Support NeoGAF

[Ripclawe]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/11/16/life.hunting.reut/index.html

HOUSTON, Texas (Reuters) -- Hunters soon may be able to sit at their computers and blast away at animals on a Texas ranch via the Internet, a prospect that has state wildlife officials up in arms.

The Web site already offers target practice with a .22 caliber rifle and could soon let hunters shoot at deer, antelope and wild pigs, site creator John Underwood said on Tuesday.

Texas officials are not quite sure what to make of Underwood's Web site, but may tweak existing laws to make sure Internet hunting does not get out of hand.

Underwood, an estimator for a San Antonio, Texas auto body shop, has invested $10,000 to build a platform for a rifle and camera that can be remotely aimed on his 330-acre (133-hectare) southwest Texas ranch by anyone on the Internet anywhere in the world.

The idea came last year while viewing another Web site on which cameras posted in the wild are used to snap photos of animals.

"We were looking at a beautiful white-tail buck and my friend said 'If you just had a gun for that.' A little light bulb went off in my head," he said.

 

[sc0la]

Cabela's Not So Dangerous Hunts 2k5: Webcam Edition!

 

[Hitokage]

Unregulated random killing of game isn't a good thing.

 

[sc0la]

Who is at fault if someone is shot by remote control over the internet, the site's owner or the unidentified internet user in south america that "pulled the trigger."

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Cabela's Not So Dangerous Hunts 2k5: Webcam Edition!

Seriously. It's like taking one of the PC games, making it more realistic, making it low in resolution, frame rate, and options, then taking away the ability to move the character. Also actual death.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

The one thing that you should NEVER do in Texas is piss of Parks and Wildlife. The officers have the most power in the state of Texas. They can make life very uncomfortable if you irk them the wrong way.

 

[Greenpanda]

So what happens if 2 people are on the site simulatenously trying to aim the gun?

 

[belgurdo]

I can't wait until some pissed off hunter tells a friend he had an argument with to "meet him in the forest," and buddy gets there with no one around, while hunter is at home using mouselook to get a better headshot

 

[Takuan]

"We were looking at a beautiful white-tail buck and my friend said 'If you just had a gun for that.' A little light bulb went off in my head," he said.

Defies logic.

 

[luxsol]

Defies logic.

Eh, isn't the reason they say it's beautiful and want to shoot it because they want to stuff it and mount it somewhere? I'm not really into hunting, but i have shot at some animals before though (various reasons and only once for sport), so i wouldn't know if they do keep the animals somewhere stuffed.

 

[Chopin Trusty Balls]

Am i the only one who found this article pure comedy?

I mean the "Its so beatiful,lets shoot it" alone is priceless

 

[Gek54]

I am no vegitarian but I have never understood why people feel its ok to kill animals for fun. I feel bad enough for the bugs that splatter on my windshield.

 

[luxsol]

Heh, i feel bad about bugs too. Usually if i see one in my room I capture it and release it outside, but if it's a spider (they scare me) I'll just squash it but still feel bad about it.

Going out to shoot an animal for sport was only because my cousin invited me. Didn't really feel all that bad about the animal though, considering deer tastes great.

 

[Gek54]

Well, if you eat it, to me that makes not as bad but people who kill preditors like bears, cougars, foxes are fucked in the head imo. "Oh thats an amazing beatiful creature, lets destroy it!" or "Lets go out deep into the woods to find a mama grizzly and shoot it as it charges us in attempt to protect her cubs" WTF mate! Just take a goddamn fucking picture or video.

 

[luxsol]

If they want to stuff and mount it somewhere I'm ok with that. Having something physical is much better than just having a picture of it. It's like owning a real painting or original artwork rather than a photocopy hanging on your wall.

This shooting over the internet thing is just ridiculous.

 

[Gek54]

Owning an original peice instead of having it in a museum so that everyone can enjoy the art?

 

[Jeffahn]

I wish they would provide a remote-controlled turrent so I could shoot the hick who thought this up.

 

[luxsol]

Owning an original peice instead of having it in a museum so that everyone can enjoy the art?

Well, don't you sometimes want to have that art in your room to admire in private?

Anyway, i was talking about comic book/manga art, etc, not just famous paintings and such. Friends have sent me art that I've framed and look at whenever I'm in my room, it wouldn't be the same if they just scanned it sent the file to me so that i can only look at it on my computer or printed it out with a poor quality ink jet printer.

 

[Gek54]

You are equating the value of ink/oil on paper to that of a living creature. The animal is beautifull alive and moving and doing what it does...imo. Its more like taking a frame from a movie out so that you can enjoy it while everyone else has to watch the movie with out that one frame. You are not the only one who wants a frame from the movie and then what becomes of the movie missing all those frames? Missing entire scenes? You have destroyed the movie and all you have left are motionless lifeless scenes. I have a firend who has a bear rug from a roadkill and thats cool but to go out and take an animals life so you can have what is basically a 3D image of it? People thought having a stuffed Dodo bird was a good idea. I dont see how eople who do this are any better than the people who kill elephants for their ivory. Why is that looked down upon and killing cougars is not?

 

[luxsol]

You are equating the value of ink/oil on paper to that of a living creature. The animal is beautifull alive and moving and doing what it does...imo. Its more like taking a frame from a movie out so that you can enjoy it while everyone else has to watch the movie with out that one frame. You are not the only one who wants a frame from the movie and then what becomes of the movie missing all those frames? Missing entire scenes? You have destroyed the movie and all you have left are motionless lifeless scenes. I have a firend who has a bear rug from a roadkill and thats cool but to go out and take an animals life so you can have what is basically a 3D image of it? People thought having a stuffed Dodo bird was a good idea. I dont see how eople who do this are any better than the people who kill elephants for their ivory. Why is that looked down upon and killing cougars is not?

And you're equating it to something that is irriplacable. Deer are plentiful (a dime a dozen)... dodos (extinct now), elephants (I'd really have a problem with killing an elephant because they're so intelligent and mourn their dead), and soon-to-be-extinct-animals are not. Bears are sometimes put into season because their population become too big (for the limited area that they're allowed to live in, which is sucky). Same with cougars/mountain lions.
I don't support how they control their numbers but i also don't think they're wrong. I understand why they would want a stuffed animal. They want a statue that will remain "immortal", not a living breathing animal. Sure, the animal is beautiful alive and moving, but these people want something they can keep as a testament to the animal, and to them having a photograph or video is not enough. There's a huge difference between pictures and seeing the real thing. And there is a huge difference between a statue of one versus a live one too. Guess what these people want? If you can't understand that, then think about it some more. If you don't support them, then fine, i agree.