A proposed bill in Florida seeks to empower homeowners to use “reasonable force” against drones that invade their privacy. This move challenges existing federal airspace regulations and sparks debates over the extent of a homeowner’s rights. The legislation primarily aims to regulate the use of unmanned aircraft systems within the state.
The bill would broaden the scope of protected locations from drone flights, including airports and correctional facilities. Significantly, it would allow homeowners to take action against drones infringing on their privacy. Such measures, however, present a legal conundrum as federal law allows drones in unrestricted airspace.
Raul Gastesi, a Florida attorney, highlights the legal ambiguity surrounding drone use and privacy rights. “No one wants to have a drone sitting over their property,” he mentioned, emphasizing the need for privacy protection. While states have privacy laws, self-help measures are unprecedented.
Under federal regulations, drones can legally fly over private areas if they remain in unrestricted airspace. However, low-flying drones posing nuisances can lead to trespassing or stalking charges. As drone technology evolves, its use by law enforcement agencies increases.
The “Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act” in Florida prohibits drone surveillance of private property. Yet, it doesn’t address live drone views of properties. Gastesi suggests, “I would include an image device to view or record an image of private property with the intent to conduct surveillance.”
If enacted, the bill allows homeowners to confront drones but lacks clarity on what “reasonable force” entails. This gap might lead to conflicts between state law and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Currently, federal law forbids tampering with airborne aircraft.
The FAA warns against shooting drones, considering it a safety hazard. “It’s illegal under federal law to shoot at an aircraft,” stated the FAA, noting potential damage and safety risks. The FAA refrained from commenting on the pending Florida legislation.
State Sen. Keith L. Truenow, who sponsors the bill, has not responded to requests for comment. The proposed law could confuse homeowners on permissible actions against drones. The conflict between state permission and federal prosecution remains a concern.
Gastesi pointed out, “There are certain things that are permissible under state law that are not permitted by federal law.” The FAA stresses the dangers of disrupting drone flights. Interfering with drones might lead to civil penalties and criminal charges.
While the bill doesn’t advocate using firearms against drones, Gastesi warns of potential dangers. “The discharge or the use of the device is not as dangerous as the consequences,” he noted, emphasizing risks of falling drones. Florida’s strict gun laws prohibit shooting in residential areas unless in self-defense.
Gastesi questions whether shooting down a drone equates to defending property. “I think you’re defending your right to privacy,” he said, doubting the effectiveness of such arguments in court. The potential for misuse of firearms in public spaces raises concerns.
The bill reflects broader national unease with increasing drone sightings. It may inspire similar legislative efforts in other states. Gastesi predicts, “There’s going to be other states that are going to follow suit.”
As drone technology advances, states grapple with balancing innovation and privacy. The Florida bill may be a precursor to more comprehensive regulations. Homeowners and lawmakers alike must navigate these emerging challenges.
