Florida Senate Bill 1422 could let you shoot down drones

Florida lawmakers are advancing a controversial new bill that could give property owners the right to use “reasonable force” to take down drones flying over their land. Florida Senate Bill 1422, which recently cleared a state Senate committee, is drawing intense scrutiny from drone industry professionals, legal scholars and federal aviation advocates — and for good reason.

While the bill may be marketed as a privacy protection measure, critics argue it sets up a dangerous legal collision between state and federal authority. It could also put drone pilots — many of whom fly legally and commercially — in harm’s way.

Florida Senate Bill 1422: what it says

The bill does a few things, but namely it seeks to protect the people of Florida from certain types of surveillance.

More specifically, property owners would have the right to use “reasonable force” to stop drones from conducting surveillance over their private property. There are a few stipulations, such as that the drone must be flying under 500 feet. It also must be violating “a reasonable expectation of privacy.”

The bill also has a few other drone-related actions, such as that it amends multiple sections of Florida law to expand definitions of “critical infrastructure,” increases criminal penalties for operating drones in prohibited areas, and cracks down on tampering with FAA-mandated Remote ID systems.

If passed, the law would take effect on October 1, 2025.

Aren’t there already privacy laws?

Yes, there are already laws — both federal and state — that address the “reasonable expectation of privacy.” Though not necessarily specific to drones, these form the legal backbone of most surveillance and privacy-related court decisions in the U.S. For example, we have already ruled that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a hotel room or a bathroom.

Specific to Florida and drones, the state already has a relatively strict drone privacy law under Section 934.50 of the Florida Statutes, enacted in 2015. That law “prohibits using drones with imaging technology to surveil private property without written consent.”

SB 1422 builds on that by explicitly allowing property owners to use “reasonable force” to stop such drone surveillance.

So why the controversy? While there are already privacy protections in place, SB 1422 shifts enforcement from legal remedies (like lawsuits or police reports) to potential physical confrontation—introducing more risk and potential conflict. That’s why many experts, like James McDanolds of Sonoran Desert Institute, argue that such bills should be approached cautiously.

“Everyone deserves privacy, but letting people physically attack drones isn’t the answer,” McDanolds told The Drone Girl. “Protecting rights on the ground doesn’t mean ignoring safety and the bigger rules that keep our skies safe for everyone.”

A collision course between state law and federal airspace regulations

That’s not the only concern that experts have with the law. There’s also the fact that federal laws also heavily regulate drones. In fact, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (not individual states) governs all airspace in the U.S. — even the air just a few inches above your backyard.

“While states can make rules about privacy or trespassing, letting people physically take down drones could clash with the FAA’s authority and restrictions on taking down drones and interfering with the operation of an aircraft, and that’s a big legal gray area,” McDanolds said.

In fact, under federal law 18 U.S.C. § 32, damaging or destroying an aircraft — including a drone — is a felony. That federal rule alone (dubbed the Aircraft Sabotage rule) makes Florida’s proposed law incredibly risky to enforce.

What does “reasonable force” even mean?

The bill is especially controversial because it leaves the phrase “reasonable force” open to interpretation — and that vagueness could be dangerous.

“Reasonable force could mean anything from throwing rocks to trying to jam a drone’s signal, and neither is a good idea,” McDanolds said. “It’s dangerous and could land someone in legal trouble with the FAA.”

Besides the legal implications, there are serious safety concerns. A falling drone could cause property damage or injure someone nearby — even a bystander.

“Using the term reasonable force leaves it open to interpretation and can cause additional risk,” he said.

A patchwork of state laws could cause national chaos

One of the greatest fears among drone professionals is what happens if other states follow Florida’s lead. A patchwork of conflicting laws could make it nearly impossible for pilots to know what’s legal as they cross state lines.

“If every state starts making its own airspace rules, it could create a confusing mess for pilots and non-pilots and even risk safety,” McDanolds warned. “The FAA’s job is to keep the skies organized and safe nationwide, and patchwork state laws could seriously get in the way of that.”

He painted a scenario where a neighborhood hires a drone pilot for infrastructure inspection, but a neighbor unaware of the arrangement decides to take matters into their own hands — even if the flight is fully legal.

The broader implications of Florida Senate Bill 1422 for the drone industry

Florida’s bill comes at a precarious time for the drone industry. Venture capital investment in drones has plummeted in recent years, and uncertainty around regulations — especially with the FAA’s long-delayed BVLOS (beyond visual line of sight) rule — has left many companies in limbo. Layering on vague and potentially unconstitutional state laws could chill commercial drone operations even further.

“If Florida moves forward, it might open the door for other states to pass similar ‘drone defense’ laws,” McDanolds said. “It could also trigger court battles over where state authority ends and federal law begins.”

How drone pilots and property owners can protect both privacy and safety

Experts argue that the answer to cracking down on rogue drones isn’t backyard vigilante justice — it’s clear communication, smart tech, and the rule of law.

“Drone pilots should be mindful about flying over private property and stick to FAA rules, while property owners should report bad behavior instead of taking matters into their own hands,” McDanolds said.

Remote ID rules have sought to make it easier for law enforcement to track drones. Assuming the drone is Remote ID compliant and is equipped with a built-in remote ID module (or an external Remote ID module like DroneTag), law enforcement could more easily track the operator.

“Everyone deserves privacy, but letting people physically attack drones isn’t the answer,” McDanolds said. “Protecting rights on the ground doesn’t mean ignoring safety and the bigger rules that keep our skies safe for everyone.”

Florida Senate Bill 1422: what happens next?

Florida’s drone bill, Florida Senate Bill 1422, is still moving through the legislative process, and it remains unclear whether it will pass into law. For what it’s worth, many bills never move past the proposal stage. But regardless of its outcome, it has already raised a bigger conversation about how we regulate drones — and who has the right to control the skies above our homes.

“There may be some larger-level conversations at the federal level between industry professionals, the FAA, and state legislators that would need to take place if many states want a law that would enable combating UAVs that might be invading privacy with nefarious intent,” McDanolds said.

Related