If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Animal Rights Guys)   What the hell did you think was going to happen?   (dreamindemon.com) divider line 49
    More: Fail, Ketchikan, Iam, animal life, animal rights groups, wild pigs, BBP  
•       •       •

33678 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Feb 2012 at 8:06 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-02-19 06:52:40 PM
4 votes:
I just love a story in which everyone looks like an idiot.
2012-02-19 06:34:17 PM
4 votes:

Riche: Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.


Here is anotherLink (new window) on the story. They knew exactly what it was. The drone was not just to film the hunt - it was to stop it entirely (bird hunt - noisy drone. Birdies no fly there.). The hunters tried to stop it legally, and when that failed, they shot it. Point goes to them, I'd say.
2012-02-19 06:50:18 PM
3 votes:

Bunnyhat: cman: namegoeshere: Riche: Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.

Here is anotherLink (new window) on the story. They knew exactly what it was. The drone was not just to film the hunt - it was to stop it entirely (bird hunt - noisy drone. Birdies no fly there.). The hunters tried to stop it legally, and when that failed, they shot it. Point goes to them, I'd say.

Trespassing is still a crime in the United States.


You don't own the air above your land. So sorry.
The shooters knew what it was, they also knew that legally that drone had every right to be in the airspace. They knowingly and willingly destroyed private property by firing weapons into the air in the direction of a busy highway and group of people.


If someone flew a small helicopter over your fence to watch what you were doing in your own back yard, you wouldnt call that trespassing?
2012-02-19 06:26:42 PM
3 votes:
Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.
2012-02-19 10:51:29 PM
2 votes:

God-is-a-Taco: Broxton Bridge Plantation is self-described as offering 'a wide variety of hunting opportunities on over 7,000 acres of land' including 'deer hunting, wild hog hunting, duck hunting over decoys, in addition to pheasants and bobwhite quail.'

Ahh, I love modern "hunting". Do they offer cars to shoot from? Can you get the animal's legs tied down so you're not emasculated when you miss? I feel more like a man just reading about this place.


Not trolling, but it is a popular sport. I have hunted since the age of eight. From that point until now, the publicly available land has vastly improved in both amount of game animals, and the quality of the state the environment is in (which has benefited all via hunting/fishing fees, licensing, and taxes).

The down side is there are a much larger population of hunters/fishermen. With that in mind, it is less stressful to enjoy the sport in a group funded hunting preserve.

For example, I have hunted for mule deer in Colorado in public spaces. And to beat my fellow competitors to a more successful hunt. I have scouted where I want to hunt for many hours, and when it's time to hunt, I arrive at my chosen area 3am ~ 4am. That means I am already in place to see most of my competitors arrive.

It's scary to see all the red hats and vests trying to be stealthy at day break heading in your direction.

That is precisely why I have no issue with a group that contracts with local large land tract owners to hunt their land for a fee as a club.

Most of the complainers really need to understand why a group does something, rather than just condemn them out of hand. Walk a mile in their shoes and all that. For example, did you know that the group (even with fees) often spend a great deal of time improving the land for the animals that live there (game or non-game). fix erosion issues, plant food bearing plants, manage trails, etc.? And that it is a shared club effort? One they all enjoy participating in? Hunting isn't about the killing. It's about the celebration of life, nature, and our inner needs to be part of it. It doesn't hurt that the results end in having something tasty you had to work for to have on your table.

You also need to consider their opposites knowledge and motivation before aligning yourself one way or the other.

/The bigger picture is well, bigger
2012-02-19 08:38:52 PM
2 votes:
I really cannot have sympathy for people who set out to be pricks knowing the law supports it. Patent trolls, WBC, animal rights activists... whatever they are, I hope all their plans fail miserably.
2012-02-19 08:26:12 PM
2 votes:
Why do these asshats do this crap in SC. It will never end well.

I was at a fishing tournement off the piers in SC one year. They thought it would be a good idea to to scuba under the pier with scissors and cut lines. We all stopped fishing for mackerel and changed gear for "large" fish.

As a matter of fact law enforcement did show up and told the asshats they were being stupid and endangering themselves. Told them if they got back in the water they would be arrested.
2012-02-19 08:24:00 PM
2 votes:

Bunnyhat: cman: Link posted above said that the owners of the land asked them not to fly the heli before they flew it. I think that indicates an intent to trespass.

Link also says the drone was flying over hwy 601 when it was shot down.



If a plane was flying over my house, I don't have the right to shoot it down regardless of how much I might ask them not too. Airspace is not private property.




Aircraft are FAA licensed (and therefore protected) vehicles. Drones are not. A privately owned drone flying over private property without the owners' permission is fair game.
2012-02-19 08:14:41 PM
2 votes:

Bunnyhat: All of this is meaningless since the dove hunters tried to get the drone fliers barred from flying it over their land was denied. The law was on the side of the drone flyers side regardless of what you might think.



The law isn't always what's "right".

The drone flyers were acting like complete assholes and got what they deserved. If left alone these hunters wouldn't have bothered anyone. The drone flyers went out of their way to cause problems for a group of people doing something they had the right to do. It's fair play that the hunters then caused problems for the people flying the drone.
2012-02-19 08:01:15 PM
2 votes:

Relatively Obscure: Bunnyhat: If a plane was flying over my house, I don't have the right to shoot it down regardless of how much I might ask them not too. Airspace is not private property.

Er, I think private property owners do have some rights to a certain amount of the air above their land, actually.


Yes. About 500 feet.
Everything else is considered "navigable air space" since the Air Commerce Act.

cman: Let me set up another scenario

Lets say your neighbor owns a tree on his property, but a big branch hangs on your side not touching the ground. If you cut that branch down to build an addition in its place (you are still on your property), should your neighbor be able to take you to court?


Totally different scenario with different laws specific for each one. Not comparable.


All of this is meaningless since the dove hunters tried to get the drone fliers barred from flying it over their land was denied. The law was on the side of the drone flyers side regardless of what you might think.
2012-02-19 07:54:29 PM
2 votes:

Bunnyhat: If a plane was flying over my house, I don't have the right to shoot it down regardless of how much I might ask them not too. Airspace is not private property.


Er, I think private property owners do have some rights to a certain amount of the air above their land, actually.
2012-02-19 07:51:26 PM
2 votes:
Asshat thing of the animal rights thing to do, but it wasn't trespassing in all likelihood.

Even if it WAS, shooting down a drone was a very bad idea.

It's perfectly legal to overfly private property in a plane or helicopter, and the supreme court even said the cops could fly over private land in a helicopter looking for pot plants.

It's probably NOT legal to just harass people with a helicopter, but if the drone was flying at a high enough altitude and not "buzzing" the hunters the drone operators are probably within the law.

The law probably needs to be updated to specifically prevent interfering with hunters using a drone.
2012-02-19 07:24:57 PM
2 votes:

ArkAngel: cman: Bunnyhat: cman: namegoeshere: Riche: Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.

Here is anotherLink (new window) on the story. They knew exactly what it was. The drone was not just to film the hunt - it was to stop it entirely (bird hunt - noisy drone. Birdies no fly there.). The hunters tried to stop it legally, and when that failed, they shot it. Point goes to them, I'd say.

Trespassing is still a crime in the United States.


You don't own the air above your land. So sorry.
The shooters knew what it was, they also knew that legally that drone had every right to be in the airspace. They knowingly and willingly destroyed private property by firing weapons into the air in the direction of a busy highway and group of people.

If someone flew a small helicopter over your fence to watch what you were doing in your own back yard, you wouldnt call that trespassing?

Technically it's only trespassing if you ask them to leave and they refuse


Link posted above said that the owners of the land asked them not to fly the heli before they flew it. I think that indicates an intent to trespass.
2012-02-19 06:42:14 PM
2 votes:

cman: namegoeshere: Riche: Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.

Here is anotherLink (new window) on the story. They knew exactly what it was. The drone was not just to film the hunt - it was to stop it entirely (bird hunt - noisy drone. Birdies no fly there.). The hunters tried to stop it legally, and when that failed, they shot it. Point goes to them, I'd say.

Trespassing is still a crime in the United States.



You don't own the air above your land. So sorry.
The shooters knew what it was, they also knew that legally that drone had every right to be in the airspace. They knowingly and willingly destroyed private property by firing weapons into the air in the direction of a busy highway and group of people.
2012-02-19 03:51:48 PM
2 votes:
It's a pigeon hunt. Pigeons are goddamn winged rats. No matter how much you love animals, let people kill pigeons. They are disgusting.


Gray squirrels too. Go ahead and kill all the gray squirrels. Then when you're done, feel free to desecrate their corpses. I hate those little farks.
2012-02-20 03:42:48 PM
1 votes:
These animal rights activists actually filmed themselves breaking the law.

Link (new window)
2012-02-20 01:21:23 AM
1 votes:
Over on SHARK's Youtube channel I left a post asking that they provide proof that it was bullets that brought down the drone, and my post was deleted. I just tried to leave another post and I received a message saying my post was awaiting approval.

More and more I am thinking that whoever was piloting the drone farked up and crashed it into the ground and the stupid idiots are now blaming the hunters for their own incompetence.
2012-02-19 11:12:29 PM
1 votes:
I see an animal rights group harassing individuals on private land, performing a legal activity, for the purpose of constructing propaganda against said individuals. I see an unmanned aircraft system being operated against FAA regulations - the hunters couldn't legally prevent the group from operating the UAS, but the group has to operate the UAS according to FAA regulations. They failed to do so.

At present, operating an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) for commercial gain is against FAA regulations. Since the flight was done for SHARK, a non-profit company, it falls under those regulations. If the drone was operating over a highway, that also violates FAA regulations - you can't operate a UAS over a highway for commercial or recreational purposes.

So, if the group is adamant to paint the hunters as somehow reckless because the UAS was over a highway when it was shot down, well, they're probably going to have to cough up a fine when the FAA reviews the footage the group was dumb enough to upload to YouTube. As PETA was also involved (PETA put out press releases for this little shindig), I'm sure they're not going to be pleased to have SHARK drag them into yet another legal dust-up.
2012-02-19 10:59:09 PM
1 votes:
Mock26 SmartestFunniest 2012-02-19 10:48:44 PM


jpo2269: Riche SmartestFunniest 2012-02-19 06:26:42 PM


Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.

If you watch the entire video, there is a point towards the end where "Steve" complains about a Field and Stream blogger encouraging the shoot down, so it is obvious that "SHAME" advertised the fly over, just as they have advertised the fly over next year.

The hunters are engaging in a lawful hunt, only to be harassed by this organization. The shooting down of the drone doesn't bother me in the least. I would recommend that the hunting lodge get a restraining order for the group that keeps them at a safe distance from the lodge.. that way their drone won't get shot again.

Nah, the hunters should pitch in and buy their own drone and get someone to hide out in the woods nearby and then there can be a drone duel!

Or, just get a big laser and flash it at the drone to blind the cameras


OK, I am man enough to admit when someone else has a better idea than myself.. Well played sir..

Now, I would like to hear from a hunter as to what is the range of shotgun shot, it seemed to me the drone was a little too high to actually get hit, but I could be wrong. Any hunters care to weigh in?
2012-02-19 10:34:50 PM
1 votes:
Riche SmartestFunniest 2012-02-19 06:26:42 PM


Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.


If you watch the entire video, there is a point towards the end where "Steve" complains about a Field and Stream blogger encouraging the shoot down, so it is obvious that "SHAME" advertised the fly over, just as they have advertised the fly over next year.

The hunters are engaging in a lawful hunt, only to be harassed by this organization. The shooting down of the drone doesn't bother me in the least. I would recommend that the hunting lodge get a restraining order for the group that keeps them at a safe distance from the lodge.. that way their drone won't get shot again.
2012-02-19 10:24:41 PM
1 votes:

The Damned: You know what Shark should have spent their money on? Someone that can keep a camera steady.

Most of the footage of the drone is wobbly-camera with some beautiful shots of the sky with no drone in it.

Awesome job, Shark.


I would not be surprised if it was intentional, that they flew the drone up, deliberately "lost" track of it and then crashed it into the ground to blame the hunters. I will believe their story when I see the holes in the drone.
2012-02-19 10:22:20 PM
1 votes:

Riche: Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.


Riche: Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.


for all you know it was SHARK doing the shooting to make it look like some roge hunter, based on the sound of the shots I would say that is in fact very likely
2012-02-19 10:19:18 PM
1 votes:

Dogsbody: StoPPeRmobile: Try telling that joke to a judge.

Try proving who actually shot the thing.


You and others might be fascinated with the strange case of Ken McElroy.
2012-02-19 10:15:03 PM
1 votes:

Bunnyhat: cman: namegoeshere: Riche: Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.

Here is anotherLink (new window) on the story. They knew exactly what it was. The drone was not just to film the hunt - it was to stop it entirely (bird hunt - noisy drone. Birdies no fly there.). The hunters tried to stop it legally, and when that failed, they shot it. Point goes to them, I'd say.

Trespassing is still a crime in the United States.


You don't own the air above your land. So sorry.
The shooters knew what it was, they also knew that legally that drone had every right to be in the airspace. They knowingly and willingly destroyed private property by firing weapons into the air in the direction of a busy highway and group of people.


Good for them. They knew it was not legal to shoot it down, and still did the right thing, and shot it down.
2012-02-19 10:14:28 PM
1 votes:

ZAZ: SN1987a goes boom: Shooting in the direction of a highway is pretty serious crime in pretty much any country.

It's a minor misdemeanor in the states where I've seen a punishment listed.


The serious part is you lose your gun rights
2012-02-19 10:07:58 PM
1 votes:
The price of lasers seems to have dropped quite a bit. You can buy ones capable of burning for a few hundred dollars. Here's the challenge: Build something capable of taking down a drone like the one SHARK used. It'll be called the SHARK FARKER. I'm looking at parts right now.
2012-02-19 10:03:56 PM
1 votes:

StoPPeRmobile: Try telling that joke to a judge.


Try proving who actually shot the thing.
2012-02-19 09:49:24 PM
1 votes:
Just wait until someone shoots down one of the law enforcement drones patrolling around looking for hidden marijuana patches in the woods.
2012-02-19 09:39:47 PM
1 votes:

Lionel Mandrake: I just love a story in which everyone looks like an idiot.


I can't think of a way this could possibly have gone better.
2012-02-19 09:17:53 PM
1 votes:
*snert* That's farking funny.
2012-02-19 09:16:26 PM
1 votes:
Look, I don't know or care if you're a tree-hugger or granola-eater or seal-clubber or whale-raper or what... I think we can all put aside our differences and agree that that was pretty damned funny.
2012-02-19 09:07:01 PM
1 votes:

Jim_Callahan: Bunnyhat:
You don't own the air above your land. So sorry.

Hope you're not actually laying any money on that, because, um, you DO own the space above you land, up to the minimum threshold where the FAA takes over, so several thousand feet.

So... if it was a lease and the people flying the drone weren't welcome, sorry, you lose, good day, sir. If it was flying at 20k feet, yeah, sure, that's not cool, but if you can peg anything at 20000 feet with bird shot I think we should be worrying more about the fact that you appear to be magneto than that you messed up some douche's illegally-operated equipment.


It's 500 feet, not twenty thousand feet. RC Drones can fly way past 500 feet. All of which ignores the fact that THE DRONE WAS OVER A HIGHWAY WHEN SHOT DOWN. NOT PRIVATE PROPERTY.
2012-02-19 09:06:59 PM
1 votes:
These guys are nuts. Take a look at Ehrhardt, SC on Google maps. Just south of the town you'll find this plantation. And their private airport. And private campgrounds. No deputy sheriff in their right mind would mess with a huge taxpayer like that.
2012-02-19 09:06:31 PM
1 votes:
If anyone has a chance to eat dove, go for it. It's amazing.
/wrapped in bacon and grilled
2012-02-19 08:59:52 PM
1 votes:

2wolves: Interesting which laws will apply. Would like to see the follow-up if anything actually happens.


Well, the police "took a report." Which I'm sure they filed correctly. In the filing cabinet. You know, the circular one. In the mens room.

It's South Carolina. I'm pretty sure the police are not going to get all CSI trying to match the bullets with the correct hunters' guns.
2012-02-19 08:59:02 PM
1 votes:
I just looked that thing up - about $1k for the kit. The amusing thing is that they use the standard 2.4Ghz band for control. I would bet that a few Linksys wireless access points with directional antennas could screw the control channel up badly. Not to mention what a modified microwave oven could do to it.

If the signal isn't encrypted you could take control and run it into the sheriff's car. That would be good for some laughs. If you own a plantation that covers nearly three square miles then you could surely afford to buy one of these things to tinker with. Maybe have a dog fight over the highway next year.
2012-02-19 08:40:03 PM
1 votes:

Bunnyhat:
You don't own the air above your land. So sorry.


Hope you're not actually laying any money on that, because, um, you DO own the space above you land, up to the minimum threshold where the FAA takes over, so several thousand feet.

So... if it was a lease and the people flying the drone weren't welcome, sorry, you lose, good day, sir. If it was flying at 20k feet, yeah, sure, that's not cool, but if you can peg anything at 20000 feet with bird shot I think we should be worrying more about the fact that you appear to be magneto than that you messed up some douche's illegally-operated equipment.
2012-02-19 08:37:23 PM
1 votes:

marius2: I think hunters are absolutely silly (unless of course it's your only means of acquiring foods. I'm speaking more about the people who hunt as a hobby.) That being said, I still think this is hilarious!


Hunting is still a hell of a lot more humane than how most farm animals are slaughtered.
2012-02-19 08:34:38 PM
1 votes:

adeist69:
Aircraft are FAA licensed (and therefore protected) vehicles. Drones are not. A privately owned drone flying over private property without the owners' permission is fair game.


So, what you are saying is, it would be foolish to use one to bother people who shoot airborne moving targets for fun?

DRTFA, but I gleaned enough from the comments.

"Hey, quit shootin' at birds!"
"Okay, we'll switch to shootin' drones." *KWHAM*
2012-02-19 08:28:11 PM
1 votes:

sammyk: Why do these asshats do this crap in SC. It will never end well.

I was at a fishing tournement off the piers in SC one year. They thought it would be a good idea to to scuba under the pier with scissors and cut lines. We all stopped fishing for mackerel and changed gear for "large" fish.

As a matter of fact law enforcement did show up and told the asshats they were being stupid and endangering themselves. Told them if they got back in the water they would be arrested.


In some states, interfering with the lawful taking of game IS an arrestable offense.
2012-02-19 08:21:13 PM
1 votes:
I think hunters are absolutely silly (unless of course it's your only means of acquiring foods. I'm speaking more about the people who hunt as a hobby.) That being said, I still think this is hilarious!
2012-02-19 08:11:41 PM
1 votes:
i291.photobucket.com
2012-02-19 07:27:43 PM
1 votes:

cman: Link posted above said that the owners of the land asked them not to fly the heli before they flew it. I think that indicates an intent to trespass.


Link also says the drone was flying over hwy 601 when it was shot down.



If a plane was flying over my house, I don't have the right to shoot it down regardless of how much I might ask them not too. Airspace is not private property.
2012-02-19 07:13:42 PM
1 votes:
I think what they (the animal rights group) were doing would be considered illegal with the FAA. Wasn't it out in LA that they shut down the realtors from using drones like that over people's property? Link (new window)
2012-02-19 06:48:48 PM
1 votes:
FloydA: Pigeons are goddamn winged rats.

And starlings. In my youth the those wretched beasts knew the sting of my pellet gun.
2012-02-19 06:37:48 PM
1 votes:

namegoeshere: Riche: Do many animal rights groups go too far? OF COURSE!!! Now that we've killed off most of the predators, hunting is necessary to prevent an overpopulation disaster among many animals.

That said, the hunter firing on the drone was being MASSIVELY irresponsible. If the act wasn't illegal than it SHOULD be.

Did the hunter even know what he was shooting at, or who was operating the drone, or where it would crash land?

For all the hunter knew, the drone could have been operated by local or federal agents. When it crashed it might have landed on somebody's head or truck or possibly started a wildfire.

The NRA should loudly denounce the actions of this unknown idiot hunter if they want to protect their legitimacy, especially if it comes out the hunter knew who was operating the drone. "If you don't agree with a POV then shoot their stuff" is hardly the mark of responsible gun ownership.

Here is anotherLink (new window) on the story. They knew exactly what it was. The drone was not just to film the hunt - it was to stop it entirely (bird hunt - noisy drone. Birdies no fly there.). The hunters tried to stop it legally, and when that failed, they shot it. Point goes to them, I'd say.


Trespassing is still a crime in the United States.
2012-02-19 06:30:00 PM
1 votes:

thelordofcheese: HAHA good
farking nosy busy-bodies
ain't got nothing better to worry about so they harass people merging entertainment with nourishment


Ewwwww... You eat pigeons! Rats with wings, them.
2012-02-19 04:03:41 PM
1 votes:
Now that there is sum funny shiat.
EARL...looky thar...it's a a wirly bird.
GIT IT!!!
2012-02-19 03:47:55 PM
1 votes:
This just in: it is probably not wise to have an expensive piece of machinery knowingly flying in the area of a pigeon hunt.
 
Displayed 49 of 49 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report