It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


California To Ban Hunting On The Internet

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 6 2005 @ 06:33 PM
California's Fish and Game Commission are preparing to take emergency action against Californians using a Texas site to hunt game remotely. Two weeks ago the state Senate passed a bill in response to the Texas web site. The bill prohibits computer-assisted hunting and the transportation of game killed from these activities.
"We don't think Californians should be able to hunt sitting at their computers at home," said Steve Martarano, a spokesman for the state Department of Fish and Game.

A bill passed by the state Senate two weeks ago would prohibit use of computer-assisted hunting sites and ban the import or export of any animal killed using computer-assisted hunting. The measure now moves to the state Assembly.

At least 14 other states and Congress are considering similar bills.

Groups including the California Sportsmen's Association, Safari Club International and the Outdoor Sportsman's Coalition of California support the ban, saying hunting over the Internet is unethical and unsporting.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

This is amazing to me. I can't believe you can actually shoot animals online. I don't really see what the big deal is. If you can legally hunt something, you should be able to legally hunt the same things online. I could understand it if this was an illegal activity, but if people enjoy hunting live game from their computer screen, what right do we have to stop them?

And really how can we argue with these prices.

Individual, Membership (30 days) $14.95

Shooting Session (each)
10 shots - Max 20 minutes $ 5.95

DVD recording of session $ 9.95 plus shipping

Paper target from session $ 2.95 plus shipping

Related News Links:

[edit on 6-5-2005 by LeftBehind]

[edit on 27-9-2005 by DJDOHBOY]

posted on May, 6 2005 @ 06:41 PM
It's illegal to sit in your truck and hunt from the road, so why should it be legal to do it from the comfort of your own home?

If you are going to kill an animal for sport, you should have to look it in the eyes first, and then handle it's body yourself. People should not be able to do such a thing without having to fully absorb the impact of it. It's just respect.

posted on May, 6 2005 @ 06:45 PM
I'm not getting this, you can cyber-hunt?

What the hell is the purpose?

Another video game.

And yes, I read it, I just don't get it.

posted on May, 6 2005 @ 06:50 PM
Apparently these sites allow you to shoot animals live over the internet.

They set up stands with remote controlled cameras and guns . Check the liveshots link, it explains how to go about killing wildlife from the comfort of your own home.

posted on May, 6 2005 @ 06:56 PM
That's just frickin wrong. Life and death shouldn't be portioned out on the Net.

You shoot it, you clean it, you eat it.

I tell you, if you've got to do the dirty work after the shot, they'll be a lot less shots.

Once you've reduced a living thing to a "digital object", you may as well check out of society, because we become targets as well. Not like there's a lot of games that glorify that.

posted on May, 6 2005 @ 07:03 PM
I have never heard of cyber hunting. I'm not a big fan of hunting to begin with but I have nothing against those that do it legally. I agree that cyber hunting should be illegal. If they want to do cyber target practice, fine. But killing an animal while sitting at the computer just seems really cruel and wrong.

No wonder people are so overweight. They can't even get away from their computer to go hunting!


posted on May, 6 2005 @ 08:09 PM
Does it really matter to the animal whether you are there or not?

I think the animals would disagree that it is more cruel to shoot them remotely.

I honestly don't see what the problem is.

Our government loves to ignore that whole "pursuit of happiness" part in the declaration of independence.

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 01:09 PM
one step closer to skynet and the matrix.
who wouldn't like to remote control a predator aircraft and strafe a village full of third world 'people'?
one step closer. we'll be there soon.

posted on Aug, 31 2005 @ 05:59 PM
it's old news....that they are proposing a law show's how old it is.

A couple years back this was on some news thing....showing hunting dear from a computer.....made me wonder what else you can do? hmmmm.......Can't wait to hunt with a "TRANSFORMER" then the dum' 22 cal. try~pod
Maybe the Army should do this....offer it free on the NET shoot at a shooting range...but BIG guns or even tanks the site would be overwhelm'd with people....get the recruitment levels up.

And don't forget 2050 they say....the robots are gon'a beat the World Soccer Camps....the bet i'z on

So the future is gona' see a'lot more of get ready

Y'r Canadian friend,

posted on Sep, 2 2005 @ 11:28 PM
I, for one do not see a problem here. Think of the disabled people who might enjoy having a chance to hunt. Everyone seems to see this as a "lazy person cyber hunt", but I see it as yet another chance for the American with Disabilites Act.

I wonder if the ACLU would tackle a case like this?

posted on Sep, 3 2005 @ 12:05 AM
Be a great case!

The ACLU versus Pamela Anderson and the PETA people.

Of course, being one of those American with Diabilities I think we have far greater issues to drag into a courtroom than the rights of someone to shoot furry critters from the comfort of their screen.

If they do I want to testify in defense of the furry critters.

Worst case scenario would be some hunter walking through the area in Texas, lost or whatever, when the guy in California decides to just scare him a little.

top topics


log in