Slashdot Mirror
Illinois Law Grounds PETA Drones Meant To Harass Hunters
schwit1 writes "Illinois passed a new state law that set back the efforts of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), making the use of drones to interfere with hunters and fishermen prohibited. The law was created in response to PETA's plan to employ drones called "air angels" to monitor outdoors enthusiasts engaged in hunting and fishing nationwide."
Strange - people fishing should be "free" to fish unmonitored... ...people hunting should be "free" to hunt unmonitored... ...people on the Internet should be "free" to be monitored at will...
To me that sounds like future terrorist plots could best be discussed on a hunting trip, because you have the gun lobby ensuring that you'll be undisturbed...
peta cares about animals (does that mean they don't care about humans?), but using drones to "interfere" with people sounds like something only the government would engage in
i guess this is proof that governments intend to defend their high ground
Do I need a license to go drone hunting? or is it just open season? because that sounds like fun! Also, I believe shooting drones stays well within PETAs goals as I wouldn't be shooting animals :)
They're the next gen of skeets!
let them fly. i need a new target
Hmmm.... Drones harassing hunters? I suspect that the hunters would have taken care of the problem without the intervention of the government. In the form of sighting in their rifles ....
skeet is the sport; clay pidgeons are the target. I strongly suggest that everyone have a try at shooting skeet; it's a great sport, less likely to pull a Cheney and shoot someone than bird hunting, and, well, it's a lot of fun.
Seems like you could save a few steps by just issuing hunting permits for peta members... At $10,000 each we could make some money too.
captcha:vulgar (but still true)
I think I prefer the response of Texas when the made drone hunting Legal. I will just shoot them down,
And even if it did, you've exceeded the daily limit.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
for those shooting them down, they do video-to-phone, and if you shoot one down, these fucks will call the cops, I can guarantee that I'm for a law that allows you to shoot them down legally if you are being harrassed or intruded upon! however, I am unsure the communication method, bluetooth and wifi only go so far, and where I live, there is no cell phone service at 90% of the places I fish and hunt so it would be like me seeing a mountain lion, no one will know, but you can bet I'll have the hide in my garage....
_you_ can't monitor the hunters and fishers but the NSA can. They don't have to listen to laws.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
PETA is not a group that anyone should frankly support. PETA is known for terrorist threats and actions against humans and large scale property destruction for the job of destroying animal hospitals and humane societies. PETA makes large statements about how animals have the right to attack humans and will verbally and publicly bash victims of hunting accidents where the animal attacks. PETA should be shut down by the government, they are a nonprofit society that seeks to punish humans with no clear case, cause or rational. Anything PETA seeks to do is to purely hurt humans for the sake of animals, what logical society would do that? If you think I'm blowing smoke:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4D1godY4vI
I'm not aware that the hunt was 'staged' any more than the local farmer knows his land and that X birds tend to be in Y field and Z time of the year, and if you line up a bunch of people to walk the field you're sure to get quite a few.
It's not like the animals were staked there or hand raised until that morning.
I don't read AC A human right
Ground Drone, OM NOM NOM NOM
I'm not sure this law would actually make the PETA drones illegal. If you look at the law it prohibits drones that interfere with hunters. According to the law "Interfere with" means to take any action that physically impedes, hinders, or obstructs the lawful taking of wildlife or aquatic life. The purpose of the PETA drones is to monitor hunters and record any illegal activity. Recording a hunter from a distance doesn't physically impede, hinder, or obstruct them from the lawful taking of wildlife or aquatic life.
A state government outlawed the use of drones by a private group to harass and/or spy on a group or class of citizens. This can be the basis to extend the law to be against against the use of drones by private individuals, corporations, and businesses to harass, spy, and advertise.
BTW, those who are comparing PETA to the NSA and other government agencies are making a false comparison. PETA is a private organization that would be violating the privacy and personal freedom of people. They are not a governmental agency and most of the governmental agencies in the comments so far do not fall under the jurisdiction of state governments.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
Looks like Illinois added another thing to hunt.
Preferred hunting method:
Lure with decoy hunting,
then EMP to confuse,
then 00buck for effect.
Result suitable for trophy mounting.
The fly fisherman might try to snag one in the air with a hook, but I don't think the shooters will have a problem. They see one, they'll just shoot it down, as they should.
Does PETA have a working solution for maintaining a sustainable population of game? Like some type of birth control or are they happy with uncontrolled heards getting bigger and bigger and expanding? Times have changed, there is no longer a natural balance of various wildlife to maintain populations in check. Until some other method of control comes around, PETA has no chance of stopping hunting. Hunting is beneficial in many areas, that is why there are a set number if hunting licenses and specific time frames for each type of game.
I assume PETA believes the wild boars should be able to expand as needed unchecked as well.
It was so much fun to read about their drones being shot down and PETA's incredulous reactions to it.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
In Ontario it's illegal to interfere with a hunt.
As well every few years there is some wingnut who runs out to disrupt wildlife (with the goal of disrupting a hunt.)
Under Ontario Law disrupting animals is "hunting". It's always hilarious when the anti-hunting protestors get charged with illegal hunting.
I call it "target practice"!
It seems this is more a topic for the FAA vs the state of Illinois. I do recall there being something in FAA FAR's about operation of a drone by commercial entities and that operation requiring a COA for the drone and pilot training.
The very least they could be reported to the FAA for unsafe operation of aerial vehicles.
For an idea google Trappy of Team Black Sheep. http://www.suasnews.com/2013/10/25471/the-faas-complaint-against-trappy/
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
Or was that claim pulled straight from your anus?
I fly quad-copters as a hobby. The drone they are selling for $324 is the Parrot Drone AR 2.0. They are basically ripping off their own members, badly, and that drone is the suck anyway. People are going to buy this thing, thinking it will be easy to fly, the video and stills will be garbage. They will never be able to get close enough (165ft range) to the hunters or fishermen to actually use the drone without interfering, and the video will not even be close to good enough to distinguish a beer in someones hand. They would need something like a DJI Phantom2 or the Blade 350qx to even begin to get in the territory of monitoring anything. The blade is over $500 with tax, the DJI is over $1000. Anyone that flies heli's or quads for more than a week knows this is a ROF Laughable joke from the start.
It's listed as a tool to film for illegal hunting and fishing activities, not for harassing hunters/fishermen. This item probably wouldnt be deployed at a standard fishing hole during the appropriate season.
No, you're thinking of the great state of Chicago and its suburbs.
Illinois is this tiny little place south of I-80 that no one pays attention to. Just ask House Speaker Mike Madigan. It's rumored he's even been there once, but his limo was going near 90 on I-57, so no one is quite sure it really was him.
then they're legal.
I take it that you will support PETA doing legal things they are legally allowed to do and not just pretent that they WILL AND MUST do the illegal stuff just so you can whine and bitch about people who you don't like theologically?
Nah, you won't will you.
a 10 gauge!
I'm sure to be consistent with the spirit of this law that Fish & Game will not be allowed to use UAV's.
In Virginia, it is illegal to interfere with persons legally hunting and fishing and has been for well over a decade. I have seen it enforced most often against recreational watercraft intentionally disturbing fishers and crabbers. As well, it has kept PETA from aggressive protesting against recreational fishing.
Yeah what PETA doesn't want to understand is all those animals they think they're going to stop hunters from hunting are going to die of starvation or be torn to shreds by predators if they're not hunted by humans.
The fact is , animals in the wild are going to die horrifying deaths, each of them. It's called "over population" and "predator-prey balance" and hunting seasons are just those season where the predator to prey balance has swung strongly in one direction, meaning there's a lot of prey that's just doomed to violent deaths. This is how uncontested nature operates on populations, and it's ugly.
Death by hunter is neither cruel nor unusual by the measure of what else is available. Some kinds of traps are both cruel and unusual and in fact society BANS those traps, so society actually DOES care about the suffering of animals, suffering which in no way effects any member of society personally, why? because absent other forces, we're just humane, that's all.
It's hard to imagine the amount of growing up people in PETA just haven't done. It entails knowing avoiding learning anything about ecology yet thinking that your personal perception of how it can or ought to be practiced should reign over all established science and expertise.
Frankly, it's disgusting and immoral.
I shall treat them accordingly.
Do I need a drone hunting tag or what?
they are supplying this:
:)
Includes Parrot AR Drone 2.0 with blank outdoor hull and decal sheet.
After reading about how hackers would be able to take over the Parrot AR drones that Amazon were talking about using... I can just imagine some PETA activist meeting up with a hacker who has a penchant for hunting or fishing.
Take it over, land it, strip off the hull and put your own on it. And then say that you were using the parrot to try and spot game
Or you could just scare up a bird in the direction of the drone and blow the thing away.
One way or another some arsehole is out $325 plus shipping.
*** I had a
This being slashdot and all, I am surprised no one has mentioned Skyjack yet...
https://www.suprmasv.com/projects/161/skyjack
One of those in the backpack ought to be enough if a PETA Drone comes within range.
As long as I can still use a drone to monitor activity on my own property during hunting season. It would make it safer to look for trespassers and call the sheriff by eliminating the possibility of being "mistaken" for a deer and shot.
Not against hunting, just against hunters shooting on my property.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
My son just built a quadcopter that has so far gone as high as 400 feet and that is far from its service ceiling. Skeet guns are not the answer.
Forget drones. PETA should arm robotic animals and send them into the woods to return fire. Might as well make hunting a real sport. After all, only the wusses would complain, since this would finally bring a sense of real manliness to the "sport".
PETA is a fundamentalist organization, and like most fundamentalist organizations, they not only have rules about how they can act, they will do anything to make YOU abide by those rules, too (though in PETA's case, they do kill a lot of animals each year in their "no kill" shelters...)
Also, like most fundamentalist organizations, their path to salvation comes through oppressing women, not men. Note that their main campaigns starting out were attacking fur wearers (women, not leather wearing bikers or motorcycle cops), attacking animal testing of cosmetics (women again). Their leader started the "I'd rather go naked than wear fur" ad campaign. Guess who gets to review and select the photos of naked female stars?
PETA is selling this device with the intention that people use it to record and report ILLEGAL activity. If someone is hunting on my property and I want to find out who it is and report them, then this is a legitimate use of this device. You can't ban the sale of the device because you don't like organization that is selling it.
I am amused by the idea that the state of Illinois is passing a law to prevent people from interfering with other people who are breaking the law.
If you wanted to buy this device to monitor the actions of animal rights protestors on your property, you would think that it was your god-given right to do so. (And you could brandish that special asshole smirk knowing that you bought the device from PETA).
It seems like making a mountain out of a mole hill. There aren't going to be that many instances where someone is going to be flying one of these things in a situation where they can gather useful information without someone seeing it and shooting it down.
PETA is a great organization and they deserve lots of support. If you are trying to be vegetarian or vegan, or trying to buy animal-torture free items, the PETA website is a great resource.
I thought those things were just a fancy replacement for clay pigeons.
Why did no one throw him in a pond? Seems sort of obvious to me...
What offends me about this law is that it's so blatantly bought and paid for by lobbyists by who is applies to. Why not just make harassing people with drones period illegal and not just hunters and fishermen?
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
I wouldn't destroy them... I would just capture them, flash their command set, and sell them on Ebay.
'Hunters' are evil psychopaths who enjoy killing animals.
Do you need to know anything else about them?
What are they afraid of? They're afraid of other people SEEING what they do to animals, that's what they're afraid of. Just like ALL criminals are afraid of people seeing them committing crimes.
What a joke that the Slashdot sociopaths (that would be 99% of you) think that PETA are 'bad' for merely trying to expose psychopaths who like torturing and killing animals.
Still, it sure beats facing your OWN pain and fear, doesn't it - just deny that anybody else feels pain and fear, and all of yours will magically go away, right?
B E E Z I D dot com!
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
There are plenty of ethnic and economic groups that hunt. Some people think you should understand the whole end-to-end process involved in getting and preparing food. Others like understanding the true meaning of "the food change". We kill to survive or improve our lifestyle. Some are more honest about it that others.
"sport" has multiple definitions. The modern, urban, head-to-head competition is only one. Hunting, fishing and other behaviors are included in some of the definitions of "sport".
Trap shootin' season is over early.
Have gnu, will travel.
If you look into the PETA catalog, it's just an AR Drone 2.0 with stickers you stick onto the outside that say PETA.
Those things are only about as loud as an electric leaf blower, and have a 20m range and a 15 min flight time, at BEST.
Given the price, you'd be better served to get an actual video camera, and an actual leaf blower.
Otherwise all the hunter has to do is wait 15 minutes for your battery to run down, walk over to where the thing landed, step on it, and resume hunting.
You're typically only getting one shot because the first shot spooks them. The only exception I know is a bow hunter. A friend was super nervous when he took hit first shot at a black bear (in Alaska) who was about 100 yards away. Shot went wide over, and the bear didn't seemingly even hear or notice. Wind shifted and the bear did smell him after a couple minutes though. Second shot went through lung/ heart, and we all had bear to eat for the next couple weeks. Very few people have trophies mounted anymore.
They actively promote harassment, have harassed, and even sell the drones to do it from the PETA website. I don't know how much more clear your intent can be, unless they start providing classes on how to do it too.
However, the NRA does not promote harassing PETA, doesn't make stupid blank statements (e.g. All PETA people are illegally drinking beer and flying drones over protected public lands and private property) and you can't buy a drone from NRA.org.
So, it is legislation aimed towards a specific idiotic segment of maladjusted society. Just as you'd think protests at funerals shouldn't need laws, however the Westboro idiots took that too far as well.
People Eating Tasty Animals... because I love small, furry critters. They are best with gravy!
As a hunter and omnivore, I think that PETA should seriously be classified as a terrorist organization. Their behavior is reprehensible on so many levels.
Seriously, it is ok to hunt, it is ok to eat what you kill. Hunters, by large, are the most active animal advocates out there. These are the people you need to harass the least. I eat what I kill, period. My goal during a hunt is a fast, clean kill. I am not out there to make any animal suffer, I would rather not take a shot than take a bad shot and risk wounding and losing the animal. Is hunting necessary for survival? Not usually, but when I was growing up, if my father had not gone hunting we would have had pretty much nothing to eat. I acquired a taste for big game, elk, deer and their ilk and prefer it over most commercially grown beef and pork. If I am legally taking game, fully licensed and in compliance with the laws of the land I am hunting on, then any harassment will be reported and someone will be arrested. There are laws in nearly every place I have hunted that specifically state that this behavior is illegal. About ten years ago there was several truckloads of people in their early to mid twenties harassing hunters in an area I was hunting in. After several attempts of talking sense into them, we finally had to get the law involved. They attempted to evade once they knew what was happening. They were caught after the vehicles they were using got stuck in the mud. They attempted to drive through a protected wetland area. They were arrested for harassment and also cited for leaving the roadway. I do know the fine for that alone was pretty astronomical. I have not had any more trouble with this kind of behavior since.
As far as using drones, same laws should apply. On a personal level, I hope they use really expensive drones, I am quite a good shot.
Most responsible hunters ask permission and will meet the property owner before entering. If you hunt, you should know this. If not, most hunters are smart (you have to be to outsmart an animal in its own environment) and know they can themselves be targets if trespassing. My dad owns 10 acres next to public lands in Oklahoma, and deer hunters ask all the time before coming on.
The vast majority of the money used for land management comes from hunting and fishing license sales, and the same people buying those licenses make up a bulk of membership in the non-profits that actually care about animals (World Wildlife Federation, Trout Unlimited etc). Additionally, many hunters manage their own private land to naturally support healthy animal populations (this is how it's done where I hunt). PETA has never done anything to help any animal in anything but a crazy stupid way to get attention and get more members to get more money. As a non-profit their administrative costs are astronomical, meaning the people in charge get paid A LOT. And by opposing hunting, and opposing everything else that they oppose, and basically through every action they take, PETA is the most anti-animal, anti-conservation group that exists. I've seen piles of deer congregated to die of starvation and mange, smelled it and heard the disturbing noises they make when it happens. The most generous thing one could say about PETA is that they are pro this, and the truth is that they are far worse than that. Anyone that cares about animals should oppose PETA more than any other group. I would guess that, as a comment above mentioned, PETA is over-charging their members for cheap drones because, as usual, PETA exists to extract money from their membership.
NOTE: The term 'drone' is being mis-applied here, just as 'hacker' is mis-used by the general public to mean a bad thing.
As a rural landowner who also flies Radio-Controlled aircraft and UAVs, I see this issue from several angles.
- Hunters and fisherman who conduct themselves ethically and within the law deserve to not be disturbed or have their 'prey' scared off. ;)
- Despite earlier remarks that hunters 'have the right' to hunt/fish unmonitored- this is obviously untrue since game-wardens exist.
- Simply flying an RC Airplane or AUV with a video downlink does not constitute monitoring or invasion of privacy any more than your next-door neighbor kid in his treehouse. The fact that he may be able to see into your yard or back windows does not give you the right to shoot him dead.
- UAVs are noisy- too noisy to sneak up on people, but they sure can spook wildlife...
- This issue is being blown completely out of proportion. Nearly all UAVs are flown for recreational purposes, there are very -very- few UAVs being used anywhere for this or any other surveillance purpose.
- The odds of ever encountering one of these outside of town is amazingly tiny- the odds that one is being used to monitor your hunting/fishing is orders of magnitude smaller than than your chance of winning the PowerBall lottery.
- It is foolhardy to use any method (e.g., noisy car stereo, UAV or otherwise) to harass anybody.
- Although I do not agree with many of the extreme views and methods of PETA, I do feel the use of game-cameras, UAVs, and other methods to substantiate/verify reports of abuse or illegal activity by hunters or polluters is valid and beneficial.
- Some of my neighbors own small aircraft and have full visibility of my place, they even sometimes do touch-and-go landings on my RC airstrip. Does this bother me? No, its good, friendly fun- we just wave and smile and often take pictures of them (they love the copies! ). If UAVs bother you so much, you can always 'moon' them.
- This is being used as a diversionary issue for simpletons to get themselves all worked-up over, yet it really has no impact on their lives. It is being used to distract your attention from other more important things. Please pay attention to the man behind the curtains instead...
- Not all uses of UAVs are so controversial- my neighbors benefit from aerial photos showing which parts of their cotton fields need special attention (insect infestation, weeds, erosion, dry spots, inundation).
Consider: http://www.suasnews.com/2012/01/11389/dallas-meat-packing-plant-investigated-after-drone-images-reveal-pollution
Drones are a lot more sporting than clay pigeons, don't you think?
Think of it as a drone with a really bad landing protocol.
If PETA members are concerned that hunters are adhering to the rules, then perhaps its members should get a degree in wildlife management or similar and become Fish and Game wardens or deputies.
It's very nice of PETA to put up some moving practice clays (drones) for the hunters... This will most definitely improve hunters aim! Maybe PETA is simply trying to make the animals deaths swift and painless. Score one for PETA! I am not sure I know one hunter that wouldn't shoot one of these annoyances down. With that said I am all for drones being used appropriately such as medicine (beer/pizza) delivery.
No one pays attention to it because it's full of corn and soybeans, not people! There's what...5 million people in cook county alone?
There are several million voters in Cook County, but there's a decades old debate over what fraction of them are living.
As long as hot celebrities will still prance around naked for them.
You are basically harassing peoples owning guns with objects flying at low heights, sized similarly to ducks.
What could possibly go wrong?
Just bought one to use for scouting deer next season. Now why didn't I think of using drones for hunting before?
Thanks PETA!
PETA are assholes and hypocrites, this is a good legal precedent, if their organization can be prevented for employing this tech for the sole reason that they want to harass people, then laws can be passed to prevent other asshole organizations like PETA from using them similarly.
And posters that think PETA doing this was a good idea are drooling retards.
Fuck Peta.
It doesn't matter. They can't change anything.
I would encourage PETA to solicit collaboration by the ACLU and the Center for Constitutional Rights in challenging what seems an unconstitutional, biased law. (If, however, drones are not legal in IL, and that is the basis of the law, that's another matter). Personally, I'd like to see the use of drones banned completely, with the exception of search and rescue, and that goes for private and governmental use of ALL kinds.
My GF loves to hunt. So now I have a reason to join her! She can hunt the deer and I can kill the drones!
They are expensive right?
I see a new sport ... Try to find where they are being used and go drone hunting.... Sounds like fun to me.