Legislation making its way through the Oklahoma state legislature aims to exempt property owners from civil liability if they shoot down a drone trespassing over their property. But that could put it on a collision course with the federal government.
S.B. 660 would allow the destruction of a drone flying over someone’s private property. After passing the Judiciary Committee by an 11-0 vote on Feb. 21, the Senate floor version of the bill reads: “Any person owning or controlling real estate or other premises who voluntarily damages or destroys a drone located on the real estate or premises or within the airspace of the real estate or premises not otherwise regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration or where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists, shall, together with any successors in interest, if any, not be civilly liable for causing the damage or destruction to the property of such person.”
The bill does not go as far as to legalize shooting a drone out of the sky, which could still be considered a criminal activity where it is prohibited.
The full Senate is expected to take up the legislation soon. In 2015, a drone operated by an animal rights group was shot down over private property while filming a pigeon-shoot fundraiser for Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla.
Drones are becoming a hit consumer product. According to the Federal Aviation Administration’s annual “Aerospace Forecast Report Fiscal Years 2016 to 2036,” combined total hobbyist and commercial drone sales are expected to rise from 2.5 million in 2016 to 7 million in 2020.
Yet toy drones can be dangerous. The FAA published a report last month revealing that the number of drone sightings by pilots, air traffic controllers, law enforcement and the general public between February and September 2016 is on the rise. While there haven’t been any verified reports of collisions between a civil aircraft and a drone, the FAA is taking action to prevent this type of disaster. The agency has worked in partnership with a number of companies and other government agencies, such as the FBI and Homeland Security Department, to evaluate drone-detection technology in and around airports.
As for whether there could be a conflict with the Oklahoma bill, an FAA spokesperson told the Washington Examiner, “We can’t comment on pending legislation.”
“A private citizen shooting at any aircraft — including unmanned aircraft — poses a significant safety hazard,” the spokesperson added. “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. Shooting at an unmanned aircraft could result in a civil penalty from the FAA and/or criminal charges filed by federal, state or local law enforcement.”
One expert pointed out there might already be a framework in place barring the shooting of a drone out of the sky.
“According to the FAA, a drone is an aircraft, and there is a federal prohibition on taking down aircraft (18 USC § 32),” Amanda Essex, a policy specialist for transportation at the National Conference of State Legislatures, told the Washington Examiner. “It has been argued that this federal law therefore makes it illegal to shoot down a drone, in which case these laws would conflict with federal laws.”
Essex said the NCSL could not comment on the likelihood of success of the Oklahoma bill, but pointed out that similar legislation considered in Oklahoma in 2015 failed to pass. Essex noted that she isn’t aware of any similar legislation introduced this session, but pointed to a law in California allowing some leeway for first responders to disable a drone that is interfering with emergency services and another in Louisiana that permits law enforcement and firefighters to disable a drone that puts people’s lives in danger. In Utah, law enforcement officers are permitted to disable or damage drones flying within certain wildfire areas.
The Oklahoma bill was initially offered by Oklahoma state Sen. Ralph Shortey, who last week was charged in a child prostitution case and has been subjected to sanctions that prevent him from having authorship of bills. An Oklahoma Senate spokesperson told the Washington Examiner on Thursday that S.B. 660 is still pending Senate floor action, and according to the Oklahoma State Legislature website the bill’s authorship has been given to another senator.
A bill like the Oklahoma one could pose a threat to businesses that want to use drones for deliveries.
The practice has yet to take off in the U.S., where FAA regulations require that drones be within sight of their pilot. Still, Amazon showed off its Prime delivery drone to the public this month at the SXSW event in Austin, Texas, this month. Last year, it performed its first drone delivery in the U.K., where the company has an agreement with the government to test its drones.
The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, a nonprofit dedicated to the advancement of the drone community, says shooting down a drone is not the answer to keeping them out of places they shouldn’t be.
“Proposals such as Oklahoma’s have the potential to create a complicated patchwork of laws that may erode, rather than enhance, safety and privacy,” AUVSI President and CEO Brian Wynne said in a statement to the Washington Examiner. He added that while his organization doesn’t condone violence against drones, it also does not support the “careless, reckless and illegal use of UAS.”
“The industry is actively working with the government to develop counter-UAS solutions to safely detect and mitigate UAS that are flying where they shouldn’t be,” Wynne said. “The appropriate way to do this is through electronic countermeasures that take command and control of a UAS, not by shooting it down, which can pose a hazard and danger to people on the ground and other aircraft in the air. Proposals such as Oklahoma’s have the potential to create a complicated patchwork of laws that may erode, rather than enhance, safety and privacy.”
Correction: A previous version of this story said the Oklahoma bill would make it legal for a resident to shoot down a drone. S.B. 660 merely protects the shooter from civil liability.
