Hunters Shoot Down Drone of Animal Rights Group

Required Snark writes "A remote control drone operated by an animal rights group was shot down in South Carolina by a group of thwarted hunters. Steve Hindi, the group president said 'his group was preparing to launch its Mikrokopter drone to video what he called a live pigeon shoot on Sunday when law enforcement officers and an attorney claiming to represent the privately-owned plantation near Ehrhardt tried to stop the aircraft from flying.' After the shoot was halted, the drone was launched anyway, and at this point it was shot down. 'Seconds after it hit the air, numerous shots rang out,' Hindi said in the release. 'As an act of revenge for us shutting down the pigeon slaughter, they had shot down our copter.' 'It is important to note how dangerous this was, as they were shooting toward and into a well-travelled highway,' Hindi stated in the release."

Comments

Re:Animal Rights?

[Tim C]

That's because while it's perfectly natural for animals to kill and eat other animals (including for humans to do it), the activists believe that unlike other carnivorous animals we have a choice.

Even a lot of those of us who do eat meat tend to believe that the animals shouldn't be caused unnecessary suffering, which also tends to fall under the "animal rights" label. As for the name, it's similar enough in intent to human rights that the name is appropriate (and even more so for those of us who do not consider human rights to be "God-given", but to be an artificial construct of a rational, civilised society).

Re:Youtube video.

[PopeRatzo]

I have a friend who lives on fifteen acres he owns. Why should his right to privacy be negated on his own property just because he's carrying a perfectly legal tool?

I don't have any problem with him carrying a "legal tool". I'm a handgun owner and a shooter. I've killed more bottles than a thirsty wino. When skeet see me coming down the street they run and hide. I love guns. I was at the range on Sunday, in fact. I practice for the day a hunter steps on to my property. I want to make sure I'm a good enough shot to scare him off without blowing his brains out.

The problem doesn't start when your friend carries a gun. The problem starts when he kills for fun.

AFAIK humans are the only species with the concept of "privacy".

Forty years ago, people believed that humans were the only species that experienced pain. (It's true). If you don't think an animal has a concept of privacy, why do you think animals camouflage their nests? And you're still missing the point. I don't loathe hunters because I'm so sentimental about animals. I loathe them because killing for fun is creepy. If something has to die for you to have a good time, then I would like round the clock surveillance on you. One of the reasons I like camo gear is because it allows easy identification of assholes.

Most hunters eat what they kill. So you're OK with eating that pig that was raised in inhumane conditions and killed, but you're not OK with killing it yourself?

I said I don't have a problem with killing an animal to eat. My problem comes with killing for "sport". Killing to eat is part of the world. Killing for fun is sick.

There may have been a time when the "fun" part of killing was an evolutionary adaptation. In the post-apocalyptic zombie future, we may once again need this adaptation. Until then, I want a Google maps overlay of the whereabouts and movements of every hunter. Better yet, let's set aside a few thousand acres and let them hunt each other. Put aside the pretense. Let's see them put some skin in the game. I would say "Make it pay-per-view and give the proceeds to food banks", but I believe that would be going a little over the top.