A man in Hillview, Kentucky decided to take drone ethics into his own hands; he shot it out of the sky and became a local folk hero. The story has gone nationwide, as these kinds of things tend to do. This is a story about ethics and drones and is likely the beginning of a huge debate that will craft rules for drones.
According to television station WDRB, in an online article entitled: “Hillview man arrested for shooting down drone; cites right to privacy,” the folk hero is 47-year-old William H. Merideth.
“When they arrived, police say Merideth told them he had shot down a drone that was flying over his house. The drone was hit in mid-air and crashed in a field near Merideth’s home.
Police say the owner of the drone claimed he was flying it to get pictures of a friend’s house — and that the cost of the drone was over $1,800.
Merideth was arrested and charged with first degree criminal mischief and first degree wanton endangerment. He was booked into the Bullitt County Detention Center, and released on Monday.”
At first we might be outraged at the callousness of the police. But wait…
As the story first began to unfold, a drone was flying low over the neighborhood and was hovering over several homes. One home apparently had a swimming pool, and the owner’s young girls were out sunning themselves. The owner came out and shooed the drone away. She told this to Merideth, who is a man of action.
He grabbed his shotgun and made the decision that he was not going to do anything until it flew directly over his home.
“’Within a minute or so, here it came,’ he said. ‘It was hovering over top of my property, and I shot it out of the sky.’”
He claims he did not shoot across the road or over any fences, but directly overhead. When he did this, it prompted the neighbors who owned the drone to come over and confront him. In addition to having a shotgun, he had a 40mm Glock handgun. He said to his neighbors:
“If you cross my sidewalk, there’s gonna be another shooting.”
A short time later, Merideth said the police arrived.
Rules for what?
As it turned out, Merideth’s weapon was “open carry,” and legal. He was arrested for discharging a firearm within city limits.
However, the owners of the drone were flying in a more gray legal area. Apparently drones are not allowed to fly over buildings. According to the article:
“An unmanned aircraft hit by gunfire could crash, causing damage to persons or property on the ground, or it could collide with other objects in the air,” said FAA spokesman Les Dorr. That’s a statement, but not much of a policy.
Merideth is not backing down. The drone was not zipping around, but was hovering over the backyards of the neighborhood at a height of about ten feet. The neighbors had no idea of what the drone was looking at, or what it was looking for. In an interesting turn of events, Merideth is suing the drone owners for invasion of privacy.
This sets up some interesting ethical arguments that will only get more confusing in the future.
The owners of the drone claim they were merely taking pictures of the roof of a home that presumably needed repairs. Why then, was it hovering over other homes? And by the way, it did have the capability of surveillance and photography, so Merideth’s contention – and that of his other neighbors that the drone was invading their privacy was not without justification.
Merideth was not exactly without blame either. He – or anyone in the neighborhood could have called the police. When the angry owners of the drone confronted him, he threatened to shoot them and that set things in motion.
However, this incident begs more comprehensive discussions on the use and misuse of technologies. Though Merideth went about it the wrong way, why was it up to him to regulate a technology that frankly, has many people concerned from airline pilots to parents?
If there are laws that prohibit people from peeking into the windows of their neighbors, why is it alright to view people from a drone flying at a height of ten feet? We are all very sensitive to surveillance these days. It was a natural outcome of incidents going all the way back to 9/11. However, how much surveillance do we need?
The ethical problem here is that federal, state and local governments have dropped the ball and are not setting firm policy for the technology. Who is regulating the technology and who gets to decide? Does a multi-billion dollar company such as Amazon get to decide on how they will use drone technology? Do the military or the police get to decide? How about a neighbor involved in inspecting a roof and then carrying it over to “extra-curricular” activities?
Mr. Merideth was wrong in how he took action and his threat, but was his intent that off-base? Better policies need to be put into place and no one is stepping up in the manner they should.
Will we wait until an unauthorized drone collides with a passenger jet or until angry neighbors have a shoot-out? To not set clearly defined policies to benefit all parties is downright unethical.
YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME!
