1
72-year-old Florida man arrested after admitting he shot a Walmart delivery drone
(www.techspot.com)
this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Weird News - Things that make you go 'hmmm'
923 readers
1 users here now
Rules:
-
News must be from a reliable source. No tabloids or sensationalism, please.
-
Try to keep it safe for work. Contact a moderator before posting if you have any doubts.
-
Titles of articles must remain unchanged; however extraneous information like "Watch:" or "Look:" can be removed. Titles with trailing, non-relevant information can also be edited so long as the headline's intent remains intact.
-
Be nice. If you've got nothing positive to say, don't say it.
Violators will be banned at mod's discretion.
Communities We Like:
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You don’t shoot at things in public, you don’t shoot into the air near populated/occupied areas, and you don’t shoot at things that don’t belong to you or you aren’t licensed to shoot at. Clearly the thing wasn’t anywhere near his property, so he’s getting off light considering how reckless and irresponsible this was.
You sure about that "getting off light" part? The article says he was charged with a felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison.
Yep, according to the article shooting the drone carries the same sentencing as shooting at a commercial airliner 👀 they are taking that shit very seriously
I wonder how that works in Deer Trail Colorado where they legalized drone hunting?
I mean, we’re talking about Florida.
But given that fact, it’s probably more dependent on whether it was a white or black drone.
Shooting at a drone has the same classification as shooting at a passenger plane. He's been charged with a felony, up to 20 years in prison. As it should be. We don't need fucking idiots shooting into the sky in residential areas, regardless of what they think they're shooting at.
You think someone shooting a drone -- a thing that by definition doesn't have any people in it -- should have the same law and sentencing applied as shooting a plane full of people? That seems pretty different to me.
Yup. Because whether there are people or not, I don't think, is actually relevant to the crime being committed.
I also think attempted murder, and successful murder should have the same sentence. Whether it was successful shouldn't matter for the punishment. They shouldn't get off with a lighter sentence just because they did a shit job, or because the person was too tough to die.
You think a 54 lb drone crashing from the sky isn't potentially deadly to people?
Or bullets falling from the sky.
Oh absolutely it can be. I think most people shooting at a drone aren't intending to hurt anyone, and the possibility of anyone being seriously hurt is largely dependent on how populated the area is if the drone crashes.
Shooting at an occupied aircraft though? The likelihood that someone could be killed goes way up, right? The intent has probably also changed: for a drone it's property destruction, for occupied aircraft it's most likely murder.
Some people believe that intent doesn't matter and that it's the results of the crime that matter. I don't subscribe to that reasoning because then the sentencing of a crime focuses on punishment instead of rehabilitation, and I think intent should have influence on if and how we rehabilitate people, but that's getting into a whole different discussion.