Drone delays Ravens-Bengals game

[Caballoflaco]

I’m not trying to be super alarmist, but this kind of a thing is absolutely a security threat that people should be concerned about.

https://nypost.com/2023/11/16/sports...all-scene/amp/

During the Ravens’ 34-20 win over the Bengals at M&T Bank Stadium in a battle between AFC North rivals, the game was twice delayed because of a drone flying over the field.

In the first instance, with 5:04 left in the second quarter, a drone flew over the stadium and halted play as the Bengals worried about the health of star quarterback Joe Burrow, who injured his right wrist during the quarter and eventually was ruled out of the game.

“Apparently, there was a drone inside the stadium so they have stopped play,” Al Michaels said on the Prime Video broadcast before cameras showed the craft with red and green lights. “So there you go, and we’ll take a commercial break.”

https://twitter.com/@twitter/status/1725362321126486325

[Borderland]

I’m not trying to be super alarmist, but this kind of a thing is absolutely a security threat that people should be concerned about.

https://nypost.com/2023/11/16/sports...all-scene/amp/



https://twitter.com/@twitter/status/1725362321126486325

With all of the drones being armed with grenades in UKR I can see a terrorist dropping one in a stadium here. Not sure how you would stop that.

[bofe954]

With all of the drones being armed with grenades in UKR I can see a terrorist dropping one in a stadium here. Not sure how you would stop that.

My thought while watching the game was that you'd need another drone.

[Half Moon]

My thought while watching the game was that you'd need another drone.

Eagles

[jh9]

Maybe in a public park or something I could understand the status quo. But the notion that a glorified quad-copter RC toy enjoys what amounts to the same FAA status and protection as passenger-carrying airlines while over private property while the owner of said property wants them gone is just gob-smacking.

Drone countermeasures should absolutely be legal. This shit is ridiculous.

[Caballoflaco]

Maybe in a public park or something I could understand the status quo. But the notion that a glorified quad-copter RC toy enjoys what amounts to the same FAA status and protection as passenger-carrying airlines while over private property while the owner of said property wants them gone is just gob-smacking.

Drone countermeasures should absolutely be legal. This shit is ridiculous.

This drone flight was illegal and has nothing to do with private property

Federal law restricts UAS from flying at or below 3,000 AGL within a 3 nautical mile radius of any stadium with a seating capacity of 30,000 or more people during a Major League Baseball (MLB), regular or post-season National Football League (NFL), or NCAA Division I football game, or major motor speedway event.

https://www.faa.gov/faq/can-i-fly-mo...eedway%20event.

[jh9]

This drone flight was illegal

Sure, but the larger point to me is that it doesn't really matter that it's already illegal. This line from the article kind of sums it up:

Before play even began in the final frame, officials took what Michaels called an “administrative” timeout as they awaited for the drone to exit the area.

There's no way to force the "exit the area" bit. There should be.

About 10 years ago on arstechnica I remember seeing a couple stories about people shooting down drones. These are two of them:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...hotgun-battle/
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...-his-backyard/

I admit to not having a complete grasp of the legal reality but as I understand it there's basically minimal recourse and absolutely no way to legally make someone with a drone hovering over somewhere it shouldn't be go away. To me that's the crux of it.

Should you be able to shoot them down with a .50 BMG? No, I think that's (obviously) reckless. Even birdshot I get opens a can of worms. But absolutely no force whatsoever? No, there needs to be some legal means to compel a drone that's in a place it's not supposed to be to leave. If that destroys the drone that's the drone owner's problem.

edit: the core of my argument is that the FAA and federal law seems to extend an almost farcical level of protection to drones being intentionally operated as a nuisance. That's the part that needs to be addressed.

[jh9]

Sorry, I added the "private property" drift and it's not relevant to the original post. Location is mostly irrelevant anyway.

The lack of redress or legal means to force an outcome when a drone is doing things it shouldn't be doing is the larger point. "Drone pilots" can basically do whatever they want, wherever they want and at best you can launch a largely fruitless legal challenge. The FAA's Remote ID or whatever they're doing now is almost entirely useless. People being harassed by a drone should have some legal means to disable or destroy the drone. That is, AFAIK, currently not the case. The FAA and federal law protect these things like they're a 737 carrying passengers. Once again, law lags tech.

[Borderland]

What's the penalty for smoking a drone? If they can actually prove you did it. Difficult where I live with many places with cover from which to ambush a drone.

I just don't know the correct shot size and choke. X-full I assume.

[Le Français]

What's the penalty for smoking a drone?

Up to 20 years in prison. 18 USC 32.

Actual sentences vary considerably. But, it is a felony conviction even if you just get probation.