Nonsense. I've been hit in the face by #8 birdshot used by a gunner over 200 yards away. If I didn't have field glasses on, I'd have lost an eye.
Well, first off, my post simply pointed out the difference between a bullet and shot, and claimed there was a huge difference. What exactly is nonsense about that? What do you suppose would have happened if you'd been hit by a rifle round from "over 200 yards away"? Your field glasses wouldn't have done a damn thing for you...
Second off, bird shot, 200 yards away, you're talking about a low-angle shot and residual horizontal velocity, *NOT* pellets falling. Of course we don't know angle and direction of this guy's shot, but the knee-jerk reaction that it was some kind of huge hazard is really uninformed.
We'd have to see a lot more detail about where the copter actually was, the angle at which Dad shot it, etc.
Separately from that: the FAA is quite clear that shooting at ANY aircraft is a crime. Big time.
OK. Let the schmuck who was flying the drone call in the FAA, and see who actually gets a fine. (Hint: also illegal to operate in close proximity to people, especially people who are on their own property, and don't want it there...)