacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 These days "Street Photography" is a big thing (Has been for years actually) I don't normally do it but when I did see a shot I asked the person if I could. On the drone subject. Some one turned up on our field and wanted to join, a pure drone person. Not interested in model aircraft at all. It turned out that he had learned top fly it on the local village green with a main road right beside him, another road and a pub on the other side. Since then he has been "droning" round his local housing estate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Posted by Lima Hotel Foxtrot on 06/06/2019 23:11:14: All this talk about jamming, long poles, water guns... Probably not a good idea to advocate criminal damage chaps. I honestly can’t tell when it’s tongue in cheek or not on here anymore. Not quite sure why you think it would be criminal damage. If the drone was flying within 50M of you, its pilot was committing a criminal offence. If you brought it down, you were *preventing* further criminal offence! -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Is it a criminal offence or a civil offence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuphedd Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 We had first hand experience of a Drone Visit the other weekend . We were a small group of fliers . 5 of us flying at a pretty remote field , with permission , when a Drone suddenly appeared at roughly 500 ft . I was flying and shouted to the others who watched its progress as I landed my aircraft only to find he was actually now below me on the same approach direction, it then swerved off and arrived next to the pilots box at about 5ft away and high . It then proceeded to the cars and examined every boot interior.Some of us wanted to "bat it out of the sky" but we did not think this wise , could have been a gang on them !! It only left after a long long time , did not know lipos could last that long ! Climbed very high and eventually disappeared from sight ! Phew !! but returned a few minutes later but rapidly shot off when the helis were launched ! What could we have done ?? without knowing where it came from or went ?? not seen since yet! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR 71 Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Brought it down, the owner would have come looking for it Then a word or as many as you like in his ear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lima Hotel Foxtrot Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Posted by Peter Christy on 07/06/2019 09:40:04: Posted by Lima Hotel Foxtrot on 06/06/2019 23:11:14: All this talk about jamming, long poles, water guns... Probably not a good idea to advocate criminal damage chaps. I honestly can’t tell when it’s tongue in cheek or not on here anymore. Not quite sure why you think it would be criminal damage. If the drone was flying within 50M of you, its pilot was committing a criminal offence. If you brought it down, you were *preventing* further criminal offence! -- Pete It doesn't matter what he's doing. If you make the choice to deliberately damage his property, that is criminal damage. QED. Two wrongs don't make a right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Meade Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Recklessly endangering an aircraft is a criminal offence Endangering safety of an aircraft 240. A person must not recklessly or negligently act in a manner likely to endanger an aircraft, or any person in an aircraft.I Also in the BMFA handbook chaps, so please let's not get silly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 I think the clue is in the words "recklessly" and "negligently". If you believe you are acting to prevent or stop a criminal act, it is neither reckless nor negligent. And flying a drone within 50M of a person or property over which you have no control is a criminal act - not a civil one (breach of the ANO). -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lima Hotel Foxtrot Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Posted by Peter Christy on 07/06/2019 12:50:45: I think the clue is in the words "recklessly" and "negligently". If you believe you are acting to prevent or stop a criminal act, it is neither reckless nor negligent. And flying a drone within 50M of a person or property over which you have no control is a criminal act - not a civil one (breach of the ANO). -- Pete I would love to see someone knock a UAV out the sky and see how that defence stands up in court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lima Hotel Foxtrot Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Apologies to all for helping this thread stray off topic. 🤨 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Meade Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 As above. With neither sight nor communication with the pilot, the right of Joe Public to be the Arbiter of Justice is laughably lacking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Totally irrelevent anyway, the ANO is a minor law, hitting the drone down comes out as Criminal Damge, section I, Criminal Damage Act 1967, an arrestable offence, max, 5 or 10 years, can't rember which. Defence is lawful authority or reasonable excuse. Can't see either applying. Argue as you wish, but I don't think your barrister will want to tell a judge your law interpretation, with comments, like your funeral mate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John H. Rood Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Drones look an awful lot like SKEET, clay pigeons as it were, so why not pay a visit to Grandad's shotgun cabinet, caress Ol' Bessie with your finest gunsmith's care, and then go on out there and give those daffy drones a good hunt! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J D 8 Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 There was a video posted on the tube a while ago by a member of a group of combat wing flyers who were enjoying themselves in multi plane action when an interloping quad from somewhere unknown came into view and started to film the action. It does not last long and the last few frames are of a combat wing coming in on an attack run from above at high speed.which brings the quad down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Posted by Don Fry on 07/06/2019 14:29:55: Totally irrelevent anyway, the ANO is a minor law, hitting the drone down comes out as Criminal Damge, section I, Criminal Damage Act 1967, an arrestable offence, max, 5 or 10 years, can't rember which. Defence is lawful authority or reasonable excuse. Can't see either applying. Argue as you wish, but I don't think your barrister will want to tell a judge your law interpretation, with comments, like your funeral mate. Are you not entitled to use reasonable force to protect yourself? A drone with a number of rotors whirling close to yourself - or people you may care about, being controlled - or not - by an unknown person with unknown intentions and if under control, being flown illegally seems a prime candidate for being brought to the ground by a large stick, blanket or similar in order to safeguard life, limb and property. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Exactly so! And the principle has been tested several times in court, though in cases, sadly, involving far more serious consequences for the perpetrator than the loss of a drone! -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted June 8, 2019 Share Posted June 8, 2019 Yes, defence of lawful authority. If you and yours are being threatened by the drown. But you are on dangerous ground if you try to manufacture the threat. And we were talking about peeping tom, overflying to irritate. But you either take advice or not. Over the age of consent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken anderson. Posted June 8, 2019 Share Posted June 8, 2019 came near me,it would sign its death warrant....same as the lads who for fun try and fly close to you... ken anderson...ne..1..... signing off dept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Norris 1 Posted August 8, 2019 Author Share Posted August 8, 2019 Update. The drone has returned today, I wasn’t around and the operator was approached. He said the drone was new to him and he couldn’t keep it within its boundary. He is supposingly a commercial operator, based in Warwickshire. Thats all I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.