Having a drone under control is almost always preferable to having a drone out of control, particularly in the pattern of a major airport. If you're going to take it down, it needs to happen in a way that gives you control of the drone, not just messes up their control.
The time window in which that's a valid option is closing fast. Autonomous flyers that don't need an external signal are already pretty good and after a few more years of iterations, they'll be even better and available to everyone. Not to mention air traffic requires lots of radio communication of its own, along with radar and GPS, and jamming equipment would need to be guaranteed not to interfere with any of that. It's a non-solution.
But who defines 'near'? At present, this is defined by the industry with a vested interest in passing the costs onto regulators and law enforcement. Not in investing in drone detection or mitigation technology.
CTRs around airports already deprive residents of their airspace rights, often to a radius of 5nm from an airport. In many cities that means no drones in a large chunk of residential area.
Nobody needs to be flying drones near airports. Seriously.
I'm certainly not interested in pulling this off.. but how hard would it be to just simultaneously launch a swarm into a busy airport while planes are landing?