Calif. lawmakers vote to ban Internet hunting

[rick_reno]

http://news.com.com/Calif.+lawmaker...hunting/2100-1028_3-5680282.html?tag=nefd.top

Calif. lawmakers vote to ban Internet hunting
Published: April 21, 2005, 3:42 PM PDT
By Reuters

California state senators approved a bill on Thursday that would ban hunters from killing animals over the Internet.

Hunters can currently stalk prey online at Live-shot.com, a Web site linking firearms and cameras so customers can point, click and shoot antelope, sheep and wild hogs on a Texas ranch from thousands of miles away.

Live-shot.com is the only Web site of its kind, and California lawmakers voted 25-6 to deter imitators.

"It's an over-the-top, pay-per-view video game using live animals for target practice that ought to be banned from coast-to-coast," said Sen. Debra Bowen, the bill's author.

"Pay-per-view hunting doesn't meet any definition of 'sporting' that I've ever heard because there's nothing 'sporting' about sitting at your computer in your pajamas, using your mouse to shoot at hogs or antelope or any other animal that's halfway across the country," Bowen said.

Her bill bars remote hunting in California and would ban anyone from operating a hunting Web site in the state.

The bill would also ban the import of animals into California killed over a remote hunting Web site, and violators would face up to six months in jail and fines of up to $1,000.

The operator of Live-shot.com was not immediately available for comment, but customer Dale Hagberg of Ligonier, Ind., who is paralyzed from the neck down, defended the Web site and criticized California lawmakers.

"They don't realize who the site is for. It's designed to help people like me, not just lazy hunters," said Hagberg, who plans to use the Web site again after an initial and unsuccessful hunt.

Bowen's bill now goes to California's Assembly. Fourteen other states are discussing similar bans, and a federal bill would outlaw Internet-based hunting across the United States.

California lawmakers in recent years have taken up a number of animal-friendly bills, including legislation aimed at stopping foie gras production, sharply limiting the practice of cropping dogs' ears, and legalizing ferret ownership.

 

[Henry Bowman]

Misguided, bleeding heart, statists.

 

[Art Eatman]

Sorry, Henry, but this is one time a legislature is doing something right.

That a person has some handicap does not justify eliminating ethics from an activity. I see "Internet Hunting" as unethical. "Fair chase" is a very important part of ethical hunting.

I've done lengthy cross-country hunting. I've played "sneaky snake" in forests and swamps. I've hunted from stands, and I've hunted from a vehicle.

As I've thought about it through the years, I've come to regard the first two methods as being the most honest and ethical. I don't object to the latter two methods, but they're a bit lower on my own scale.

But Internet Hunting removes all the fair chase aspect which is so important.

Just 2¢ worth...

Art

 

[rick_reno]

It's rare that I would commend the California legislature for doing anything right - but this is one they got right. Sitting here in Idaho and shooting an animal in Texas isn't hunting.

 

[dasmi]

I hate it when I agree with the California legislature, but this time, they are right.

 

[TarpleyG]

I agree that this is not moral but why is California's answer to everything to ban it? Can we just ban California and be done with them? Surely there is another solution to this. Are Internet hunting sites popping up all over the place overnight? Typical knee-jerk reaction. I hate the government and what it has become.

Greg

 

[Henry Bowman]

"Internet hunting" makes it sound like a video game that costs nothing but time or that you get 2 minutes foe each pair of quaters you drop in. How much does it cost to participate in this activity? Hundreds, even thousands, of dollars? How many customers have they had so far? Two? Does the existance of such an activity affect you ability to play "sneaky-snake" in the woods? I didn't think so.

Guess we're all safe now from the scurge of Internet hunting. California has banned it. We can get back to the "honorable" and "protected" uses for the Internet -- like gambling, importuning and porn.

 

[dolanp]

I'm surprised anyone agrees with them. You may think that someone who isn't handicapped and wants to hunt over the Internet is not moral or ethical, but I don't see how that matters at all. Many people think hunting in general is unethical. It's plain that these legislators are not doing this to preserve the "morality" of the honorable sport of hunting, they are doing it because it is one way to stop people from killing animals. This is an animal rights issue, don't delude yourself.

 

[RomanKnight]

Another giant step towards banning both hunting and firearms. It's called incrementalism. Why not let the free market decide? I bet not one on this forum will ever use it, and all "ethical" hunters will boycott it as well. If enough (fill in the blanks) will use this thing, the business will survive, if not, it will go bankrupt, and the owner(s) will be haunted by the shame.

 

[Rebar]

It's not very sporting when I go to the supermarket and pick up a steak or a chicken, either.

Maybe we should ban that, and have everyone go out and hunt their own cows and chickens.

 

[HankB]

I want absolutely NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with Internet "hunting" myself.

I have difficulty saying that it should be banned on private land for someone with a genuine, serious handicap like a quadruplegic who simply CANNOT get out in the field and hunt, even assisted with a wheelchair or from the back of a pickup.

But even in that case, I wouldn't allow the resulting trophy to be eligible for any record book listing.

 

[GreenFurniture]

I somewhat agree with the Cali. ruling.

But, have any of you visited the website? I did and I would like to hear some feedback from those of you who have checked it out.

 

[Nehemiah Scudder]

It's cheaper than I thought about 20 bucks for 20 minutes the first time. Then 6 bucks for 20 minutes afterwards.

I guess they plan on charging alot for the carcasses cleaning, shipping, etc.

 

[Henry Bowman]

It's cheaper than I thought about 20 bucks for 20 minutes the first time. Then 6 bucks for 20 minutes afterwards.

But no guarantee that you will see any game come into view during the time you're paying for. Kind of like renting a deer stand or a duck blind by the 1/3 hour. Better ban those, too.

I guess they plan on charging alot for the carcasses cleaning, shipping, etc.

Or, like "real" hunting, you may look for hours or days and never see anything to shoot.

 

[Nehemiah Scudder]

If i'm paying 3 cents a minute, I better have a target come up soon or I'll be super pissed. lol

I was looking at the "game" part and saw where the money comes in.

$150.00 guide fee per hunt
$170.00 taxidermy fee
$60.00 meat processing fee

I saw where you can make a special request, instead of just shooting off the menu.

Considering, the money setup... I'd say that the "guides" are animal wranglers, giving 'em a gentle nudge from behind the camera.

 

[tyme]

I don't like the idea of a firearm on a computer-actuated mount controllable via the internet. Any ethical issues are secondary.

 

[cliffy109]

Y'all realize the trap of this don't you? This isn't hunting. Using the word "hunting" in this context dilutes the meaning of the word. There is nothing related to hunting going on here. There are no hunters involved. The media and the animal rights crowd, however get to point to "lazy hunters" and unethical hunting practices and gradnstand thier point of view. Meanwhile, genuine hunters watch as they are again painted as ignorant slobs with no ethics.

Even on this site, some of you have referred to this as hunting and the participants as hunters. That's a trap guys. Don't fall into it. Call it what it is. Call it remote slaughter and the participants voyeurs.

 

[Blackburn]

I don't like the idea of a firearm on a computer-actuated mount controllable via the internet. Any ethical issues are secondary.

This sounds a lot like the system I'm building for home defense...

 

[StrikeFire83]

These canned "hunts" are an embarrassment. Anybody who participates in this crap and calls himself a hunter is one pathetic individual. Canned slaughter of farm animals over the internet is rediculous, and certainly the domain of men looking for a penis replacement.

 

[ravinraven]

Now. If we could only get some...

...computer hunting systems set up where they would do us some good!

Any ideas for a prime location?

rr

 

[Too Many Choices!?]

Really you guys need to find something else to cry about...

Just because not everyone wants to run around in the woods chasing animals does not mean they don't have a right to shoot animals...

Questions...
1. Is it legal to shoot an animal in Texas? Yes.
2. Is it legal to use the internet in Texas? Yes.
3. Is it legal to fire a gun with a computer? Yes.

So who died and made you guys the hunting must be sporting(as defined by us) police ?
If Congress(or states for that matter) want to regulate this activity that is fine(and within their granted authority), but in order to ban something(to make not legal under any situation)they should need to show a public health risk or some credible reasoning. Naw,reason and logic take actual work, let's just make a law because what you "feel is right" is that hunting is only supposed to be done this way !

 

[Shalako]

Its not hunting, its farming. If I had a pen full of pigs and let some guy dispatch one, would anyone care?

This guy has a pen full of critters and lets people dispatch one remotely. If that sickens you, make sure to stay out of a slaughterhouse.

Its not hunting by any stretch of the imagination though. If I'm going to kill some critter, I make sure I have to earn it or I just really need the critter dead.

This Live-Shot busines is for folks that want to swing the axe at the slaughterhouse. Not my cup of tea but, whatever trips your trigger...

 

[Standing Wolf]

Why not let the free market decide? I bet not one on this forum will ever use it, and all "ethical" hunters will boycott it as well. If enough (fill in the blanks) will use this thing, the business will survive, if not, it will go bankrupt, and the owner(s) will be haunted by the shame.

Well, yeah, sure, but is the free market still legal in the People's Republic of California?

By the way, I wonder what the P.R.C. is doing about its multi-billion-dollar budget defecit these days. Oh. I see. It's busy banning stupid stuff again.

Nero fiddled.

 

[StrikeFire83]

Just because not everyone wants to run around in the woods chasing animals does not mean they don't have a right to shoot animals...

So who died and made you guys the hunting must be sporting(as defined by us) police ?
If Congress(or states for that matter) want to regulate this activity that is fine(and within their granted authority), but in order to ban something(to make not legal under any situation)they should need to show a public health risk or some credible reasoning. Naw,reason and logic take actual work, let's just make a law because what you "feel is right" is that hunting is only supposed to be done this way

I don't think it sould be illegal. I just think that canned hunting over the internet is STUPID. People should be allowed to do it, and I don't care about the animal's death, I eat me twice, sometimes 3 times a day.

But to call this internet fad "hunting" is disengenuous. People doing this for the "thrill kill" are pretty sad individuals in my personal opinion. If you want a rush, go on a real hunt, join the military, or get laid. Shooting a caged animal over a highspeed connection is a pretty weak substitute for manhood.

 

[Too Many Choices!?]

Yeah, if the animals are in a pin that changes things,

I would not call that hunting either. I just find all the guys saying Kali finally got one right, to be funny . Kali never gets it right, you guys should know that by now . What if the guy let you shoot a 1919 hooked-up to the 'net and it fired at cars, blocks, or whatever? Would that be ok?