Robotic Deer to Fight Illegal Hunting

Roland Piquepaille writes "If you were a law enforcement official searching for hunters who don't follow the rules, what would be a good gift for you? In 'Robot Deer Captures Poachers,' Brian Bull, reporting from Mosinee, Wisconsin, writes that you can buy robotic decoys for deer, elks, moose and even bears. These life-like creatures are made of animal hides or skins attached to polyurethane foam bodies and equipped with remotely controlled motors allowing the head and tail to move. After you pay about $2,000 for such a robo-deer, you put it on a side road. All you have to do is wait for an illegal hunter trying to shoot the fake deer and fine him. Many officers have reported collecting well over $30,000 in fines with a single robot. Not a bad deal."

Comments

Business model

[mtenhagen]

Now that is a good business model!

But I prefer parking fines since it requires a lower investment and less skilled personnel.

Re:Business model

[Technician]

But I prefer parking fines since it requires a lower investment and less skilled personnel.

More importantly, they are away and are not carrying a high power loaded weapon.

Re:Business model

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember when 'entrapment' was obviously illegal, and
cases of entrapment would get tossed out of court. When
did this change? And now... ...It is a business. Wow.
God Bless America

Re:Business model

[Ucklak]

Unless the deer is saying SHOOT ME, C'MON, it's not entrapment.

It's no more entrapment than a cashier opening their drawer and walking away while you steal their money.

Re:Business model

[pnewhook]

I remember when 'entrapment' was obviously illegal, and cases of entrapment would get tossed out of court.

You're right. Instead they should equip the robot deer with some serious firepower and blow these asshole illegal hunters out of the water. That'll stop poaching in it's tracks.

Re:Business model

[yoder]

"You're right. Instead they should equip the robot deer with some serious firepower and blow these asshole illegal hunters out of the water. That'll stop poaching in it's tracks."

Beautiful idea. I love it.

Re:Business model

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember when 'entrapment' was obviously illegal, and
cases of entrapment would get tossed out of court.

And I remember when even ignorant fucktards knew the definition of entrapment.

Re:Business model

[wclacy]

They have had these for more than 10 years. I don't know why this is news now.

Re:Business model

[Anonymous Coward]

Since you didn't technically shoot a deer, couldn't you get this knocked down to unlawful discharge of a firearm? Wouldn't you have to shoot at an actual deer to be poaching?

Re:Business model

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm clueless about law, but it would probably be equivalent to someone who fishes illegally but has not caught anything at the time he's arrested.

Can "intent to poach" be prosecuted?

Re:Business model

[ppanon]

There was a story in Analog a year or two back where somebody genetically engineers some smart deers and the deer work together, stalk some poachers, lead them into a trap with a decoy and take them out with some quick hoofs to the head.

Re:Business model

[scottv67]

Since you didn't technically shoot a deer, couldn't you get this knocked down to unlawful discharge of a firearm?

Frequently, decoys like this (deer, turkey, pheasant, etc.) are placed near a roadway to catch people who hunt from their vehicle. While shooting at a robo-deer may not be illegal, hunting within 50 feet of the centerline of a road is definitely illegal (YMMV according to the laws in *your* state). The game wardens will be glad to give you a fine, take your weapon and possibly the vehicle you were riding in when they caught you "road hunting".

Re:Business model

[Treates2]

oh yeah, i already bought five stocks bonds... haha you stupid poochers

Re:Business model

[kd5ujz]

If you sell crack to an undercover agent, but he does not intend to use it, is it a crime?

Re:Business model

[FuzzyDaddy]

I would hope the law would be written so that you don't actually have to hit a dear to meet the legal definition of hunting - that would be hunting well

Just like a real deer.

[CrazyJim1]

After you pay about $2,000 for such a robo-deer, you put it on a side road

Then you watch as it gets hit by a car.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Dr. Cody]

Fantastic: We killed the wolf, we killed the coyote, and now we're creating a device to reduce the number of the deer's last remaining predator.

Now, if we could only make a robo-whitetail-suicide bomber.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[od05]

The deer are way overpopulated this year, that is why hunting season is two days longer this year (at least in Ohio).

Re:Just like a real deer.

[TubeSteak]

You got modded funny, but there's a kernel of truth in there.

One of the shitty things that poachers do, is shoot a deer then run it over with their truck.

By doing this, they can claim that the deer was hit by a car & they were only putting it out of its misery... an act which is perfectly legal.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Shads]

I live in Ohio also, was a hunter when I was a kid/teenager, I don't hunt anymore because I have nothing to do with the meat... I personally don't like venison and I won't kill something if it's not going to be eaten. The deer have been over populating most of Ohio for at least 20 years. My family lived on a farm for ~50 years in NE Ohio and deer were a constant problem. They knew the neighbors were poaching deer and they did some themselves and it never even put a dent in the deer problem.

A large portion of the problem is just lack of natural predators.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

True, but when they hit the robo-deer, they will still have to account for how they managed to veer off open road.

And I'm sure most will just grab their rifle right away expecting to see a real deer, which, well, if they didn't see what they hit coming, how could they possibly know that it was something that needed to be shot right away?

Such things may not work in, say, a murder case, but for fines? More than sufficient.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Battleloser]

Believe me when I say anyone who wanted to take a deer that was standing on the road wouldn't take the time to pull over and get their guns. Just turn on the high beams and put the peddle to the metal! Ah childhood memories...

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

And then there will always be the drunk who spots an illuminated animated deer in a Christmas display on a front lawn, pulls the rifle off the gunrack, shoots the animatronic critter, plows down the front picket fence with his truck, runs over the deer, and then tells the officers it ran out on the road in front of him. :)

Re:Just like a real deer.

[dattaway]

True, but when they hit the robo-deer, they will still have to account for how they managed to veer off open road.

That's easy. When you see a deer, there's always at least one more. Its always the other one that will get you.

"That's why I swerved off the road. And hit another one. And I had to shoot it. It was not my day!"

This is why remote motion sensing cameras are VERY popular. They sell them at hunting stores, not only for hunting, but to protect property from other hunters.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Shakrai]

and now we're creating a device to reduce the number of the deer's last remaining predator.

Not if they follow the rules. This device does nothing to reduce legal hunting of deer. There's various reasons to regulate hunting, ranging from game management (you can only take so many animals and most of them have to be male) to safety (can't discharge your firearm within X yards of a structure). All this device does is provide a decoy for the violators to shoot at.

Living in Upstate NY and dealing with morons from the city that shoot at anything that moves (hint: diary cows don't look anything like deer yet they are routinely shot...) I think this is a wonderful idea.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[GNious]

Odd, I thought it was humans that were way overpopulated, and the deers being forced to live in too small a place?

Re:Just like a real deer.

[flafish]

The deer problem is so bad in SE Ohio that the town has opened the city up to bow hunting of deer inside city limits.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

From what I've heard from friends of mine who hunt, the bruising from getting hit by a truck pretty much ruins the meat on the side that was hit, but that's when dealing with real roadkill, maybe killing them first changes it.

Also in several states, if you find a deer hit by a car, if they catch you with it you're still not allowed to keep it (unless you have a tag to waste), you have to call the animal control/forest service/whoever deals with hunting in your area, and usually they'll confiscate it (most of those states, they'll donate it to a food pantry if there's usable meat on it).

Re:Just like a real deer.

[djh101010]

Fantastic: We killed the wolf, we killed the coyote, and now we're creating a device to reduce the number of the deer's last remaining predator.

Um...the whole point of having laws wrapped around hunting, is to control where, which, and how many deer should be removed from the herd. Some random poacher shooting the first deer they see, doesn't help to _manage_ the population. Poachers (notice I didn't say "hunters", who are by large a honorable and careful group) aren't helping, and they're breaking several laws. I've seen these robo-deer (the DNR has them at the county fair every year, so it's not like this is some stealth program) and I'm completely in favor of it.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[CETS]

No, go look it up. The number of deer (at least in Wisconsin) has grown dramatically over the last several decades.

Even in places with CWD (Chronic Wasting Disease), where there have been specific herd reduction efforts by the DNR, the numbers are actually increasing.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Always more then one, very true. Last year my wife hit two of them at the same time. Well actually she hit one with the front fender and the other ran into the drivers door. Both caused significant damage. They both ended up running off but I doubt the one she hit made it very far. It actually rolled up onto the roof and then back down across the hood and onto the ground. I hit a deer straight on with the bumper/grill in a full size van when I was a teenager. Not much damage to the vehicle but that thing went flying across two lanes of traffic. Luckily I maintained control of the vehicle because this from the fast lane on a 4 lane non divided highway without a center turning lane.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[aplusjimages]

Blame the hunters. If they wouldn't have killed the wolf and coyote, then there wouldn't be this problem. Kill off the deer and I'm sure a new problem will occur.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[bohemian72]

(hint: diary cows don't look anything like deer yet they are routinely shot...)

That's because they have no privacy and those poacher predators found their info on MySpace.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[plopez]

an act which is perfectly legal.
Not in my state. Usually you call the Sherrif, who then may contact state or federal fish and wildlife depending on jurisdiction for permission to euthanize the animal.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[msobkow]

Can you network the robodeer so that a herd jumps across the road in front of you?

How many jumps per second does a beowulf cluster of deer produce? :p

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hunter getting nailed by a bait. Quite the irony...

Wouldn't this be a form of entrapment?

Re:Just like a real deer.

[SpinyNorman]

Driving what? A tank?

Have you ever seen what happens when a modern vehicle ( Mack truck) hits a deer head-on?

If you're unlucky it won't only be your car that suffers major damage.. I remember reading an amusing freak accident case where a driver was killed due to the deer flying throught the windshield and impaling him!

Re:Just like a real deer.

[fprintf]

Actually blame the ranchers and farmers. If they hadn't killed off predators to protect their livestock then there wouldn't be a deer problem.

But I think this is just a problem looking for a novel solution. I like the idea of hunters taking down game and then providing it to homeless shelters. There must be other ways of using this food source to benefit others.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[The Tyro]

They really should try to build in some life-like behavior for the deer, aimed at the idiots who like to spotlight them at night. Those fools are particularly dangerous, because in low-light they can't be sure of what's beyond their target, yet they blast away at it; pity the poor sod whose house is downrange.

Put in a photocell that makes the robotic deer raise its head, and turn toward the light... that'd be pure gold.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[jellomizer]

No it is more the farmers. They Killed the Wolf and Coyote becase these animals were hunting their livestock too. Hunters like large game that offer good meat.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, silly nature. Needs us to keep things under control.

Anyway, the deer would hunt you and everyone you care about, if they had the chance!

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Bastard of Subhumani]

... and launches a light-seeking missile up the beam. I don't know if such a thing exists, but I guess you could make one on the same principle as a heat-seeker.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Dun Malg]

Yes, silly nature. Needs us to keep things under control. Don't be a fucking tool. In nature the deer population is normally kept down by predation. Humans have killed all the wolves, however, so nature reverts to the old favorite, starvation. In an effort to mitigate our past stupidity, we manage the population by hunting, taking the place of the wolves. You think it's better for all deer to starve rather than some deer to be hunted by humans? If so, you're a moron.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Sponge Bath]

...shoot a deer then run it over with their truck.

Sounds reasonable. Venison definately requires tenderization.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[khallow]

I remember reading an amusing freak accident case where a driver was killed due to the deer flying throught the windshield and impaling him!

That's not a particularly freakish accident.They can jump pretty high (I've heard of them clearing 12 foot hight fences before) easily clearling the hood of the car or truck and going through the windshield. Those deer have game.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[BruceCage]

I'd rather see more wolves being brought back into their natural environment and humans taking a step back and removing themselves from the playing field than more hunters running about shooting things.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[wolff000]

I have actually seen pictures of a deer colliding with a Pick-up. Somehow the poor guy got turned around and his feet went through the windshield. Unfortunately he killed the driver and the passenger kicking trying to get out. He didn't make it and when a forest ranger found them he had to be shot. Deer are tough animals and hitting one with any vehicle is not advisable. Back to the topic, I think this is great people that shoot from the side of the road and use spotlights are scum not hunters. A hunter goes in to the woods and stalks his prey like any predator. Poachers often use tactics that give them far too much of an advantage. Yes hunters have a big advantage too but not as much when following the law. I see no problem with hunting if the animal will be eaten and all the useful parts used. I hate to see stuffed game it's a waste of meat, hide, and life. We must eat to survive and being a vegetarian is not for me. I tried for over a year and craved a piece of steak 70% of the time.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[pizpot]

Fantastic: We killed the wolf, we killed the coyote, and now we're creating a device to reduce the number of the deer's last remaining predator.

Note, hunting on the road is not good. Roads attract people.

What does hunting on the road from your running vehicle with the headlights blinding the animal have to do with wolves? Do you mind if fishermen use depth charges near your beach? They would if you let them.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[It'sYerMam]

If you're going to kill your meat to eat it, what difference does it make whether you shot it while it was paralysed or not? Do you ever complain that it's an unfair advantage to kill cows in slaughterhouses? I assume you would hunt for pleasure, meat, and perhaps reduced cost - if someone just wants the meat and doesn't care about enjoying the hunt, why shouldn't they paralyse the thing? If anything, it'll be less painful for it, since they can probably get a cleaner shot.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Skynyrd]

After you pay about $2,000 for such a robo-deer, you put it on a side road

Then you watch as it gets hit by a car.

Actually, if i was just like a real deer, it would jump out in front of motorcycles.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why don't spotlight them back with high-powered head-mounted lasers.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Skynyrd]

I'd rather see more wolves being brought back into their natural environment and humans taking a step back and removing themselves from the playing field than more hunters running about shooting things.

Wolves, cougars, coyotes and the like aren't well loved in populated areas. They tend to eat pets and occasional humans. I grew up in the sticks and have seen all of those animals on my property (plus deer).

I understand what you want, but it just isn't reality any more. There isn't much natural habitat left.
Where I grew up, you couldn't build a house on less than 5 acres, and most people had between 20 and 300 acres. At this point (I'm now 40) along the road I live on, almost every large piece of land has been subdivided to 5 acre pieces. The wild animals used to be able to hang out on "the back 40", but now there's 7 or 8 houses on that previously uninhabited spaces. I'm assuming this is typical for rural America. Deer love it, and there's constant herds of them in my front yard (no dogs here), but the coyotes, wolves and big cats stay away.

Bows, bullets, starvation and vehicles are the only thing that kill deer any more (at least in Southern Oregon).

Re:Just like a real deer.

[dididothat]

i agree with Shakrai.as a farmer / rancher in central texas i know all too well what it is like to have fences cut, livestock shot, and a bullet hitting my house. poachers are felons, and the "good ole boy" mentality doesn't wash out with me. being a single dad, my daughter and i love our venison, LEGALLY taken, according to state laws. if you think it is cruel, wrong, or sinful to hunt, don't do it (and i will defend your right to feel that way if you do), but if you DO shoot deer.do it LEGALLY! as far as i am concerned, the local game warden (who is also a friend) is MORE than welcome to put a mechanical deer on my road frontage, (and he has), and i as a landowner will gladly prosecute. these poachers are not hungry, they are criminals. texas has a "hunters for the hungry" program that will gladly give hungry folks venison to eat..and texas also has a jail/prison system to place poachers.......if that doesn't make sense to you."here's yer sign."

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you ever complain that it's an unfair advantage to kill cows in slaughterhouses?

If you call it hunting we'd all complain. The comment you reply to is about hunting, not farming.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[meta-monkey]

And they could certainly do that. The problem these decoys are meant to solve is not people killing too many deer, but killing deer in the wrong places, like on the sides of roads or near homes and businesses.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[0xdeadbeef]

You think it's better for all deer to starve rather than some deer to be hunted by humans?

Yes, because the selection pressure is beneficial. Humans, unlike other animals, prefer to kill the most fit.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[indigozeal]

(hint: diary cows don't look anything like deer yet they are routinely shot...)

See, in Montana, to prevent this problem, we spray-paint "COW" on the side of the animal in big orange letters.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[khallow]

If you're going to kill your meat to eat it, what difference does it make whether you shot it while it was paralysed or not? Do you ever complain that it's an unfair advantage to kill cows in slaughterhouses? I assume you would hunt for pleasure, meat, and perhaps reduced cost - if someone just wants the meat and doesn't care about enjoying the hunt, why shouldn't they paralyse the thing? If anything, it'll be less painful for it, since they can probably get a cleaner shot.

How are we "paralyzing" the deer? At least with hunting when done properly, the hunter verifies that the target is a deer. And I gather wounding is infrequent. You don't have to worry about what other wildlife dies when you shoot a deer. It's pretty focused. If say, you used poison, it's likely that most deaths would not be deer.

Remember also, that if there's an easy high tech (or for that matter low tech) way to get deer. there's an easy high tech way to get lots of deer at once. Hunting as currently structured doesn't lend itself to mass production techniques (especially with the restriction that you can't hunt from a road) so there is more control over the rate of culling. You don't have to worry about a few people going in and cleaning out most of the deer in a few days. Compare that to the old bison culls in the 19th Century. Hunters had a team at hand to reload rifles, strip the bison carcasses, and a wagon or train car at hand to move the meat, fur, and other parts directly to US cities. So there was incentive to kill bison as fast as you could pull the trigger.

I personally don't have an issue with how my meat was killed as long as it isn't sufficiently sentient. For example, unless it is necessary, I won't eat mammals from the orders Carnivora (most land mammal carnivores), Cetacea (whales and dolphins), Primates (monkeys and humans), and Octopoda (octopuses). It's a very immature philosophy since I don't fully understand the degree of sentience among species in these orders (particularly in order, octopoda, there are species that I would consider legitimate food). My take is that cows, poultry, and most herd animals fall below this threshhold, hence, are legitimate food. I am aware of the grisly details of how that steak went from a living animal to a piece of protein on my plate.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, except it's illegal to pick up a deer you found along the road and take it (at least in Texas). It doesn't matter if it was wounded or dead when you found it. It's also illegal to saw off the antlers and take them.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

I actually saw this happen on one of those TV COPS shows. They had a foam deer which they put off the road a ways. Most people would just stop and shoot it from their trucks. One guy drove by a couple times then veered off the road and ran it down. So he had to pay the fines PLUS buy the cops a new deer. HA HA

Re:Just like a real deer.

[ZooDog]

I remember reading in college about farmers in upstate NY doing this, only to find their cows shot and the bullet hole centered on the "O" in "COW".

Re:Just like a real deer.

[UbuntuDupe]

"But isn't that actually a bull?"

"Hey, no sense making it any more complicated for the city slickers than necessary."

Re:Just like a real deer.

[afedaken]

Umm... No, no we wouldn't.

First of all, depth charges are regulated munitions that are well beyond the purchasing capability of the average fisherman.

Secondly, a depth charge is overkill for this purpose. Commonly available dynamite will do the job just as well.

Thirdly, It's both inaccurate, and patently offensive to lump all anglers and hunters in with the poacher crowd. Yes, there are people who break the laws, and those folks should be punshed as severely as the law allows.

OTOH, there are legions of legal hunters and anglers in this country, whose purchases of the appropriate licenses, stamps, and permits, are often the primary or sole source of funds provided to the regulatory and enforcement bodies that strive to prevent the very illegal poaching we all find so loathsome.

I, and every other properly licensed resident fisherman in the state of Pennsylvania coughed up the 20 or so dollars for the fishing license. Some of them (not me, I was too busy this year!) paid again for a trout license. The hunters pay even more than we do!

I know that in PA at least, the angling community is often one of the first and most vocal opponents in preserving the quality of the water and fauna associated with our local watersheds. I've done the education and outreach programs. I've been wading through slime, muck, and worse than that in the Schuykill to get population counts, water samples, and sediment specimins. While I'm not a hunter personally, I've met with them, and i've seen the educational programs that they've implemented. Conservation. Gun Safety. Pollution control. Opposition to Eminent Domain. Open Space Preservation. Legal hunting and fishing have done at least as much for the preservation of the environment in this state as the large environmental lobby and interest groups. (No offense ment to you guys at Sierra or the like. Y'all do good work.)

What I'd like to ask the parent poster is, "What have YOU done to keep the wilds clean and wild?" And what gives you the right to assume that the rest of us are patently irresponsible?

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, welcome our new robotic deer overlords with friggin' laser beams attached to their heads.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[bladesjester]

There was a local farmer where I grew up in Ohio that painted "COW" on both sides of his cows in bright letters. Most of the local farmers (my family included when they had a modest herd) insured their cattle, and there were a lot of claims every year.

The best story I've heard locally so far, though, has to be the people who shot, field dressed, and tried to check in a *goat*.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[StikyPad]

I think this is great people that shoot from the side of the road and use spotlights are scum not hunters.

Reminds me of one time when I was 18 or 19.. I was driving through a State Park with my girlfriend in the early evening. We saw a huge herd of deer next to a parking area, so I pulled in so we could get a look at them. The next thing I knew, a Statey came up behind me and "pulled me over" in the parking lot. He then threatened to give me a ticket for spotlighting because my headlights were shining on the deer. I suppose it might be common knowledge among rural dwellers that it's illegal to use your headlights if deer happen to be in the path, but as an out-of-towner just trying to enjoy the sights in the park, I found it pretty ridiculous. I was driving a two-seater, by the way.. not exactly the sort of vehicle you'd try to put a bloody carcass in. Anyway, I appreciate that poaching is illegal (by definition) -- although I have no feelings one way or the other on the subject -- but is it too much to wait until someone actually takes a shot before treating them like a criminal and wasting a half hour of their time? I don't think so, but maybe that's just me.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

That's amusing?!

Re:Just like a real deer.

[GlacierDragon]

lol, yeah, in Colorado some farmers do that or put orange vests on the cows. We had a game warden get his horse shot out from underneath him.

When I worked for the forest service, we had a couple of guys outfitted in brand new hunting gear come into our office looking for a picture of an Elk because they had licenses and didn't know what an Elk actually looked like.

I *wish* I was pulling your leg, but I'm not.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[kd5ujz]

Why use depth charges when dry ice, soda bottles, cinder blocks, and rope work just as well?

Re:Just like a real deer.

[kd5ujz]

Did it look anything like this? NSFW? Not for the weak stomach.
Deer Vs. SUV Gore

If I remember the story right, a vehicle hit this deer, threw it into the air, and it hit an SUV that was following the first vehicle.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[kd5ujz]

I posted this already, but your comment deserved another link.

Deer Vs. SUV gore

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Battleloser]

I don't know what happened in those situations where the deer goes flying through the windshield, but I've been in a car (a pickup, to be precise) twice in my lifetime that has hit a deer, and both times there was a thud, and a jerk as if a bus was stopping, and the deer just toppled over.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[szembek]

Not me, I'll shoot it big, small, whatever walks by me. I do enjoy it more however when a large buck decides to walk by me as opposed to a spike.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[szembek]

NY state has a deer venison donation program in place. I eat the venison I shoot, but this is a great idea. http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/ deer/venison.htm

Re:Just like a real deer.

[szembek]

Spotlighting is perfectly legal (at least in NY state) as long as you don't have a gun in the car. I guess they don't trust you if you have a gun with you.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Grishnakh]

Wolves, cougars, coyotes and the like aren't well loved in populated areas.

Too bad. There's too many humans, and not enough predators. Bring back the predators, and if people hurt them (even in defense of their children), execute the overpopulated humans.

Even though this will obviously never happen, it really galls me how so many people actually claim now that the USA is underpopulated. I for one think we should go back to the days where we lived on lots between 20 and 300 acres like you say.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[Grishnakh]

lol, yeah, in Colorado some farmers do that or put orange vests on the cows. We had a game warden get his horse shot out from underneath him.

I hope he shot back at whoever shot at him.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[GlacierDragon]

I think He was too busy dismounting the collapsing animal, unfortunately.

Re:Just like a real deer.

[wolff000]

Comparing a slaughterhouse to a true hunt is like comparing flying a glider to flying a helicopter. They both invlovle similiar things but are thousands of miles apart on everything else. If you trully paralized not blinded the animal then I say paralize them if at all possible. Being blinded and standing still because of it is not paralyziation it is fear and a natural response for deer and lots of other animals. I would rather have my meat be shot and never know its coming then to have the sh!t scared out of it and then shot. As far as slaughterhouses go they are revolting places that need a drastic update in how they kill, house, and the animals destined for my plate. I get as much meat as possible from local sources that treat thier animals well before being killed. If I could I would hunt all my food that way I know it did not suffer before and it had a nice life of being free before being killed.

In related news, the forthcoming RoboDeer v2.0 ...

[D4C5CE]

...developped in a joint research project by PETA and the DoD, will feature an autonomous targetting and self-defense system that fires back at persistent poachers to hand out harsher punishments than just fines. ;-)

Do the same laws apply?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are robotic deers out of season at the same time of real dear? You can argue you were not shooting an animal, but an inanimate object.

Wouldn't the charge then by just vandalism?

Re:Do the same laws apply?

[aussie_a]

It depends if "intent to kill a real deer out of season" is a crime.

Re:Do the same laws apply?

[WindBourne]

$2000. That would be a felony in most states. All in all, poaching may be cheaper. What needs to happen is that laws need to have the shooter criminal pay to replace the target (including for a 10K one).

Re:Do the same laws apply?

[camelrider]

In Alaska the offence would be the discharge of a firearm within a quarter-mile of a public road. This is obviously related to public safety rather than game management.

Re:Do the same laws apply?

[phoenixwade]

Not if you are on the Kenai, it's not.

It's, quite literally, a federal case if you poach on the Wildlife refuse, or the National Park.

It's not okay if the bear poaches you out of season, either.... And It's a capitol offense for the bear, if caught.

Re:Do the same laws apply?

[jamar0303]

Wildlife refuse

Is this the place where deformed animals are put to rest?

Re:But what about

[The Anarchist Avenge]

Why would you even bother? Most places where this will be used, skins are ridiculously easy to come by... even for Bear or Moose. Deer hunters often give the hides away, and I'm sure that game wardens find enough hides from poached animals to come up with the elk and bear pelts. Have you ever felt a live deer? They're fur is very high quality, and the cost of getting them made from special fabric is probably more expensive than just using the real deal. This way, any game warden just needs to order the body of the model.

entrapment

[dwater]

isn't that entrapment?

Re:entrapment

[Freakstyle571]

No, because you would be shooting them out of season or at the wrong time of day anyway.

Re:entrapment

[JackStrife17]

From Columbia University Press encyclopedia:

entrapment, in law, the instigation of a crime in the attempt to obtain cause for a criminal prosecution. Situations in which a government operative merely provides the occasion for the commission of a criminal act (e.g., when an undercover agent posing as a narcotics dealer is approached by a would-be customer) do not constitute entrapment. Only when the crime was not initially contemplated by the target is entrapment said to occur: thus, for example, an undercover agent may not recruit a previously law-abiding individual into a drug distribution ring in order to prosecute. Many police operations, especially in the areas of drugs and gambling, raise questions of entrapment, which is available as a defense in a trial.

Re:entrapment

[Anonymous Coward]

wrt some charges it does seem like it would be iffy, but for spotlighting or shooting from the road I think it is pretty obvious that the intent was already there to comit that crime and that the officers didn't induce the hunter into anything. In those cases the hunter was actually already comiting a crime, the robotic target just allowed them to catch him in the act.

Re:entrapment

[dwater]

So, I guess it's possible to claim entrapment, since it is not illegal to own, carry, or even fire a gun (or is it?) - surely it's not illegal to shoot fake deer, is it? Couldn't they just claim they knew it was fake - or is that too much of a stretch?

Re:entrapment

[dwater]

fair enough :)

Re:entrapment

[wheelgun]

It is illegal to shoot game from inside a vehicle in most states. It is also usually illegal to shoot from or across a public road. Even if a poacher weaseled out of the deer shoot, he'd still go down for the way he tried to do it. All the stings I've seen on TV were set up next to roads.

Re:entrapment

[BruceCage]

I think you're trying to stretch the intent of entrapment as a legal defense a little too far there yes, you must be a lawyer? All they do is place a mechanical deer on the side of the road, step back and wait.

IANAL, but I assume discharging a firearm is illegal when doing so outside of the official hunting season. For example (after some Googling) here is a snippet out of Chapter 166 -- Offenses Against Public Order; Firearms and Other Weapons; Racketeering of the Oregon Revised Statutes:

166.220 Unlawful use of weapon. (1) A person commits the crime of unlawful use of a weapon if the person:
(b) Intentionally discharges a firearm, blowgun, bow and arrow, crossbow or explosive device within the city limits of any city or within residential areas within urban growth boundaries at or in the direction of any person, building, structure or vehicle within the range of the weapon without having legal authority for such discharge.

And another quick Google turns up the following:
Hunters Beware - Robo-Deer is Watching! "The man was charged with shooting from a public highway, and shooting within 500 feet of a house."
B.C. natives win night-hunting case "They were charged with hunting with a firearm during prohibited hours, hunting with the aid of a light and hunting without reasonable consideration of danger to others." (it's Canada and they eventually got off, but that was for a different reason not entrapment or anything, another article on this case)

Re:entrapment

[Loligo]

There's nothing illegal about firing a gun outside of hunting season, provided you don't do it "within the city limits of any city or within residential areas within urban growth boundaries at or in the direction of any person, building, structure or vehicle within the range of the weapon without having legal authority for such discharge" (from your cite).

I can drive less than four miles from home and shoot whenever I like without breaking any laws, any time of year, day or night.

The law you're referring to makes it illegal to fire a gun within city limits without proper legal cause (ie: self defense). Nothing in that law applies outside of developed areas, and there are exemptions available for places like gun ranges.

  -l

Re:entrapment

[dwater]

Fair enough, I guess.

Re:entrapment

[edwardpickman]

Only if the deer comes on to the hunter. If you see a deer in hotpants and high heels standing on a corner don't shoot it.

Re:entrapment

[dwater]

Yes, I'm a SCO lawyer actually. ..but seriously, what you say all seems fair enough....but I can't help wonder what the point is in being allowed to carry a fire arm, if you're not allowed to use it at certain times of the year (for personal protection/defence/whatever)....

No, I'm not American, and don't really get this whole 'gun thing'.

Max.

Re:entrapment

[sirstar]

Actually, no, this is not entrapment (in most states). This will most time lead to a search warrant for that person(s) (if need be) that will (almost always) lead to more evidence against the poacher (meat, skins, etc) found in their homes/cabins.
This has been used in my area (PA) and works very well for catching the poachers. And, no, they don't learn.... I've heard many stories from the game wardens here about the poachers chasing the 'robot' turkey around the field trying to catch it after they shot it... amongst all of the foam flying around the field (parts that were shot off the 'turkey'). I'm guessing they knew they were busted, but wanted to try and hide the evidence.

Re:entrapment

[Anonymous Coward]

surely it's not illegal to shoot fake deer, is it?

Um, it may be legal to shoot at other people's property where you come from...

Re:entrapment

[Dachannien]

Or maybe they were excited to get a turkey that came pre-stuffed ;)

Re:entrapment

[CETS]

Or even as popular, the infamous road hunt. This is where a the maniacs shoot either from their vehicle or from right next to the road. In WI it's illegal to shoot within 50' from the center line of the road.

Re:entrapment

[Provocateur]

But these are poachers. So it's irony, not entrapment.
 

Re:entrapment

[rabbit994]

He didn't post the entire law. Most laws that forbid shooting within structures or road or whatever generally have exception clause. From my local county, they forbid shooting within 100 feet on any structure, public road or on someone property without express permission of the owner. However, they spell out the following exceptions to the rules:

(1) The discharge of guns on any target, trap or skeet range or hunting preserve lawfully existing upon the date of adoption of this article or hereafter established in compliance with all other provisions of this Code or other county ordinances or state law;
(2) The discharge of guns on any target or rifle established and operated by the police or law enforcement department;
(3) The discharge of guns in a private basement or cellar target range;
(4) The discharge of guns in defense of one's life or to kill any dangerous or destructive wild animal;
(5) The discharge of guns by any duly authorized peace officer or law enforcement official acting in the proper performance of his duties;
(6) The discharge of blank cartridges in theatrical performances, sporting events, or the firing of salutes at military funerals or other military affairs;
(7) The discharge of legal firearms while hunting fowl, in the Potomac River or any tributary stream thereof; provided that in the Dumfries/Triangle prohibited area no such discharge shall be permitted in that portion of Quantico Creek which is included within the prohibited area;
(8) The discharge of firearms by the owner, or any member of his immediate family, or any permittee of the owner, on one or more contiguous tracts of land, located within the prohibited area, having total area of five acres or more; and
(9) The discharge of firearms for the killing of deer pursuant to Code of Virginia, 29-529, provided that the discharge occurs on a parcel of land that is at least five acres in area, and which is zoned for agricultural use.

Most laws regarding firearms allow you to fire in self defense.

Gun thing is uniquely American I agree and people own weapons for different reasons. I for self defense and because they are fun to shoot safely.

Re:entrapment

[BruceCage]

It says "or in the direction of any person, building, structure or vehicle within the range of the weapon without having legal authority for such discharge" doesn't it? And in this case the mechanical deer is a structure is it not (depends on how they define structure but I would say so)?

Re:entrapment

[morpheus343]

Keep in mind that the use of decoys like that is very much context sensitive. They're rarely deployed in any significant way outside of hunting season or in areas that don't see much hunting in general. They're mostly used right around hunting season on roads that lead to or are near hunting areas and they're targetted pretty much exclusively at hunters who break the hunting rules. Rules like not shooting from inside a vehicle, not shooting from or near roads etc... are generally aimed at protecting the general public, not at protecting dear. They don't affect people who go hunting and follow the simple safety rules that go with getting a license, they're really only intended to catch people who endanger the public by attempting to poach (generally from public roads).

Re:entrapment

[AK Marc]

So, I guess it's possible to claim entrapment, since it is not illegal to own, carry, or even fire a gun (or is it?) - surely it's not illegal to shoot fake deer, is it?

The cops didn't try to get anyone to commit a crime. They set up a situation that may occur regularly and caught only people that would have broken the law had they come across it naturally. It is no more entrapment than putting a TV in your house "causes" someone to break in and steal it.

I looked up the hunting laws, and "poaching" is defined as hunting without proper permission. Since firing a rifle in the general direction of a furry-ish creature is a hunting activity, the fact it was fake wouldn't matter. Well, unless they claimed they knew it was fake, in which case they were intentionally destroying public property with a firearm, and that may be a worse charge.

Re:entrapment

[Sloppy]

isn't that entrapment?

Yes, if they put a "shoot me" sign on the robodeer's back.

Re:entrapment

[Loligo]

>No, I'm not American, and don't really get this whole 'gun thing'.

Funny, I AM an American, and I don't really get people who dismiss it as "this whole 'gun thing'"...

I'm a hunter, recreational shooter, and collector. My gun collection is, to me, no different than, say, your CD or DVD collection, except that mine can be used to feed my family or protect their lives.

  -l

Re:entrapment

[scottv67]

In WI it's illegal to shoot within 50' from the center line of the road.

I was waiting for a fellow Cheesehead to chime in. In addition to the illegailty of discharging a firearm within 50 feet of the centerline, is it not also illegal to have a loaded firearm within 50 feet of the centerline (meaning you don't have to shoot, just having a loaded rifle on the shoulder of the highway is enough for the game warden to stop by)?

I always make sure my rifle is unloaded before I walk back to the pickup (which is parked near a highway). I don't want to have a sneaky game warden say "Boy, I just watched you walk up to that truck with that loaded rifle." and receive a fine.

Does anyone here know if just having a loaded weapon within 50 feet of the centerline against the law (in WI)?

Re:entrapment

[Xaria]

Or hurt someone else (not that I'm suggesting you would). Guns are dangerous. With the obvious exception of rural situations, why would you need a gun to protect your family unless the other person *also* had a gun? If *no one* had a gun, then less people would get shot.

Re:entrapment

[Loligo]

None of my guns have ever hurt another person. They are as harmless to you in my hands as the aforementioned CD and DVD collections.

When you figure out how to get the guns away from the criminals, you let me know. Until then, I'll keep mine, and know that should the worst happen, I'll be prepared. You can throw your boxed set of Red Dwarf season 2 at the bad guys and hope they're fans.

  -l

Re:entrapment

[dwater]

'Offtopic'???

It's just as on topic as the parent, and I've added some humour too.

Me thinks some people have no sense of humour! ...or should that be 'sense-of-humour-impaired'?

Re:entrapment

[phlinn]

Because you're a 52 year old man who's been assaulted by a 25 year old schizophenic who specifically threatened to kill you before attacking? Basically, it takes minimal training and physical fitness to defend yourself with a gun compared to a knife, blunt object, etc. Guns allow the otherwise defenseless to protect themselves when there isn't time for any other option.

Obligatory: In Soviet Russia...

[TravisW]

...deer hunt you!

Re:But what about

[Yold]

Actually Deer hides are relatively valuable, and the butcher will usually sell them. My buddy gets $5-$10 per hide ontop of his butchering charge. Quite nice for deer-skin gloves (typically made in China). As an experienced Northern hunter, I don't know why you think that Bear and Moose hides are easy to come by. They are typically the most regulated game in terms of getting a permit. You may have to wait 5 years to get a Moose permit in some parts of the country, and rifle Bear permits are also granted via a lottery system in Wisconsin and Minnesota.

But to answer your question "why would you even bother?". Well, as a deer-hunter in an area where these 'robots' have been in use for years already, it is often a matter of hunter's safety. The DNR/Conservation Officer will put a decoy in a position where it will be shot at from the road. It is illegal to hunt within 50 yards of a public road's median. Quite a hefty fine. Also, if a hunter is willing to break that regulation, who knows what other rules they are breaking.

Useless in other coutries

[foobang]

At least here in France it would not work.
In many cases (methinks this one included) French law states that pushing someone to commit an offence is a bigger offence than the original one.
A hounter could argue that he was provoqued and the fine would be probabely dropped.
What other countries have similar laws ?

Additionally a hounter could claim that he was aware of the trick an thus not guilty of shooting an animal but just damaging an artefact.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[rolfwind]

Screw that, I'd consider suing the warden or the state for reckless endangerment if they put it on the side of the road.

What a great idea! Goading hunters to shoot at a target just a few feet/meters of the road where cars pass.

Ironically enough, one of the fine they (hunter) would incur would be shooting too close to the road. The wardens here are little better than the shooters IMO.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[dfenstrate]

It's called entrapment, and it's illegal here in the united states, or at least is a valid defense against a 'guilty' verdict.

Like you said, goading or pushing someone into committing a crime they would otherwise not is unlawful.

What is perfectly lawful is presenting them with an opportunity to commit a crime, and then punishing them for it. There is a significant difference.

Further, 'knowing' that a deer was fake would not permit you to shoot it, as you're still discharging your firearm near/on a road.

You could maybe get away with attacking it if you got out of your vehicle and bum rushed it.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[nacturation]

In many cases (methinks this one included) French law states that pushing someone to commit an offence is a bigger offence than the original one.
A hounter could argue that he was provoqued and the fine would be probabely dropped. The game wardens aren't going up to hunters and saying "Hey, I'll give you $50 if you shoot that deer over there." That would be entrapment. Since we all love analogies, it's like putting a realistic looking person on a park bench at night. If someone comes up to that "person" and repeatedly stabs them over and over just because they saw it and had the urge, that's not entrapment... that's the murderous tendencies of a criminal coming to light and that person should find their ass in jail sooner rather than later.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[Anonymous Coward]

A hounter could argue that he was provoqued and the fine would be probabely dropped. Yes, and someone with light clothing could have provoked her rape ? Don't be silly. When you're playing with a gun, you are the one responsible. If you can't keep cool, then you should try another hobby. Stupidity is no excuse when playing with firearms.
The french law you're talking about is to stop the police from paying/forcing you to do something against the law, and then frame you for that.
With the robotic deer, no one paid you to shoot it, no one forced you to shoot it. It is just there.
Of course, if you saw the deer, did not shoot it, and then some policeman went to you telling you you can do it, you would be right, and protected by the law. But this is not the case here.
Again, if you're somewhere where deer hunting is not allowed, and seeing a deer is enough to provoke you, then you should stop playing with guns and seek mental help. No sane judge will agree with someone unable to keep his gun in the holster.

Additionally a hounter could claim that he was aware of the trick an thus not guilty of shooting an animal but just damaging an artefact. Yeah, try that...
Then there is a full set of laws that would befall on your head because you're destroying the state's property, knowingly.
People already tried that with the Radars that appeared in french highways, and AFAIK, the Radars are still there, doing money over people who do not know how to drive a car within legal limitations.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[Charcharodon]

They also use the fake deer to fine people that hunt from cars. It was funny one story my uncle told me, he's was a warden and they've been using fake deer for decades to fine rule breakers.

They had the fake deer out on the edge of the trees near the road, it didn't have all the motion stuff just a stuffed dear. An old guy in a pick-up truck saw it, pulled over, put on his hunting vest(orange safety) got out of the truck, got his rifle, moved the minimum distance from the road and vehicle, and proceeded to take a bead on it. He shot it and was surprised that it didn't fall down or run away, before he could take a second shot all the rangers busted out laughing and then he realized what was up.

They didn't fine the old man because he did everything he was supposed and had a license to hunt the deer, they just wanted to see if he could figure out whether or not he'd fall for a completely still fake deer (This was some 30 years ago.).

Re:Useless in other coutries

[nospam007]

At least here in France it would not work.
In many cases (methinks this one included) French law states that pushing someone to commit an offence is a bigger offence than the original one.
---
Yeah, all those banks showing off their wealth, they _made_ me rob the bank, your honor.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[MrNougat]

IANAL

In the first part, provoking someone to break the law, in the US it is also illegal to entice someone to break the law, provided they wouldn't have broken said law under normal circumstances. So - going up to a random house and offering to sell them a bag of weed, then arresting them when they buy it - that's illegal. Going up to a specific house, one where drug activity has been reported and observed, offering to sell them a bag of weed, then arresting them when they buy it - that's legal.

This is an interesting situation, considering that the offenders caught would be random people, not specific people. However, hunting laws and seasons are strict enough, well-publicized and well-known. Hunters know which deer are okay to shoot and which are not, as well as when and where.

The last part, about the hunter claiming he/she knew it was a decoy - in that case they might get out of the poaching charge, but would be liable for a property damage charge. I'd imagine that there's a special statute covering intentional property damage of state-owned wildlife decoys which would make the fine for that offense the same as (or more than) the fine for poaching.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[djh101010]

What a great idea! Goading hunters to shoot at a target just a few feet/meters of the road where cars pass.

You seem to miss the entire point. This isn't about hunters, it's about poachers. Poachers are people who illegally kill animals, either in the wrong place, at the wrong time of year, the wrong sex, or without having paid their license fee to do so. A hunter doesn't just drive along and suddenly decide "Oh, I think today I shall break the law, since there is a deer standing right over there." The only people shooting at these robodeer, are the people who aren't following the laws. I am having a hard time understanding why so many people in this thread are seeming to confuse hunting with poaching, this isn't a subtle distinction. Hunters follow laws and manage the deer population in the proportions determined by people who know what, where, and how many deer should be removed from the population. Poachers, don't give a shit about the laws or management, they just want free meat without paying their fair share, and without regard for the laws.

If you get the impression that hunters get annoyed at being associated with poachers, then you're perceptive. Two different groups of people.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[Popsmear]

I tried this same defense. Someone put a 7-Year old girl on the side of the road. I stopped, picked her up, drove across state lines, and raped her. They tried to tell me I was responsible. Hah. I let them know it was entrapment. I was provoked into committing that crime.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[nomadic]

Screw that, I'd consider suing the warden or the state for reckless endangerment if they put it on the side of the road.

You might be able to--if it actually resulted in you getting shot. You can't sue people because you might have been injured.

What a great idea! Goading hunters to shoot at a target just a few feet/meters of the road where cars pass.

I don't see the "goading".

Re:Useless in other coutries

[Hork_Monkey]

Kind of off topic, but my wife did sit on a jury for a few weeks on a lawsuit that was based off of "fear of harm".

They walked off with a nice chunk of change.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[nomadic]

In order to have a legitimate cause of action for a civil tort you need some sort of injury; sounds like her jury heard either some kind of emotional distress case, which can qualify as an injury, or an assault case, where the "threat of imminent harm" counts as an injury, legally speaking.

But if someone sees the fake deer and decides that it's reckless to put it on the side of the road (even if it is), but doesn't really suffer some sort of personal injury because of it, they can't sue.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[ubuwalker31]

IANAFL - I am not a French Lawyer - but your rationale is misguided. General pricipals of justice are fairly consistant from one country to another. There is no "pushing" in this case. They put a deer at the side of the road where it is unlawful to hunt. Then someone shoots a rifle, from their car, which is also unlawful. Then they are arrested. So, they are guilty of firing a firearm from a vehicle and hunting without a licence.

You do have a point though that they could not be charged with an actual "poaching" charge, since they did kill an animal. However, they could be found guilty of "attempting to poach" the animal. Just because a person is mistaken as to the fact that the animal was not alive, does not make the crime of "attempting to poach" disappear. Similarly, you could be found guilty of "attempted murder" if you stab a dead body, believing that person to be alive.

Also, note that under French law, a judge could admit evidence unlawfully obtained by entrapment, at least according to some reading I did online. Americans take a suspicious view of such evidence, but Europeans generally do not.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[Anonymous Coward]

IANAL but I think in the US it's only illegal to encourage someone to break the law and then arrest them for it not to create a situation that is conducive to breaking the law. A cop can sell drugs to someone who was going to buy them anyway but can't go around trying to convince people to buy drugs. and then arrest them. It's very much a gray area in the USA.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[zcubed]

Additionally a hounter could claim that he was aware of the trick an thus not guilty of shooting an animal but just damaging an artefact.

It is illegal to shoot a weapon from the vehicle or to shoot at anything within 200 feet of a roadway. Where do you think they put the robo-deer, near the road. There goes that defense.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[Anonymous Coward]

So the next time I see a real deer some place I can't shoot it, I should have it arrested for entrapment?

Re:Useless in other coutries

[Jeremi]

A hounter could argue that he was provoqued and the fine would be probabely dropped.

What, because the mere sight of a deer drives people into such a state of lustful desire that they can't control themselves?

"Yer honor, the deer was asking for it! His lips said no, but his antlers were saying yes, yes, yes!"

Re:Useless in other coutries

[AK Marc]

In many cases (methinks this one included) French law states that pushing someone to commit an offence is a bigger offence than the original one.

Methinks this one is not included. A deer just existing is causing someone to shoot it? Hardly. If a cop called me up and said, "lets go deer poaching," that would be pushing me to commit the offense. Just having a deer exist isn't pushing anyone to do anything. If you think it does, then having a TV in your house means you are pushing robbers to come take it, so everyone with a TV is breaking a law that is a bigger offense than robbery.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[isomeme]

I've always wondered why such charges aren't trivially dismissed on the grounds that the hunter shot a robot, not a deer. It's like when someone gets busted for propositioning a teenager online who turns out to have been a cop; why isn't a valid defense "Show me the teenager I'm accused of propositioning"? The whole thing makes no sense to me.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[ppanon]

Intent. Look it up.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[Mister Transistor]

Not only that, it had a nice rack... (bah-dump)

Thank you, you're too kind. I'll be here all week - try the venison!

Re:Useless in other coutries

[scottv67]

Screw that, I'd consider suing the warden or the state for reckless endangerment if they put it on the side of the road.

No, Silly Rabbit, the game warden doesn't put the deer at the *side* of the road. They put the deer some distance *off* the road but close enough to the road that people driving by can still see it. Let's say that distance is 150 feet from the centerline of the highway. A poacher driving by sees the robodeer, pulls his pickup over on the shoulder, loads his weapon and takes a shot at the robodeer. The poacher is still on or very close to the highway but is shooting *away from* the highway.

The game wardens aren't placing the robodeer right next to the highway and attempting to catch poachers who are in the woods near the highway (which would involve shooting *toward* the road). The game wardens are placing the robodeer some distance away from the road and attempting to catch poachers who are driving past.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[scottv67]

I've always wondered why such charges aren't trivially dismissed on the grounds that the hunter shot a robot, not a deer.

Because it's ooooo-so-illegal to shoot at a deer when you are within 50 feet of the centerline of a highway.
See top of page 12:
http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/wildlife/regs/ Deer06regs2-14.pdf

It's not the "shooting at the robodeer" that gets you, it's the "discharging a firearm out the passenger window of your buddy Billy Ray's pickup after he pulled over on the shoulder". Regardless of whether or not you thought the robodeer was real, it's hard to explain your way out of shooting from a vehicle that is on a public road.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[Anonymous Coward]

Your parent post seems to understand that. I think they are just scared where the robot is planted is inherently dangerous to others (drivers), regardless whether it is a poacher that does the actual shooting.

I share the concern, I couldn't care less about the poachers themselves.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[djh101010]

Your parent post seems to understand that. I think they are just scared where the robot is planted is inherently dangerous to others (drivers), regardless whether it is a poacher that does the actual shooting.

I fear that you, also, have missed my point. This isn't causing anyone to engage in unsafe behaviour that they don't already engage in, this is a way to catch them doing it. And when you're planting a robodeer, you can decide where physically to put it to minimize the risk, I'd imagine that the DNR folks, not being stupid, take that into consideration. It's a net positive no matter how you look at it.

Re:Useless in other coutries

[Slashdot Parent]

Actually, putting the decoys by the side of the road is the whole point. They want to catch people "road hunting", which is extremely dangerous and also illegal with or without a hunting permit.

The more road hunters they can nail, the better.

Like a deer in the headlights

[leaping_leopards]

When will this make it into a episode of Cowboy BeBop? ---and the Masters of Horror all wrapped up in one. Now, people make jokes about hunting things down, they think of Bambi, his mama, and all the trees burning down in a "un"controlled fire. They seem to misunderstand that the rhythm of nature is a slightly different thing then what is society here least in the capitolistic land of New England, she begs for a better balance and tighter control on states of being.

Re:Like a deer in the headlights

[Jeremi]

They seem to misunderstand that the rhythm of nature is a slightly different thing then what is society here least in the capitolistic land of New England, she begs for a better balance and tighter control on states of being.

Hmm, so which is it, letting the "rhythm of nature" take care of itself, or having humans manage nature the way they see fit? You seem to be arguing for both ways at once.

Personally, I think if nature is 'begging' for anything, it's to be left alone.

Re:But what about

[kfg]

Have you ever felt a live deer?

Yes. I also "just happen" to have some dead ones right at hand (No, I'm not just a weirdo; I'm a weirdo who ties his own trout flies).

They're fur is very high quality

If by "high quality fur" you mean thick, course, stiff and hollow hair, then yes, you're right. These properties make it an excellent insulator, and it floats, but it isn't what most people are looking for in fur; which would be something more along the lines of thin, flexible, shiney and silky smooth to the touch; like weasel (only be sure to call it something else for marketing reasons).

But you're right, these are the properties generally made in fake furs; which don't in the least resemble deer hair. I presume, however, most jackers operate at night; since a)that's when the deer are out and about and b)it makes the whole light in the eyes thing work a lot better.

KFG

ElkS?

[nekojin]

I think the subject says it all. But I'll repeat it here for those who missed it. 'ElkS'?

Re:ElkS?

[kfg]

I'll repeat it here for those who missed it. 'ElkS'?

Well, they're not necessarily my favorite people in the world, but I think someone intent on taking pot shots at a lodge deserves getting into a bit of trouble over it.

KFG

Re:ElkS?

[Bloke down the pub]

LOL, Like everybody knows the correct plural is "elken".

Re:But what about

[The Anarchist Avenge]

I think you misunderstood my post. When I said "why would you even bother?", I was referring to using artificial hide instead of natural. I admit that I was making an assumption about the prevalence of bear/moose pelts, but I'm acting under the assumption that the pelt doesn't have to come from an animal that was hunted, it could just as easily come from an animal that died of natural causes. I don't know where you have hunting experience, but I live in southern Minnesota, and in my particular area, hunters will often leave deer hide lying where they butcher the whitetail. I don't enjoy anything more than coming home to find that my golden retriever has dragged a deer hide back to the house to share with my family.

No deer involved

[piggydoggy]

The people who shoot them aren't actually shooting deer. They are shooting a robot. So how come those people charged for poaching, instead of just vandalism?

Re:No deer involved

[Anonymous Coward]

When people buy 'drugs' from an undercover police officer (in reality fake decoy drugs) they are still charged with possession of controlled substances. Likewise it is illegal to *sell* fake drugs (trying to pass off powdered sugar as cocaine, for instance) and you'll get arrested and charged for it.

Re:No deer involved

[Shadow of Eternity]

Heres the real question, if they see the robotic deer appears to be grieviously injured could they say they were attempting to put down a mortally wounded animal?

Re:No deer involved

[Oh the Huge Manatee]

The penalties for gun-based vandalism vary by jurisdiction, but are invariably harsher than the penalties for hunting. If you are arrested for shooting a gun in the course of committing vandalism, you'll be grateful to accept the lesser charge and lesser penalty that goes with illegal hunting.

Re:No deer involved

[aussie_a]

Is the charge just as high? if so that's completely screwed up.

Re:No deer involved

[biggomez777]

They are problably being charged with "attempted poaching" as they haven't actually poached anything, just tried. It's assumed that a hunter wouldn't waste a bullet on a fake deer, or if he did, I imagine there are conservation agents(as they're called around here) watching you for your behavior. A reaction of "wooo! I got him!" is different from "I'm gunna shoot me one of them fake deers!" Yes, I live in a redneck area.

Re:No deer involved

[pembo13]

Because they thought they were, and intended to shoot a real dear.

Re:No deer involved

[Wyrmy]

I am just waiting for the conspiracy nuts to claim that the robotic deer mind control innocents individuals to shoot at them.

Re:No deer involved

[KingNaught]

Makes yah wonder about all those dateline stings. If the guy wasn't talking to a real 13 year old then how is he being charged for a crime. I'm no law expert but apperently it all has to do with intent. If you intended to kill a real dear out of season then your busted.

Re:No deer involved

[Rob the Bold]

Because they thought they were, and intended to shoot a real dear.

I'll leave that to you to prove. Or will I ? . . . You tell me what I'm thinking.

Re:No deer involved

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe that's true where you're at, but in Texas poaching laws are quite severe. You regularly here of people doing 10 years in prison for poaching offenses. I doubt shooting a not-obvious robot on the side of the road brings so much punishment under any sort of applicable law.

Re:No deer involved

[nomadic]

I'll leave that to you to prove. Or will I ? . . . You tell me what I'm thinking.

"Ladies and gentleman of the jury. On that cold morning of Dec. 26, Defendant put on his reflective hunting vest, grabbed his shotgun, and headed out. He sees what appears to be a deer; the very deer that we showed you in this trial. Lifelike, wasn't it? Now he's here, insulting your intelligence and mine, by claiming that he in fact knew it was a fake deer, but shot it anyway. He seems to be under the delusion that because we can't read his mind, there's no way to disprove this. But what his intent was is a question of fact, something that which it is YOUR duty, ladies and gentleman, to decide. You can base your decision on his actions, and what a reasonable person would believe in his situation."

Re:No deer involved

[Rob the Bold]

You can base your decision on his actions . . .

And his actions were to shoot a fake deer.

Re:No deer involved

[nomadic]

And if the jury decides that he thought it was real, they can convict him of the crime of attempt.

Re:No deer involved

[AK Marc]

What does the fake have to do with it? Are you claiming that you are not poaching if the deer is fake, or are you claiming that you knew it was fake so you weren't poaching?

It is illegal to "hunt" out of season, at night, without a permit, and from a road (all separate crimes, so you could get charged with multiple crimes). Poaching is "hunting" improperly. I have seen no requirement in hunting that an animal be killed. Firing a rifle towards a deer-like object (even if it isn't a deer, and even if you miss) is poaching, if you are not properly licensed/permitted in my jurisdiction.

So I ask again, would you claim in open court to be committing purposeful destruction of state property with a firearm, or are you claiming that you were in fact poaching, but so stupid that you were poaching by shooting at a fake deer? Either admission is a crime, and you are making claims, so please clarify which crime you have confessed to.

Re:No deer involved

[Overzeetop]

No wonder Texas has so many people in prison...

Actually, felony destruction of property, and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony are both potentially serious crimes in many states. No idea what they are in TX - only been there a combined month in my entire life. You might even be able to cobble together 10 years with multiple overlapping penalties for varios firearm related infractions in some states.

Re:No deer involved

[jafiwam]

In WI all of the following are illegal:

- transport loaded firearm in vehicle while in reach of driver (trunk is OK, but not a good idea)
- firing firearm from inside vehicle (unless operating under handicapped hunting license)
- discharging firearm within 100 feet of a road
- discharging firearm where road is crossed by bullet
- hunting while after dark
- shining deer with intent to hunt
- baiting deer with intent to hunt
- discharging firearm or unsafe hunting without being sure of what is behind target
- unlawful taking of any game without specific license (yes, illegal to pick up roadkill without a permit. you can get them if you hit a deer and call the sheriff to come fill out some form you can take it home)

There's more.

The poachers were certainly doing some of the above, so fake deer or real deer or whatever they're still busted.

The fact that the thing is mechanical is the only new part. The DNR has been putting those out (other types of animals too) for _years_ and busting the dumbass hicks that fall for it.

Re:No deer involved

[scottv67]

So how come those people charged for poaching, instead of just vandalism?

The "poachers" nearly always charged with discharging a firearm within 50 feet of the centerline of a highway. Every responsible hunter knows that you don't hunt near public roads. See top of page 12:

So how come those people charged for poaching, instead of just vandalism?

Re:No deer involved

[scottv67]

- discharging firearm within 100 feet of a road

Isn't it "within 50 feet of the centerline"? See top of page 12:
http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/wildlife/regs/ Deer06regs2-14.pdf

Re:No deer involved

[scottv67]

Here is the link I forgot to include in my previous post:
http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/wildlife/regs/ Deer06regs2-14.pdf

Re:No deer involved

[Grishnakh]

What you're missing here is that "Rob the Bold" misnamed himself. He should have called himself "Rob the Troll".

Anyone who actually believes criminals should only be convicted if they succeed in their crime is an idiot. Otherwise, all attempted murderers would go free.

Re:But what about

[mjwx]

Good Sir,

Based upon your recommendations I wish to place an order for 50 Tonnes of weasel fur.

How quickly can fill this order?

aibo deer at home

[Anonymous Coward]

What if you just stop and take the obviously abandonned robot deer with you ?
Plus, it's probably not recyclable, so you take some rubish out of the nature :)

Re:But what about

[kfg]

Well, I like to obtain my weasel by scraping it off the road, so it takes me awhile to fill bulk orders, but these fine people might be able to help you out:

http://kaufmanfurs.net/gallery/index.php?cat=2

KFG

Re:But what about

[The Anarchist Avenge]

'Scuze me for that, I personally consider deer hide to be of a much higher quality than weasel, due to its relative durability. I think you'd be surprised at how bold some poachers are, especially in sparsely populated areas. Anyway, as I said in another post, many hunters discard deer hides, an effectively free source of fur.

Re:But what about

[nacturation]

Actually Deer hides are relatively valuable, and the butcher will usually sell them. My buddy gets $5-$10 per hide ontop of his butchering charge. Am I misunderstanding you, or did you just make the point that five to ten bucks per hide is considered relatively valuable? That's the cost of a couple lattés.

Re:But what about

[kfg]

'Scuze me for that, I personally consider deer hide to be of a much higher quality than weasel, due to its relative durability.

I agree, but hide is not hair.

I think you'd be surprised at how bold some poachers are, especially in sparsely populated areas.

My cousin was killed in his own suburban backyard by deer poachers.

KFG

Re:But what about

[The Anarchist Avenge]

Considering that it's only a few more pounds and the cost of transporting it back to a truck and from there to a deer station is probably very small(assuming that you've got several people in your party), it's almost all profit.

Afterword:

[kfg]

You're certainly right that hides can be obtained for free, in limited quantities and with a bit of asking around, but it does take a certain amount of time and work to do so. Not something you could base a commercial sales operation on.

The fake stuff is made out of polyester by the mile and costs less than the labor of tracking down free/cheap real stuff (I bother because I actually need the properities of the real stuff). You can order it in bulk as needed.

It also doesn't smell bad if it gets a bit wet. The stuff you get for free from the hunters isn't tanned. On the other hand you can eat it. I don't recommend doing that with your bathroom rug.

KFG

Re:Afterword:

[The Anarchist Avenge]

In the article, it mentions that the furs are donated and sold by wildlife companies. So obviously, they're making it work. I'm assuming that they *are*, by that point, tanned, since it mentions that they receive them from around America and up into Canada. If a warden station is going to be spending over 1k on a robotic deer, it makes sense to put in the extra $10 it would take to make the robot look even more realistic.

Re:Afterword:

[kfg]

At this point I must invoke Date's Priciple.

KFG

Obligatory Dr. Evil quote

[orzetto]

All I asked for was sharks with frikin' laser beams attached to their heads! Deers? Oh, that's a start.

Re:But what about

[The Anarchist Avenge]

I agree, but hide is not hair. I think you're quibbling over hairs here(no pun intended). It's not unreasonable for me to assume that you would realize that I was referring to both the skin and the hair of the deer when saying "hide". The English language isn't always literal you know. As for your cousin, I'd consider the people who killed him to be something more than "poachers"... perhaps "murderers" would be a better word if he were killed consciously. That is, of course, assuming that he wasn't killed due to an accident. You're wording, specifically how you replied to my statement about the boldness of poachers, implies that it was not accidental. In any event, I'm sorry that you experienced such a loss, firearm deaths during hunting season are something that loom over my family during the hunting season.

Re:But what about

[nacturation]

Considering that it's only a few more pounds and the cost of transporting it back to a truck and from there to a deer station is probably very small(assuming that you've got several people in your party), it's almost all profit. Selling lattés is almost all profit as well, but with the bonus that you don't have to kill anything.

Robo-this, robo-that

[Conanymous Award]

What's up with all these robotic animal stories recently? Within a couple of days, we've had stories of robo-seals, robo-snakes and now robo-deer. Should I welcome our new robotic animal overlords? Was that Dr. Eggman I just saw?

Re:Robo-this, robo-that

[AndroidCat]

Have we had RoboSnakes on a plane yet?

Cool

[Anonymous Coward]

but does it run linux?

Re:Cool

[etnoy]

No, but NetBSD!

Re:But what about

[kfg]

.. perhaps "murderers" would be a better word if he were killed consciously.

Discharging a firearm inside city limits and involuntary manslaughter. They're probably out on parole by now.

He left a widow behind. They'd been married nearly days.

KFG

Poachers are in the clear...

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

... so long as they yell "it's coming right for us!" before shooting.

Re:Poachers are in the clear...

[Anonymous Coward]

Or are senior OCP employees.

Re:Poachers are in the clear...

[FusionDragon2099]

No, that doesn't work anymore. Now you have to say you're "thinning out their numbers".

Re:But what about

[The Anarchist Avenge]

but with the bonus that you don't have to kill anything. I'd argue that that isn't a bonus.

Re:But what about

[Anonymous Coward]

Selling lattés is almost all profit as well, but with the bonus that you don't have to kill anything.

But then you have to deal with the wankers who drink lattes. It's just not worth it.

Re:But what about

[The Anarchist Avenge]

So you see what I mean about poachers operating during the day? Realism can be important in decoys.

Re:But what about

[kfg]

So you see what I mean about poachers operating during the day?

No.

KFG

Re:But what about

[The Anarchist Avenge]

This is getting a little sidetracked. I'll sum up by saying that I'd say it's a reasonable assumption that some poachers operate during the day. If these poachers are to be caught, the decoys need to be of high quality. Thus, the best materials to use are those that are as close as possible to the targeted animal.

Re:But what about

[Bloke down the pub]

It seems to me that if you're close enough to see the quality of the covering, you'd be close enough to tell whether it's real or not by other means - unnatural movements, whirring noises...

police as revenue collectors

[timmarhy]

when the state starts using the police as revenue collectors, they are no better then gangsters. tax's are THE only place a government is supposed to make money. buying a device especially to entrap people into paying fines is no better then hitting them for "protection" money. If any hunter had the money to challenge this i'm sure a good lawyer would win it for them.

Re:police as revenue collectors

[Detritus]

The fine is supposed to be a deterrent. Back home, if you get caught poaching deer, they also seize your vehicle. The poacher may laugh off a fine, but losing his fancy new truck is going to hurt.

Re:police as revenue collectors

[Calydor]

HOW is this entrapment? That's the same as saying that having a stand of newspapers on the sidewalk is 'entrapment' for cleptomaniacs. Shooting the deer is illegal; same as speeding is, so are the roadside speed detectors 'entrapment' as well?

Re:police as revenue collectors

[CETS]

Oh cry me a flippin river. The big bad government is at it again. GET A LIFE YOU MORON! Poaching deer is a problem. Unfortunately there are enough of these deer "hunters" out there taking ILLEGAL actions that efforts as such are needed. It is ILLEGAL to shoot a deer out of season and close to a road and depending where you're at and what permits you have, a doe.

These idiots deserve to be fined and have their guns taken away and it's not entrapment (see other threads).

I am a deer hunter that follows the laws, and I have witnessed such stupidity (that's why I avoid public hunting grounds).

Re:police as revenue collectors

[Anonymous Coward]

when the state starts using the police as revenue collectors, they are no better then gangsters

This is correct. The main difference between the mafia and the government is that the mafia has more honor.

if any hunter had the money to challenge this i'm sure a good lawyer would win it for them.

This is incorrect. You've forgotten that the courts are just another part of the government of gangsters. The main function of the courts is to make the people think there's a difference between the government and the mafia. Yes, once in a while the court lets a defendant go free, just like a fisherman will throw back the small fish -- in order to get more, bigger fish in the future.

Oh, and don't put your faith in a jury. The jury is almost irrelevant when it's up to the judge to decide what evidence and legal arguments the jury will or will not hear.

Re:police as revenue collectors

[khallow]

So the government is a protection racket. What else is new? And why do you cast it as being "bad". Remember that even Mafia protection rackets had some legitimate benefit (ie, it reduced regular crimes against the "protected") since property crimes reduced the value of the extortee's property and how much could be extorted from that victim.

Re:police as revenue collectors

[ScentCone]

that's why I avoid public hunting grounds

Public Hunting Grounds = Death Wish

Of course, that's also true of driving on most public roads, but at least I have airbags in my Evil SUV. I don't wear anything, personally, that will stop someone who got his first 30-.06 for Christmas yesterday and thinks it's OK to shoot at a sound in the bushes. Living in the DC area, I can tell you that only the most really-a-PITA-to-get-to public grounds are safe from that class of casual hunter that seems to include both the lazy and the dangerous.

Unless I'm fortunate enough to have been invited to some private property, I don't bother going out unless it's bow season. Even a real jerk will have a harder time accidentally killing you with a bow from 200 yards away. I love venison, but when you have to value it in terms of How Many Times You Risked Your Life Per Pound, it's frustrating, that's for sure.

Re:police as revenue collectors

[ScentCone]

So the government is a protection racket. What else is new?

How is fining someone for discharging a high powered rifle along the shoulder of a public road a "protection racket?"

A protection racket, if you could even dream one up for the circumstances being discussed, would involve something more along the lines of a farmer being told that he's not allowed to shoot a crop-destroying deer on his own property unless he pays a weekly fee to a third party. The protection racket model involves the actless act of "protecting" you from harm that you yourself are threatening to do to someone. As in: give me money, and I'll protect you from the harm I would otherwise do you. It's called a protection racket because the perpetrators operate under the (completely transparent) scam/illusion that it's other people who are the threat, and that they're really going to protect you from those other people.

In short, fining (and sometimes, jailing) poachers and reckless road-shooters isn't anything at all like a protection racket. Whine all you want about The Man, but you're completely tone deaf on this one.

Re:police as revenue collectors

[khallow]

A protection racket, if you could even dream one up for the circumstances being discussed, would involve something more along the lines of a farmer being told that he's not allowed to shoot a crop-destroying deer on his own property unless he pays a weekly fee to a third party. The protection racket model involves the actless act of "protecting" you from harm that you yourself are threatening to do to someone. As in: give me money, and I'll protect you from the harm I would otherwise do you. It's called a protection racket because the perpetrators operate under the (completely transparent) scam/illusion that it's other people who are the threat, and that they're really going to protect you from those other people.

Well, that farmer gets to pay an annual fee to keep their property. They pay an annual fee on their income to keep earning income and stay out of prison. Your last remark is IMHO in error. The perpetrators of an illegal protection racket can't risk admitting it directly. Besides that still doesn't rule out government as a protection racket. Those sorts of rhetorical florishes are routinely employed to justify spending public funds.

In short, fining (and sometimes, jailing) poachers and reckless road-shooters isn't anything at all like a protection racket. Whine all you want about The Man, but you're completely tone deaf on this one.

The economic basis of a protection racket. You pay money to protect yourself and your property to a "protector" with the additional aspect that the "protector" will be the first in line to damage you and your property, if you don't pay. The protection racket usually provides legitimate protection in addition. Fining and jailing poachers is a service provided by government. But you can't chose not to receive it. If I chose not to pay taxes, then government has numerous ways to extract that money by force or just to punish me if I can't pay. Paying taxes protects me and my property from the government. The purchase of services with those tax funds isn't relevant to whether it is a protection racket or not.

Re:police as revenue collectors

[morpheus343]

Do you spend any time outside of the city?

Most regulations governing hunting around roadways are intended to protect people. Just drive out a ways from most cities and take a look at how far back houes/farms can often be fromt the road. These decoys are generally planted where you can see them from the road and they're intended to catch people who stop their vehicle, grab their gun and discharge it in unsafe ways.

It's a quirk of the legal system that it's called poaching because they're attempting to kill and animal in a situation where they have no right to, but really it's responding to the fact that in many areas, shooting from the road can easily mean that you're shooting right at someone's home, or at another road etc... Generally people aren't allowed to hunt anywhere they please and these robo-deer are aimed at stopping people who endanger others through their own stupidity/greed.

Re:police as revenue collectors

[An Onerous Coward]

For the last frakking time, it's not entrapment!

Okay, sorry. I had to get that off my chest.

Police can only "collect revenue" if the law says they can. If there are laws on the books whose primary purpose is to generate revenues for the police force, then they're bad laws. If there are laws being enforced in such a way that they generate high revenue, but little public benefit, then the enforcers need to be reined in. But if the threat of a big fine is keeping people from poaching, or from blowing through a school zone at fifty miles an hour, then that's fine by me.

I have no problem with a police department generating revenue this way. Non-hunters should be fine with it, and honest hunters should be fine with it.

Re:police as revenue collectors

[Grishnakh]

These idiots deserve to be fined and have their guns taken away and it's not entrapment (see other threads).

Screw that. Back in Virginia where I used to live, I'm pretty sure these idiots had not only their guns taken away, but their vehicles too if they shot from their trucks. I'd heard of these morons seeing bear cubs from the road in their shiny new expensive trucks, pulling over, shooting the bear cubs only to hear the sound of a bullet hitting metal, and knowing they had just lost it all.

Re:police as revenue collectors

[Grishnakh]

So you don't think laws apply to you? Or you don't think we should have laws at all?

Hardly news

[barzok]

These "robo-deer" have been out for several years now. I recall one poacher in Michigan getting caught hunting these things not once but twice.

I've seen a few on the side of highways.

Re:Hardly news

[nittibang]

These are classic.. I have a word to respond to them with... Entrapment.. I once was going to attempt to become a park ranger but I was blessed with a family unexpectedly and discovered that finding a job as a park ranger locally (Ohio) is impossible so I would have to move.. Then the salary came in to play.. Topping out at a whopping 40-50K just did not sound like the life for me.. If they would quit purchasing robo-deer and start hiring hard working folks to actually work the fields they might have more arrests for poachers.. I agree with someone above, there are too many deer around the state here in Ohio and I can only imagine other states have the same issues. Cars are deers' worst predators not Guns.. As for poaching.. well I do know that here in OH they are able to just about take everything you own if you are caught hunting or shooting outside of the parameters of the laws. You might lose your hunting license for 10 years for your first or second offense but they will also confiscate vehicles, guns, meat, refrigerators, knives, saws, fish, antlers, bows, camo, alcohol, cabins, houses and any thing else you may have that is closely related to harvesting in your house. Full search and seizure is not fun and you may be able to get your stuff back (possibly years and court costs). I witnessed a friend of a friend get busted by the locals and they pretty much took everything he had and since he was caught poaching he was never able to get it back. His uncle was arrested by FEDS for obtaining a licence and legally shooting a deer in KY while he was under suspension in OH. Scary stuff like that will help people obey the laws!! Biggest rule I have is to avoid hunting from the truck and be sure to not load your gun till you get past the fence or power lines :-)

Best of all

[rbanffy]

If these robo-deer prove as profitable as the OP said, they will hardly become extinct.

I for one welcome our new robotic-deer overlords.

Have you noticed who is reporting?

[WinKing]

Bull, reporting about robot deer. I hope it will be a real one.

My name is Bambi(robotic voice terminator style)

[Nocturnal Deviant]

DESTROY DESTROY, AlL YoUr BaSe BElOng tO mE

i could just see the hunters face "OMGWTFBBQ"

Only one problem with that scheme...

[192939495969798999]

It's not illegal to hunt robot deer, it's illegal to hunt real deer. If you want to argue in court, it seems like a slam dunk to say that this in fact is not a real deer, so you can't be busted for hunting a real deer when you didn't actually shoot a real one.

Re:Only one problem with that scheme...

[KokorHekkus]

So take your pick: pay the poaching fine or pay for the robotic damage. If the hunter KNEW it was a robotic deer and shot it anyway then it's vandalism. Slam dunk for the prosecutor, not the poacher. Surely you're not suggesting that it's ok to shoot anything that isn't a deer just because it's not fenced in/locked in/guared by a person/etc.

Re:Only one problem with that scheme...

[Detritus]

Show me your robot hunting license. :-)

Re:Only one problem with that scheme...

[Anonymous Coward]

Read the article. They get them for discharging a weapon from a vehicle.

Re:Only one problem with that scheme...

[DDLKermit007]

And there are laws that forbid shooting accross or within a certain distance of a road. Not to mention laws forbidding discharging a firearm from a car. Not to entrap said poor hunter, but to protect the poor schmucks driving on the same road as the dipshit.

Re:Only one problem with that scheme...

[Anonymous Coward]

In most states it is illegal to fire a gun within 500 feet of a road. I would imagine they would prosecute under this law instead of the anti-poaching laws. There would be no wiggle room out of that one.

Re:Only one problem with that scheme...

[nomadic]

Factual impossibility is NOT a defense to an attempt crime. Just because the gun was unloaded even though you thought it was loaded, or that the cocaine you tried to buy is baking powder, or that 16-year-old girl on AIM was really a deputy sheriff, does not mean you're getting away scott-free.

Re:Only one problem with that scheme...

[Prof.Phreak]

They can make a fine 10x more for shooting a robotic state-setup deer. (kind of like the fine/punnishment for destroying a red-light camera is several orders of magnitude than a ticket for running a red-light).

ie: ``But it's not a real deer, and I knew it wasn't a real deer when I shot it'' argument would be met with ``Fine, then you're liable to replace this damanged property that you knowing damaged, along with a 30k fine.''

Re:Only one problem with that scheme...

[Anonymous Coward]

I call bullshit on this.. If the 'bot was already full of bullet holes etc. (apparently they are up-close) I would not think the person could be expected to pay dick for repair costs.

          That said, TFA has various vitriol against poachers, but actual charges listed are shooting gun from a vehicle, shooting at night, using spotlight/headlight to light up the "deer", etc. I do agree, there is not a robot hunting season so hunting without a permit would not apply.

Re:Only one problem with that scheme...

[brufar]

Ahh but it IS illegal to fire a weapon from the edge of the roadway. So whether the deer was real or not is a mute point if they want to charge you. Excerpt from Ohio's hunting laws.. I'm sure most other states are similar.

All hunting from motor vehicles, except boats and machinery being used in farm operations is prohibited. Hunters who are physically handicapped to the extent that they cannot walk, may hunt from a stationary vehicle in a field except on a public hunting area. Hunting all game and furbearers except mink, muskrat, and beaver is lawful from a boat or powercraft. All hunting from aircraft is prohibited.

It is unlawful to shoot from, on, across, or along a public road or highway.

Re:In related news, the forthcoming RoboDeer v2.0

[robert.elliott.smith]

I, for one, welcome our robotic deer overlords.

But Deer need to be culled

[Wansu]

They should be paying them, not fining them. There's way too many deer in the US and not enough predators to keep them in check. Most get killed by vehicle collisions anyway. Deer hunting should be encouraged.

Re:But Deer need to be culled

[Mogh]

I agree that there are way too many deer -- here in western PA we have lots of deer road kill and they cause a good deal of property damage as well. While there should be more efforts to cull the deer herd, how it is done matters. There have been several examples in our area of brainless poachers shooting at deer in close proximity to suburban developments and in one case a friend of mine had one of her house windows shot out by a poacher. (She was in the room when the window was shot out, but thankfully unhurt by the bullet or the broken glass.) Organized culling of the herd -- absolutely; illegal poaching isn't the same thing, however.

Re:But Deer need to be culled

[Anonymous Coward]

I just read on Wikipedia that the deer population has tripled in the last 6 months!

Re:But Deer need to be culled

[ScentCone]

They should be paying them, not fining them.

That's like saying they should reward Boy Scout troops that clean up roadside trash by using napalm, giant vats of hydrochloric acid, or by causing avalanches that will push the other debris off the road. Some twit that discharges a high-power rifle anywhere near a road (to say nothing of shooting down the shoulder of the road, in parallel with it!) isn't doing anyone a favor.

That said, of course, there are too many deer. Various studies suggest that there are untold hundreds of thousands more of them than there were in pre-Columbian times. We're providing them with more edibles and sanctuary than they ever used to have, and have pushed their natural predators way off into the margins. I don't think most soccer moms would like to know that their risk of hitting a deer with their minivans has gone down because there are now more timber wolves, coyotes, and mountain lions in the woods behind their neighborhood soccer field. So, enter the hunters. The careful ones.

Re:But Deer need to be culled

[Anonymous Coward]

"Deer hunting should be encouraged."

Deer hunting is encouraged, deer poaching is not. There is a difference.

robohookers

[Kildjean]

the next thing they will do is making robo-hookers and robo-drugdealers...

Re:robohookers

[Dersaidin]

Futurama!!! Right on the money, yet again. Which would mean our civilization is due for an anihilation so we can start again and rebuild several times in the next thousand years.

Re:robohookers

[multipartmixed]

In fact.. forget the lunar lander, and the blackjack!

Re:robohookers

[opc.chr0n1c]

i for one, welcome our... "robo-hooker overlords"

Will nobody think of the tourists?

[badzilla]

I'm a Brit and don't know a deer from an elk from a moose - some of them have horns some of the time don't they? I've rarely been able to get close to large animals for photos in North America but imagine the embarrassment if I saw one of these and was snapping away like hell when the cops came.

Re:Will nobody think of the tourists?

[ScentCone]

I'm a Brit and don't know a deer from an elk from a moose - some of them have horns some of the time don't they? I've rarely been able to get close to large animals for photos in North America but imagine the embarrassment if I saw one of these and was snapping away like hell when the cops came.

Deer, elk, moose: in all cases, males have horns ("racks") and females do not.

Deer: from small (90 pounds or so?) to large (250+ pounds) depending on the flavor (whitetail can get quite large, and out west we have mule deer and various antelopish things that are mid-sized)

Elk: can get quite large. A bull elk is a substantial, several-hundred-pound animal. They are not seen anywhere nearly as frequently in suburban areas, though - much tougher hunting, usually in mountainous areas. Also a fantastic pain the butt to haul out of the woods. We have a small asian elk called a Sika, which now live in the Chesapeake Bay area. They're about the size of a large goat, and are very, very tasty.

Moose: even bigger, but more likely to live in wet areas (they really like marsh grasses and other wet vegetation. Do not taunt a bull moose.

As for taking pictures of robodeer: local cops don't really get paid very much. They absolutely live for being to tell stories about tourists doing funny stuff like that, so please consider such a mistake to be a form of compensation for their hard work. I will also confess to being sure I was looking at a Great Horned Owl, once. It was a very good scarecrow someone has installed on a dead tree next to a corn crib... good enough that I had spent a couple of minutes sneaking up on it with a 200mm lens before realizing I'd been had. The farmer involved thought it was perhaps the funniest thing he'd ever heard.

Well you won't have to wait in Alaska ....

[joe_n_bloe]

If you want to shoot black bear and moose, the biggest problem is that you can't just shoot the ones in your backyard. Or skin it before the ravens do .... :-)

Easier than real police work

[dbIII]

Yes - but it's so much easier than real police work.

Re:Easier than real police work

[c6gunner]

I think what you meant to say is:

"I don't know - but I'm too lazy to look it up, so I'll just say 'yes' and blame it on lazy cops".

One question ...

[ScrewMaster]

How do you pronounce Piquepaille?

Re:One question ...

[BCW2]

Pigpail, since everything he submits is hog slop!

Re:One question ...

[multipartmixed]

I'll let somebody else cover the slashdotisms (i.e. ass-munch, astroturfer, fuck head..), and in case you were really curious, the French would pronounce it mostly like an American would say "peek-pie".

Re:One question ...

[ScrewMaster]

Yes, I was really curious. And you forgot "fuckwit" and "fucktard", two of the more common Slashdotisms.

Re:One question ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was closer to pukepile, actually.

In Fantasyland, robot deer hunt Roland Piquapaille

[Anonymous Coward]

They hunt him down and kill him.

What's the fine for?

[AlecLyons]

Surely not hunting deer if they didn't shoot a real one. Criminal damage perhaps?

Re:What's the fine for?

[CETS]

Discharging a gun from a vehicle and/or within x feet from the road, where x=distance defined in your state.

Not really robots

[ishmalius]

I would call these "animatrons" since they are merely animated to have the appearance of animals. But I would not classify them as robots. They are no more robots than Battlebots are robots. They are not autonomous at all.

Nor do they have any "servo" function. That is where they would sense something in their environment, perform some analysis of that information, and respond according to the analysis.

Re:Not really robots

[multipartmixed]

Oh come on, everybody loves robots.

I keep telling my kid that her uncle has a robot leg. (Actually, it's a high-tech version of Terry Fox's)

Just wait'll she sees 'im again, I wonder what she'll say to him.

hehehehe

He'll probably tell her to bite his shiny metal ass.

Re:Not really robots

[Rob the Bold]

I would call these "animatrons" since they are merely animated to have the appearance of animals. But I would not classify them as robots. They are no more robots than Battlebots are robots. They are not autonomous at all.

That may be true, but it would make a lousy headline.

Nor do they have any "servo" function. That is where they would sense something in their environment, perform some analysis of that information, and respond according to the analysis.

I didn't design the robot (sorry, animatronic) deer, but I would guess they are using a hobby or industrial "servo" to move its parts. That position of that "servo" is controlled by an external electrical signal. External to the servo -- not necessarily external to anything else. Whether or not the controller unit itself is within or without the animatronic deer is not important. The positioning device is still referred to as a servo. But why are we even worried about that?

A French deer would just wave a white flag

[Anonymous Coward]

How are those, uhh, "youths" behaving lately?

Charles Martel is spinning in his grave...

Re:In related news, the forthcoming RoboDeer v2.0

[shades66]

This will increase the price somewhat but would be entertaining to watch as the robot deer retaliates...

http://www.newlaunches.com/archives/samsung_develo ps_machine_gun_sentry_robot_costs_200k.php

really old news

[Revek]

This had been done since the mid 80's in arkansas.

Poaching fine

[Anonymous Coward]

I notice a number of people wondering how you can be fined for shooting a robo deer. Apparently they did not read the article.

"Something like a loaded gun in a motor vehicle is punishable by up to a $1200 fine. For some of the more serious offenses like illegal night hunting, the fines are up to $2400." They don't mention a fine for poaching. But the poachers are apparently breaking a number of other laws. Keep in mind, regardless of weather they shoot a deer or not, it is probably illegal to hunt deer out of season.

Law for Profit?

[Stiletto]

Like another poster mentioned, this is just a blatant case of using the police as gangster-like money collectors. It's a big problem when you start measuring your laws and law-enforcement techniques in terms of how much PROFIT they generate.

It sounds like an all-too-common case of too many police, not enough crime.

If they're down to spending their time going after deer poachers, they're already scraping the bottom of the crime barrel. Perhaps they need to start making cuts in the police force rather than investing in a $2,000 money-making deer robot.

Re:Law for Profit?

[Catbeller]

Don't shoot the deer. That's all you have to not do.

Re:Law for Profit?

[Prof.Phreak]

The law has to be enforced (and obayed). Period. If the law is stupid, then get rid of the law. But if the law exists, then it should be enforced.

I'd welcome less laws. The problem is that if most laws aren't enforced, then you're not exactly sure whether you're in violation of any at any given time---and thus can be arrested/fined for `no reason' (well, any reason) at any time without having much of a ground to complain on ('cause ignorance of the `law' that isn't usually enforced, except right then and there).

Re:Law for Profit?

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to hunt. And I support the law enforcement efforts. Most (all??) the idiots who take game illegally don't care about conservation. Most of them just bought their firearms and have *no* training. They shoot at anything that moves, scare off legitimate game, and half the time leave beer cans all over the place. Guns and beer and idiots don't mix well.

Re:Law for Profit?

[Vellmont]

It's a big problem when you start measuring your laws and law-enforcement techniques in terms of how much PROFIT they generate.

This I totally agree with. Law enforcement isn't a business. The current trend towards looking at everything as something that generates money is destructive to the society. The problem here is there it's the article submitter that's measuring law enforcement through profit, not the actual article or the police.


If they're down to spending their time going after deer poachers, they're already scraping the bottom of the crime barrel.

Well, I have to disagree here. It's important to enforce poaching laws, and hunting laws. Before there were robotic deer I'm guessing it was pretty hard to enforce this law unless you just happened to catch someone shooting at a deer, or doing something idiotic and dangerous like shooting from your car or at night with a spotlight. Poaching laws protect the hunter, the deer, and innocent bystanders. If there's rampant poaching then there won't be any deer for legit hunters to hunt during deer season. I also don't want to get shot by some drunken idiot hunting from his car with a spotlight.

Perhaps they need to start making cuts in the police force rather than investing in a $2,000 money-making deer robot.

Well, you've really twisted the statement the article author was trying to make. The statement is:

The life-like creatures with motor-driven heads and tails cost about $1300 apiece. But Gray points out that the poachers they help catch are fined hundreds of dollars, so they pay for themselves soon enough.

Which is an attempt to justify the cost of the expensive equipment by saying it pays for itself. That's not the same thing as saying this is a profit making enterprise. They still have to pay the salary of the cop, so I doubt there's much profit made.

Re:Law for Profit?

[Slashdot Parent]

I also disagree with law-enforcement being used as a revenue generator, but I don't think this is a good example of that phenomenon.

The type of thing I object to is automated traffic enforcement, speed traps, etc. I'd much rather see cops just driving around looking for reckless drivers. Lord knows there are plenty.

But this is a tool to catch poachers who are hunting from their trucks on the road. This is really dangerous activity.

Anyhow, I doubt these deer really pay for themselves considering they have to be manned by actual, paid enforcement officers.

How much cooler would Bambi have been...

[nurhussein]

...if he and his mother had been protected by a cyborg deer from the future. Picture the robot deer riding down on a motorbike, grabbing Bambi before he's killed by a poacher, and he takes out one big, badass gun and blows the poacher's head off.

"Hasta la vista, POACHER!"

_That_ would have been a movie.

OFFICER!! I KNEW it wasnt real!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Officer!! What are you fining me for?? I KNEW that it was a freakin robotic deer and I was shooting it not because I was hunting it but because that damn thing was scaring all the REAL deer away!

Re:OFFICER!! I KNEW it wasnt real!!

[T.E.D.]

Officer!! What are you fining me for?? I KNEW that it was a freakin robotic deer and...

Destruction of Government Property. Its a felony too, so you just lost your right to vote, pal.

Old Old Old news.

[c0reboarder]

They've had these for years. When I took hunters safety in Wisconsin 14 years ago the DNR guy was telling me about their robotic deer decoy that they used for poachers. This one sounds a little more advanced, but same idea.

Cyborg deer

[DaMattster]

Why not make the cyborg deer charge and attack the poachers? That'll learn ya. Hey, I am a hunter but I do it legally and responsibly.

Cat/mouse game of technology folks

[HellYeahAutomaton]

As these become more popular, the onus of better target verification will come into play. It's just a matter of time before every hunter goes to his local Walmart and picks up an infrared heat sensor / spotter along with his shotgun and and leaves egg on the face of the local game enforcement playing with their robo-prancers.

I, for one, welcome our new rule-based hunting gear.

Re:Cat/mouse game of technology folks

[funwithBSD]

There will be HEATED DEER!!111!11!!

I can't believe no one has said it yet...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, blame Bush.

Made with real deer skin and fur

[dtfinch]

They kill a deer to build a robotic deer to catch people killing deer.

Re:Made with real deer skin and fur

[wolfgang_spangler]

They kill a deer to build a robotic deer to catch people killing deer. Most deer that are processed by professionals have the hides sold. Most deer processed at home have the hides thrown out (a shame).

They most likely get the hides from a local processor and use them instead of letting them go to waste. This is a good thing. The more of the animal that is used, the better.

private citizens

[smadasam]

Can private citizens buy such a robot? It seems like it would be a good investment

Fine them?

[Millenniumman]

Why fine them? They should attack the poacher when he shoots them, in such a way that he doesn't realize they are robots.

right back at the cops?

[torxim]

does this mean we (the people) can make fake automated mannequins with a fake gun pointing at people on the side of the road, and when the cops decide to open fire on said mannequin (which of course moves around a bit) we can prosecute them on grounds of destruction of personal property, firing a lethal weapon unnecessarily , etc etc etc? those things are illegal too...

Re:right back at the cops?

[morpheus343]

Nope, cops have the nearly unbeatable "I felt like I was in danger so I fired at _____" defense.

It's not necessarily fair, but they've shot quite a few actual people (who happened to be unarmed) and that defense usually gets them off. Good luck winning against them if they didn't even wound anyone :-p

Re:But what about

[khallow]

I agree with the other side. Realism is useful. They can have things like spotter or telescopic sights (and probably do). They also might be in a hurry. So a realistic looking deer with short term natural movements (especially if it were in some brush) could trick someone even in daylight. Camoflague works in a similar manner. The person or animal doesn't actually look like whatever it's hiding in. Instead, the appearance of the creature is modified in a way that makes it more difficult to spot/ Alternately, whatever it is hiding against has to get closer (and have more opportunity to be spotted).

What's up doc ?

[Joebert]

a truck drives by, stops, then backs up. The deer turns its head towards the vehicle, and a rifle barrel emerges from the driver's window.

Moral of the story: If you're dumb enough to believe that deer is real, you don't need to be wandering the streets.

+3 insightful, wtf?

[BruceCage]

I guess all the morons got modpoints for Christmas.

Been done...

[Deadstick]

...with plain plastic deer. This is just a technical improvement.

rj

how do you get caught though

[Anonymous Coward]

just take the thing once you realize it is fake. duh

nothing new

[DrDitto]

I was hunting with a friend 15 years ago in Wisconsin. We were driving down a road, saw a large buck standing about 100 yards away...its head had a slight movement. My friend got out and shot the thing about 10 times before getting back into the truck. 5 minutes later a DNR officer was writing a $1000+ ticket!

Re:nothing new

[Anonymous Coward]

Haw-haw!

Re:nothing new

[Slashdot Parent]

I'm sure this isn't what you want to hear, but what your friend did was extremely dangerous. He should be thankful that the worst that happened was getting a ticket.

entrapment tag?

[Vegeta99]

Uh, wtf is this story tagged "entrapment"? You're not supposed to shoot a deer out of season. They didn't try to entrap you, they just gave you an opportunity to break the law that you probably would have found another mile or so down the road.

maybe "stupidfuckingpoachers" is more appropriate.

Nothing really new

[BCW2]

Game & Fish officers have been using decoys in one form or another for over 15 years. These are used to catch people road hunting, night hunting and poaching out of season. Adding robotics or animation is just another step. There are rules for hunting in every state in the U. S. and most other countries, when you hunt illegally you deserve to get caught and punished. This has never been ruled "entrapment" in any court in the U. S. that I have heard of. Just like a cop posing as a hooker isn't entrapment. The bait is out there, nobody forces you to bite.

It's also a Christmas decoration

[Anonymous Coward]

These very same robotic deer can also make a festive holiday decoration.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/search/content/oh/s tory/news/local/2006/11/24/sns112506roboticdeer.ht ml

Just mix it with that Machine Gun Sentry Robot...

[ofcourseyouare]

All you have to do is wait for an illegal hunter trying to shoot the fake deer and fine him

Fine him? Fines are for wimps. The man's way to fight poaching would be to combine this dummy deer with that super cool Korean Machine Gun Sentry Robot discussed a couple of months ago. When the deer was shot at, it would return fire with its robot controlled 5.5mm machine guns. Okay, the robot sentry costs $200,000, but you could earn that back in no time by offering a website showing a live feed from the hunter-splatter-cam...

(BTW Sentry Robot at: http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/ 14/0132216 )

A link from 1993

[jsrjsr]

This link is to a story from 1993:

http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.Article?article_id =2584

And I remember first hearing of these "robodeer" in the 80's. Best rural legend I heard about them involved a guy who legally shot one to pieces (he spotted the robodeer out in the field, went and got permission to hunt on the land, snuck up on it and blasted away -- the story goes that the DNR agents had set it up to sting people shooting from the road and had put it far enough into the field that he didn't violate any laws).

'Course, maybe it takes the VOA a while to report things....

Re:The crime is shooting from the road

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if you have a deer tag, you don't get to shoot from your car on the road due to the obvious safety concerns.

Robodeer says ...

[mr_death]

... "Put down your rifle! You have 10 seconds to comply" ... "I am now authorized to use deadly force".

Poetic justice, indeed.

Re:Robodeer says ...

[Ed_Pinkley]

You forgot: [guy drops gun.] "You now have 5 seconds to comply"

Wow...

[IHC Navistar]

Normally, I would be pretty interested in this, except that robotic and animatronic deer have been used to catch illegal hunting for about 15 YEARS.

Do the people that read article submissions have the ability to tell old news from new news? I'm getting pretty tired of reading about things and 'news' articles that are DECADES old.

OLD NEWS, Indiana have been doing this for years

[briand212]

Indiana DNR have been using these types of decoys for years. The really sad part .. they still work !!!

Re:But what about

[despisethesun]

I guess you could kill them. That might even it out.

The test

[Sloppy]

If you cannot ballistically distinguish a deer from a robot, can the robot be considered a deer?

Re:But what about

[The Anarchist Avenge]

If you RTA you'd know that the motors are quiet enough that you can't hear them further away than arms length.

A Long Awaited Drinking Party

[Sloppy]

Now, if we could only make a robo-whitetail-suicide bomber.

Hey, I remember that Myth 2 level.

Nice economic model!

[One Track Mind]

;-) Well the robot costs the state 2000$ and the fine for shooting one is 1200$ (2400$ if you do it at night). So unless all these robots are being shot at night then the state looses 800$ everytime one is damaged? Or is their also a fine for destroying public property that makes it a good cash grab? Personnaly I think I could make a buck charging people to shoot at the fake deer and then enjoy the show!

Re:Nice economic model!

[MLease]

Note that the summary (let alone TFA) said that they were collecting "well over $30,000" from a single robot, which equates to a $28,000+ profit rather than an $800 loss. Apparently, they can survive being shot multiple times.

-Mike

Score one for the deer

[xaosflux]

If they would just equip these robots with the ability to fire back, the illegal hunters wouldn't be a problme anymore!

To the silly suds

[Bryansix]

Dear Silly Suds who think this is entrapment
This is clearly not entrapment. When I see I deer I don't think "Oh let me shoot it. What? A Permit? What's that?". Instead I think, "nice a deer, that is good that they can survive (insert location)".

This is the same as when police have decoy prostitutes or when they put a bike out on the street and wait for someone to steal it. What would be entrapment is if they had the robot dear and then approached people offering to pay them to shoot it. THAT would be entrapment.

Dick Chenney would like this

[Anonymous Coward]

But he wants his model to scream in pain when he shoots it repeatedly.

He's also looking for a complimentary lawyer model, and a caged robot ducks (Yes. He actually shoots ducks in cages).

With a great military man like Chenney, no wonder we're winning in Iraq.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:But what about

[Walt Dismal]

Based upon your recommendations I wish to place an order for 50 Tonnes of weasel fur.

How quickly can fill this order?

As soon as we can shoot and skin many members of Congress.

Excellent.

[master_p]

Now all we need is a live scoring system and...real life Deer Hunter, here we come!

bonus ammo is at every 100 robotic deer shot down. ...where do I post my high score?

Re:In related news, the forthcoming RoboDeer v2.0

[Tablizer]

That is actually kind of a plot from the Crocadile Dundee movie (2?) from the 80's. He set up bogus kangaroos that shoot back at hunters.

Ideas from Russia with love

[Tablizer]

I'll counter with robotic hunters. So there!

robotic deer.... FIGHTS BACK

[revolu7ion]

Fake deer + machine gun sentry robot = more fun

Re:But what about

[kd5ujz]

If you listen to the grinder closly, you can hear the beans scream. :P

Deers are furry and cute...

[mi]

Now imagine MPAA/RIAA posting some fake wares in a manner, that would allow them to easily catch the illegal downloaders.

Would that receive as favorable a write-up from Slashdot editors?

Tried to give ANYTHING to a shelter recently?

[dotfile]

It has been my experience that they won't take anything that's not commercially packaged and sealed. Nothing prepared, nothing home-made. Apparently the homeless have lawyers, too. Sad, really. Tons of food goes to waste daily, and we still have people going hungry.

Re:Tried to give ANYTHING to a shelter recently?

[Slashdot Parent]

Society is great, eh? The alternative is a homeless person eating from a garbage can. At least then, if he gets a food-borne illness, it was his own fault for "doing something stupid" like trying to get something to eat.

A few months ago, our county tried to pass an ordinance that any perishable foods distributed in shelters must be kept in commercial-grade refrigeration, and under commercial health codes. Thankfully, that measure was defeated. At least I think it was. I should check.

In Soviet Russia...

[Anonymous Coward]

In Soviet Russia, deer shoot YOU!

California Needs This

[mycal]

Because of Grey Davis parting gift to the California Fish and Game department of 32 crowny laywer appointies (who arnold hasn't gotten rid of either) the department had to fire over 200 officers (because of lack of funds), bringing staffing levels of wardens to 1965 levels. These robot deer would be a great help to get some kind of enforcement going in California that is despratly needed as poching is rampit in the eastern sierras, plus it would keep the remaining wardens good company since they mostly have to work alone now.

Maybe we should put in for a donation pool for the California Fish and Game!

-m

Obligatory: in soviet russia

[Anonymous Coward]

the deer hunts you!

this is not sarcasm...

[leaping_leopards]

i bow down to your wisdom... You are a sage amongst many serendipitous encounters now with the crank 2,.0 people been dl'. Sorry. Hard to backspace nowadays, even harder to race through tthe present to find oneself not in the future but the present again. I do argue for both sides of the divination, the release as well as the management of subsystems alone, which we've already put here. So, before this train of thoguth looks like a messy tangle of post-GITS mangled crank-alm interface... SO Mother nature... Defending herself... She has, always, and will, forever, look at what the sun he been doin the past month, been wired reelativity drama in our heliosphear what with the tsnumasmanis... OUCH /me fall down go boomacaskdalackadaizy..... daisy...

Not Entrapment

[Slashdot Parent]

This is not entrapment by any stretch of the imagination.

Entrapment is actually a difficult defense to raise at a criminal trial. One of the tests for entrapment is whether or not the defendant would have likely committed the crime without the encouragement of law-enforcement. In other words, if you shoot a decoy from your truck (which is illegal even with a hunting license... you've unlawfully discharged your firearm, among other crimes depending on your state), you would need to convince a judge and jury that you somehow wouldn't have done it had you encountered a real deer.

Yeah, I'm also thinking that would be an uphill battle.

Oblig South Park

[blippy]

Well, I think it should be OK to shoot them if it's purely in self-defence.

"Quick, it's coming straight for us"

Legalize decoy-shooting

[volpe]

I think they've got the wrong idea here. How about making it legal to shoot the robo-deer, and only the robo-deer. It would serve as an outlet for all those guys who actually derive pleasure out of depriving a defenseless animal of his life.