I worked very closely with policymakers and armed forces on drone/UAV matters in a Central European country around the time consumer drones became popular (a bi

I worked very closely with policymakers and armed forces on drone/UAV matters in a Central European country around the time consumer drones became popular (a bit after 2010). I also have a UAV operator and a UAV pilot license where I live, which involved some training, although surprisingly little actually. Anyways, the common understanding among lawmakers and armed forces in early 10s was that land owners do not own the airspace above their land. Now this is more clearly enshrined in laws in many different countries. It is often either: 1. You don't own the airspace above the tallest construction on your land. 2. You don't own the airspace above a certain altitude above your land (often 50 meters or less in Europe). 3. You don't own the airspace above a "reasonable" height. This is more common in common law countries like the US or the UK. It usually involves owning the airspace above your land that is necessary for the ordinary use and enjoyment of the land, and the structures on it. You don't own high altitude space, you do own the land, and everything else depends on the courts either case-by-case or based on precedent. 4. You don't own any airspace above your land, but navigational easement and zoning laws prevent any aircraft including drones flying at low altitudes above your land. The drone in the article was a purpose-built commercial surveillance UAV that almost certainly flew outside the airspace this man could have owned, even if it was in a case law country. It would have been quite criminal to shoot it down. The consumer drones, you can probably take down in most of the world if they fly close to your structures and not too high above your land. Though still, it makes a lot of sense to check the laws before doing so. If the privacy invasion with a drone is repeated, that means you have enough time to look it up. Lots of people act irrationally and shoot down or take down other people's drones with cameras believing they have the right. But from a legal perspective, they are shooting down an aircraft, which is not usually a very wishy-washy thing in laws. Especially in civil law. So when I say you can PROBABLY do so in some situations, what I mean is it's not very likely you will go to prison for it. I don't want it to sound like "yeah, just do it lol". Depending on the country, it can still be treated as a serious criminal offense. And if this incident is properly reported to the aviation authority, you will probably have to provide at least a written or in-person statement about what happened. Even if you are totally in the right. So I would say it's still almost never ever worth the hassle. Another interesting thing to note is that the large commercial surveillance UAVs tend to weigh between 230 and 2500 kilograms, or 500 to 5000 pounds. When you see such an aircraft at an altitude of 500 meters or more, it doesn't look that different from a manned glider or a helicopter. The drones don't all look like GA Predator drones in movies. And if it's a small drone (around 2.5 kilograms, just slightly bigger than most consumer ones), then you won't be able to see it or hear it when it's at the altitude from which pictures like the ones in the article would be taken. If you shoot at a large commercial drone you can see at significant altitude, it might not even be unmanned at all. Consider what that means. Finally, a disabled drone is considered far more dangerous to people on the ground than when it stays in the air. So there are often laws about that. If the UAV falls onto a person, at best it will cause a small injury, at worst it will maim or kill them. Even drones that weigh 2.5 kilograms have propellers that can cut through cheeks, eyeballs, ears, and fingers. It is no joke. This is why there are often such strict laws about UAVs flying above people - not because the sound is annoying or the privacy may be invaded, but because it can fail. Overall, it's complicated. Appreciate the complexity and don't do anything that would endanger the aircraft, unless in very specific cases where the laws allow it and it can really be done safely.