Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

612

Here’s the thing: that annoying little quadcopter counts as an aircraft. No, seriously. Under federal law, it’s treated like a baby Boeing, complete with all the rights and protections of a full-sized airplane. That means the FAA officially considers your neighbor’s $299 backyard drone and a Delta 747 to be spiritual siblings — one just serves peanuts at a higher altitude.

So when you introduce that buzzing annoyance to your favorite brand of buckshot, you’re not just having some weekend fun — you’re technically committing a federal offense. The U.S. Code (18 U.S.C. § 32) makes it very clear: damaging or destroying an aircraft, even a remote-controlled one, is a felony. Translation: if you think the FAA is going to high-five you for downing a DJI Mini because it was filming your tomato plants, think again. The FAA doesn’t even like it when pilots joke about snakes on a plane — you think they’re going to laugh at “skeet shooting in suburbia”?

What’s worse is that, legally speaking, a drone crash scene is treated almost like an aircraft accident investigation. They’ll cordon it off, photograph the wreckage, maybe even ask if you’ve “had anything to drink tonight.” You’ll be standing there in flip-flops and a “Come and Take It” apron, wondering how your quiet Saturday turned into CSI: Airspace Edition.

> Here’s the thing: that annoying little quadcopter counts as an aircraft. No, seriously. Under federal law, it’s treated like a baby Boeing, complete with all the rights and protections of a full-sized airplane. That means the FAA officially considers your neighbor’s $299 backyard drone and a Delta 747 to be spiritual siblings — one just serves peanuts at a higher altitude. > So when you introduce that buzzing annoyance to your favorite brand of buckshot, you’re not just having some weekend fun — you’re technically committing a federal offense. The U.S. Code (18 U.S.C. § 32) makes it very clear: damaging or destroying an aircraft, even a remote-controlled one, is a felony. Translation: if you think the FAA is going to high-five you for downing a DJI Mini because it was filming your tomato plants, think again. The FAA doesn’t even like it when pilots joke about snakes on a plane — you think they’re going to laugh at “skeet shooting in suburbia”? > What’s worse is that, legally speaking, a drone crash scene is treated almost like an aircraft accident investigation. They’ll cordon it off, photograph the wreckage, maybe even ask if you’ve “had anything to drink tonight.” You’ll be standing there in flip-flops and a “Come and Take It” apron, wondering how your quiet Saturday turned into CSI: Airspace Edition.
You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (7).
[–] • 1 pt

The law has made them aircraft, and applicable to the flight restrictions set forth for their classification. Nothing over 400' for drones in open airspace, and further limited height restrictions around airports. Typically no flight within 1000', 100' with 1M radius, and 300 feet for the next 2. Roughly. No civilian flights in military designated areas. So on and so forth. Much of the land around National parks is also restricted for some reason.

Not all airports have circular restrictions or areas, some are far larger. Take the area around DFW/DAL. Then Have a look at the insane area shapes outside of Alamogordo NM.

You can check the restrictions for the airport in about 5 mins.