Consider defending yourself from drones with chickens

It was last summer, in Hillview, Kentucky, when William Merideth became known as the drone killer when he shot down a drone that was buzzing over his backyard.

“If he had just flown by my property, there wouldn’t have been a word said,” Merideth explained. “But when he hovered above my property for more than a few seconds, I felt like I had the right to defend my property.”

He was charged with irresponsible criminal mischief.

Related: Taking cellphones from students is like playing with fire

But very quietly last week, in Bullitt County District Court, Judge Rebecca Ward said the evidence showed the drone was flying low enough to be annoying, and threw the case out.

“He had the right to shoot this drone,” Judge Ward said. “I’m going to dismiss this charge.”

Case dismissed. But the owner of the drone isn’t happy, and could challenge the ruling, which has legal analysts wondering if this might end up in the Supreme Court. Because the court has ruled on annoying aircraft. It was in a case brought during World War II by a North Carolina chicken farmer whose farm was at the end of a military runway, and who complained that the bombers, transports, and fighters passing a mere 63 feet above his barn were causing panicked chickens to flap themselves to death. He lost 150 chickens.

It was Justice William O. Douglas who finally ruled in 1948 that the military flights could continue &#8212 there was a war on after all. But that the farmer deserved compensation for the damage to his poultry.

Now, will the Kentucky drone case get that far? No one knows. But in the meantime if you want to protect yourself, raise chickens.