PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 6, 2025
Defense Against Drones Act of 2025
This bill allows an individual to shoot an unmanned aircraft (i.e., drone) using a legally obtained shotgun if the individual reasonably believes the drone is flying not more than 200 feet above the individual's property. This is subject to applicable state law on the discharge of a firearm.
Not later than 60 days after an event in which an individual shoots a drone and is able to identify its registration number, the individual must report the event's location and the registration number to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
An individual may, but shall not be required to, return the drone to the owner at the owner's request.
The FAA must issue such regulations as are necessary to carry out this bill.
People & committees
Rep. Burchett, Tim [R-TN-2] · R–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1907 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1907 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1907 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1907 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-03-06 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Defense Against Drones Act of 2025 would let individual property owners shoot drones with legally obtained shotguns when they reasonably believe the drones are flying no more than 200 feet above their property, subject to state firearm-discharge laws. They could decline to return a downed drone to its owner, but would have to report the incident if they could identify its registration number. State laws governing civil and criminal liability would remain unaffected.
This Act may be cited as the Defense Against Drones Act of 2025.
Subject to applicable State law relating to the discharge of a firearm, an individual may shoot an unmanned aircraft using a legally obtained shotgun if the individual reasonably believes that such aircraft is flying not more than 200 feet above property owned by the individual.
An individual may, but shall not be required to, return an unmanned aircraft shot down under subsection (a) to the owner of such aircraft upon request by such owner.
Not later than 60 days after an event in which an individual shoots an unmanned aircraft under subsection (a) and is able to identify the registration number of such aircraft, the individual shall report to the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt or otherwise have any effect on any State law relating to tort liability or criminal liability for an action taken under subsection (a).
Section 2 would add a federal provision permitting individual people to shoot drones under specified conditions. The permission would depend on a reasonable belief about the drone's height above property the shooter owns, use of a legally obtained shotgun, and applicable state firearm-discharge law.
Chapter 448 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 44815. Protection of private property from unmanned aircraft
Subject to applicable State law relating to the discharge of a firearm, an individual may shoot an unmanned aircraft using a legally obtained shotgun if the individual reasonably believes that such aircraft is flying not more than 200 feet above property owned by the individual.
Someone who shoots down a drone under the proposed permission could return it when its owner asks, but would not be required to do so under this provision.
An individual may, but shall not be required to, return an unmanned aircraft shot down under subsection (a) to the owner of such aircraft upon request by such owner.
If a person shoots a drone under the proposed permission and can identify its registration number, the person would have to report the incident's address and that number to the Federal Aviation Administration's Administrator within 60 days.
Not later than 60 days after an event in which an individual shoots an unmanned aircraft under subsection (a) and is able to identify the registration number of such aircraft, the individual shall report to the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration— (1) the address at which such event occurred; and (2) such registration number.
The Federal Aviation Administration's Administrator would have to issue regulations needed to carry out the new section.
The Administrator shall issue such regulations as are necessary to carry out this section.
The proposal would use the definition of “shotgun” in section 921 of title 18 of the United States Code.
In this section, the term shotgun has the meaning given such term in section 921 of title 18, United States Code.
The proposed permission would not override or otherwise affect state laws governing civil responsibility for harm or criminal liability for the shooting.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt or otherwise have any effect on any State law relating to tort liability or criminal liability for an action taken under subsection (a).
The supplied actions snapshot, updated June 5, 2025, records introduction in the House and referrals to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and its Subcommittee on Aviation on March 6, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-06-05T18:57:34Z. 2025-03-06: Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation. 2025-03-06: Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. 2025-03-06: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-06. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents of other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents of other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The text contains a narrow exception concerning return of property, directly related to the bill's main policy. Classification does not establish whether the exception is justified.
Individuals who shoot down a drone under the proposed permission would receive express discretion to decline its owner's request for its return. This is a specific benefit for qualifying shooters affecting drone owners, although the proposal also preserves state civil and criminal liability laws.
An individual may, but shall not be required to, return an unmanned aircraft shot down under subsection (a) to the owner of such aircraft upon request by such owner.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt or otherwise have any effect on any State law relating to tort liability or criminal liability for an action taken under subsection (a).
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Jun 5, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI