RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is...

RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

joether -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 7:03:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: bounty44 quote: ORIGINAL: joether You want a rational, intelligent, an educated answer? Or the conservative/paranoid answer? youre a loathsome embarrassing partisan hack and what I would want, for once, on anything, is a straight up answer without some lame attempt to besmirch "rational, intelligent, an educated" people just because they are conservative and happen to disagree with you. Yea, I want to win the lottery. anyone else have any impossible dreams? Conservatives and libertarians growing enough of a brain to be of use to America. Or becoming educated enough not to be ignorant when discussing advance concepts that are currently well above their mental capacity right now.

Kirata -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 7:05:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Kirata... zoom in on the pictures I posted from comparable altitude and see how much detail this brings out. Because all drones have the camera you were using? Yeah, no. K.

kdsub -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 7:19:34 PM)
We are talking a Phantom 3 my friend... no other...and NO phantom 3 has a different lens. Butch

Kirata -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 7:23:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub We are talking a Phantom 3 my friend... no other...and NO phantom 3 has a different lens. You're talking about a Phantom 3. The rest of us are talking about drones with cameras. K.

kdsub -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 7:26:44 PM)
I'm talking about the thread... Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict... is this not what the thread is about? I'm talking this thread... this drone... these circumstances and the laws involved. Butch

Kirata -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 7:39:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I'm talking about the thread... Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict... is this not what the thread is about? I'm talking this thread... this drone... these circumstances and the laws involved. Well I think it's fair to say that thread drift has broadened the topic. The photo you uploaded appears to be 1024x762. One of the drones in the YouTube video you posted comes ready to mount a Go-Pro camera capable of recording 4K video and 4000x3000 stills. K.

joether -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 7:41:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub We are talking a Phantom 3 my friend... no other...and NO phantom 3 has a different lens. You're talking about a Phantom 3. The rest of us are talking about drones with cameras. All the cameras on the market that could reasonably fit on a drone....CAN NOT LOOK THROUGH SOLID MATTER! A drone 193 feet above your house, could take some really good pictures of your yard and roof. Of course, if you use a firearm and shoot down the drone; the drone operator can sue you. If you state you believe it was taking pictures of your house; its up to you to provide the burden of evidence!

ifmaz -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 7:44:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I'm talking about the thread... Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict... is this not what the thread is about? I'm talking this thread... this drone... these circumstances and the laws involved. Well I think it's fair to say that thread drift has broadened the topic. The photo you uploaded appears to be 1024x762. One of the drones in the YouTube video you posted comes ready to mount a Go-Pro camera capable of recording 4K video and 4000x3000 stills. K. Image size doesn't necessarily matter, it's the zoom/focal length that would matter in this context.

joether -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 7:52:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I'm talking about the thread... Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict... is this not what the thread is about? I'm talking this thread... this drone... these circumstances and the laws involved. Well I think it's fair to say that thread drift has broadened the topic. The photo you uploaded appears to be 1024x762. One of the drones in the YouTube video you posted comes ready to mount a Go-Pro camera capable of recording 4K video and 4000x3000 stills. The point of the thread is whether the moron with the firearm should prove, in court, that the drone he/she shot down was indeed looking/spying on him and his property with some sort of evil or sinister intent. The drone operator doesn't have to do a single thing until that idiot with the gun has shown reasonable evidence. Many of the drones on the market allow for a GPS bearing down to the square inch and chart its flight path (including changes in elevation) from start ot finish. In fact, one could program a drone to fly a specific pattern. Barring wind conditions and biological objects (i.e. birds); it'll fly the distance on its own. Including taking pictures along its flight route as designated by the drone operator.

ifmaz -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 8:01:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether The point of the thread is whether the moron with the firearm should prove, in court, that the drone he/she shot down was indeed looking/spying on him and his property with some sort of evil or sinister intent. The drone operator doesn't have to do a single thing until that idiot with the gun has shown reasonable evidence. Many of the drones on the market allow for a GPS bearing down to the square inch and chart its flight path (including changes in elevation) from start ot finish. In fact, one could program a drone to fly a specific pattern. Barring wind conditions and biological objects (i.e. birds); it'll fly the distance on its own. Including taking pictures along its flight route as designated by the drone operator. Most consumer-grade GPS units are accurate within 3-15 meters (10-50 feet), not "down to the square inch".

kdsub -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 8:25:36 PM)
Kirata the go pro and the phantom have the same resolution... my post were reduced in jpeg compression to post here and as you know jpeg compression does not reduce detail it just introduces artifacts of compression... The go pro will not produce any more detail than the phantom 3... I do wish you would watch the link of the Phantom 3 at 193 feet... it would match the go pro almost exactly...you will see how these types of camera and drone combinations are not suited for spying. Butch

kdsub -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 8:29:04 PM)
Damn you guys do not know what you are talking about... did you check out the link that shows the log information... the FPV is stored on the control device through the DJI Go software... you can actually see what the camera on the bird sees.... the judge could have known exactly the truth... if they had allowed the evidence. Butch

Kirata -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 8:45:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub my post were reduced in jpeg compression to post here Then why did you tell me to try zooming in on the image to prove that it didn't resolve detail? K.

Kirata -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 8:49:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata You're talking about a Phantom 3. The rest of us are talking about drones with cameras. All the cameras on the market that could reasonably fit on a drone....CAN NOT LOOK THROUGH SOLID MATTER! You're off your medication again, aren't you. K.

kdsub -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 8:51:27 PM)
Because the detail is the same...on the compressed and the full version... the compressed just has more artifacts from compression... not loss of detail... within reason anyway. Send me your email address on the other side and I'll send the full version if you are curious. Butch

MercTech -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 8:56:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Hill I have... and listed them... you have no rights...at least according to the FAA and they are the ones who have the say... and if you are familiar with cameras and lens you will know that with a 20mm lens at 193 feet you will be hard pressed to even see people clearly...It is strictly a landscape lens at that distance. Now the judge ruled so there is no debating that and not worth an appeal... but I believe if he did he would win. As Merc says there is a lot of confusion and there is a need of clarification of laws... I believe they are coming and look how fast... now if we could only get gun laws to change that fast as well.... had to put that in because I'm a fanatic...[:D] Butch Did I not say subject to the FAA? This craft is not regulated by the FAA and therefore is not protected by the FAA. Ergo, no rights. As for 193' being too far away to spy on a lovely young female with your camera, hell, that's only a bit over 60 yards. I can gawk a woman that far away with my naked eye. That kind of piece of shit camera are you talking about? As Merc said, shooting down a drone with a shotgun at that altitude is damn near impossible unless you're using an old 10 or 8 gauge (good luck finding ammo). I have a feeling that the 'pilot' was a lot lower than he was claiming. Just a point of order... hobby aircraft ARE regulated by the FAA. It is just you don't have to have a license to fly a hobby aircraft but you do have to obey air traffic regulations. Fly any hobby aircraft close to an airport and you will find out it is regulated. (Remembering a nimrod that that thought the end of the airport runway would be a great place to launch his RC aircraft.)

kdsub -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 9:04:50 PM)
quote: (Remembering a nimrod that that thought the end of the airport runway would be a great place to launch his RC aircraft.) And they are breaking the law... there is no excuse for ignorance as with every drone, phantom anyway, there are very detailed FAQ's such as HERE. The user manual page 40 on is even more specific...HERE Now if we can just get newbies to read them. Butch

MercTech -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 9:15:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: (Remembering a nimrod that that thought the end of the airport runway would be a great place to launch his RC aircraft.) And they are breaking the law... there is no excuse for ignorance as with every drone, phantom anyway, there are very detailed FAQ's such as HERE. Butch Exactly, ignorance of rules can lead to breaking the law. Flying hobby aircraft in the 1970s: any overflight of private property without permission was a considered a violation. We were restricted to flying in non-residential areas. I usually used the ball park complex, with permission, when little league wasn't using it. Or, out at a friend's horse ranch. One horse seemed to have fun chasing after the planes.

Kirata -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 9:21:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Because the detail is the same...on the compressed and the full version... the compressed just has more artifacts from compression... not loss of detail... within reason anyway. Well there are different models of the Phantom 3, but the Advanced and Professional 3's are both capable of recording 4000x3000 stills, and you can't reduce an image that size to 1024x762 without sacrificing resolution. But let it go. The issue raised by the OP was, "sending a drone at low altitude over private property is an invasion of privacy." Regardless of the specifics of the current case, and whether it was a bad decision, the larger question still remains. Drones will carry even higher resolution cameras tomorrow, and a guy on the ground has no way of knowing a drone's payload. Nor does an operator (assuming no ill intent) have any way of knowing what kind of scene he might inadvertently overfly if he's flying uninvited over other people's private property. K.

kdsub -> RE: Kentucky Drone Shooter... and the verdict is... (11/1/2015 9:21:55 PM)
Yep...except quad copters are not prohibited from flying over private property... but they are prohibited from flying near airports. This case had nothing to do with an aircraft flying over private property... it was the aircraft spying on the teen daughter. Butch

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875