Urban is city, you mean rural.
You don't own the airspace above your property... Ever. You cannot shoot at any plane or drone above your house without breaking the law. It is not trespassing... Even in Texas.

Any bets on that? You fly over my private property you become a quail or pheasant. OOPS.

7000 ft altitude? Freakin' idiots.

You might need to get a bigger shot gun...them quail be high!

And once again, the person violating the rules/law gets applause from those that don't have a clue and egg them on for more of the same. It's too bad that You tube can't/doesn't remove videos showing people breaking laws. That, in and of itself, might slow the number of people doing stupid stuff since they won't get any credit or idolizing for doing so

Sure you do, it's called air rights.

Yep...you have a point. YouTube is pretty good at removing videos with unauthorized music in the background. Youtube should consider buying the rights to the Brady Bunch background music and make that the standard...

Damn, you trying to get the forum shut down? No one would post anything on You Tube if that was the case

Looks like Trumbull, CT is a suburbe of Bridgeport CT and I'll bet there all kind of local ordiences that would prohibit the discharge of fire armes with in 20 miles of U. So Go ahead and start shooting bet your neighbors dial 911 before u can reload.

Not exactly, this is CT law.

Sec. 53-203. Unlawful discharge of firearms. Any person who intentionally, negligently or carelessly discharges any firearm in such a manner as to be likely to cause bodily injury or death to persons or domestic animals, or the wanton destruction of property, shall be guilty of a class C misdemeanor.


So if you are carful that there is nobody downrange I think it would be OK. A lot of gun laws have been relaxed since the SCOUTS decision on gun rights a few years ago, and unlawful discharge of firearms is one of those. In the past you could be charged with violating that law even if used for self defense in some areas. So many laws were rewritten to bring the laws within the SC guidance.

In all reality, if you lived in Trumbull you'd probably hire "the help" to do the shooting for you, it's just easier that way. To many country club outings to go instead of getting the hands dirty with a gun! :) :)

I wonder how many birds during the day fly above 1000 feet compared to multi-rotor aircraft?.......

Lot's, I have seen birds a couple thousand feet or so, mostly duck and geese.

Ducks and Geese can fly well over 1000ft. They do this in Migration periods.
We are not talking Ducks and Geese here, that's Nature, can't change that. We are facing the problem with unknowing individuals that buy a Drone, fly recklessly, endanger full scale Aircraft near Airports. Some of them don't know the rules of Flight Safety, and the others that do, without regard to the rules. That is the problem. Will this kind of behaviour among those people, give us Law abiding Members of the RC Industry more Restrictions? I believe it will if it continues. I hope not, but when the First Full Scale Aircraft is directly involved with it's flight path from a Remote Controlled Aircraft or Drone, crash or not, we shall see big problems in the future.

Birds have a self-preservation instinct that many multi-rotor operators seem to lack!

I can tell you that in many areas of the country including the pro gun states that firing a gun without a valid cause can wind you up in jail in fact you can't even fire a warning shot.
Unless you are at a legal gun range the only reason accepted for firing a gun is self defense and firing at mode airplanes wont qualify as self defense. Also legally hunting
in a area that is legal to hunt in would be about the only other reason you can fire a gun.

Wonder if I can get a couple million federal dollars to try and educate the ducks and geese on flight safety?

Here's a thought. Homing pigeons or falcons with cameras, trained to fly where you want.

Hmmm...look what another idiot doe's... LOL

Many areas yes. Not most. But not true of a warning shot. That comes under self defense. In Moreno Valley I see it is possible to legally fire a firearm if not within one half mile from a house, road, or other public property. California state law further says you cannot fire from or at a vehicle. State law which may overrule local law allows the possible use of a warning shot or even shooting of a trespasser if the use of force is deemed appropriate, so you might be able to shoot down a drone where you live. If you have a good lawyer that is.

That is true and also most turbine engines can survive a single bird ingestion and keep operating - at least temporarily.

A drone with hard metal components (motors / frame etc) is a different story.

Same goes with bird strike resistance on cockpit windows - soft flesh, feathers and cartilage might bounce off at 250Kts but 4 x 120 gram metal motors probably won't.

Hard metal would make little difference. It may cause more nicks in the blades but a 5 pound drone would be little different than a 5 pound bird. In fact most bird strikes never make it to the compressor stage. That big fan in front slings most bird parts away from the intake. Large hale is almost as hard as small metal parts and the airliner engines can fly though most hale. Keep in mind this is not true of business jets and military planes.

Would you rather be hit by a metal bullet or a pellet of minced meat of equivalent weight travelling at the same speed?

Soft flesh causes less damage because the energy is dissipated by deformation very differently on impact than a hard piece of metal.

Try putting a 100 gram piece of chicken (with bones) in your home blender, then try it with a 100 gram RC motor - I am sure you agree the results will be very different.

We are not talking about low mass bullets flying at supersonic speed, the soft bullet would be deformed by blasting through the sound barrier and would no longer be small enough to penetrate. We are talking about medium mass object flying at subsonic speeds and constrained enough that it will not easily deform. For example on mythbusters they found no difference in shooting a frozen or thawed chicken through a windshield of an airplane. The damage is done by the impact not a hard object, the blender is not an equal comparison. That is a much lower kinectic energy situation with hardend blades, still the likely result is that the blades get bent from the engine, and dulled from the bones. The aircraft engine uses softer but much stronger blades and the damage is not caused by contact with hard objects but a sudden impact. Yes the motor will nick and cut the blades more than the chicken, but that is minor damage the engine will run through. It is total breakage and missing blades that will do the jet engine in, not cuts and nicks.

I'd rather put ice, fresh lime juice, Cointreau, and some good tequila in the blended. But that's just me.