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

©2025 Poal.co

401

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

Nobody is talking about gun safety. Bullets that go up will come down. You could kill someone you never even see.

[–] • 1 pt

Nobody is talking about gun safety. Bullets that go up will come down. You could kill someone you never even see.

You're correct. They come close, but don't quite get there:

Even if you somehow dodge federal charges (spoiler: you won’t), you’re still looking at a buffet of state-level problems. Discharging a firearm within city limits? That’s a crime. Damaging property that isn’t yours? Another crime. Endangering people when the flaming drone wreckage lands on someone’s car or head? That’s a third. It’s a legal combo meal of bad decisions — and you don’t even get fries with it.