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."

32 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. Land of the Free! by beh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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...

    1. Re:Land of the Free! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Land of pirates: gratuitous "r" inserted. Was supposed to be "land of the fee".

      In the US, you are free if one of two categories applies:

      1) You have the money to pay people with the power to make you less free;

      2) Nobody is listening to you anyway. Lip service costs nothing.

      In fact, most people come under category 2 - and this is where dictatorships have all gone wrong: out of paranoia, they silence even the people who would do no harm if they could speak. The illusion of freedom is Western civilisation's greatest gift to human psychology.

    2. Re:Land of the Free! by Charcharodon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Let people hunt members of PETA?

    3. Re:Land of the Free! by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Informative

      Wow that is the most confused reply I think I have ever seen.
      "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..."

      First so do you think that people should be allowed to take part in totally legal activity without out harassment? If so what does the monitoring of internet meta data have to do with anything?
      Second do you understand that these drones are often flown over private property without consent? Yes aircraft can fly over private property but they must do so at a safe altitude which is 1000 feet from any obstacle within 2000 ft of the aircraft. In none congested areas it is down to 500 ft of altitude and no closer than 500 ft from any person, vehicle or obstacle. So you can fly any lower than a 50 story building.
      The rules for flying a radio controlled aircraft have been around for at least 50 years and those are. The big rules are you must be in VISUAL contact with the aircraft at all times and you do not fly over people. You also do not fly over private property without permission.
      So PETA was already breaking safety regulations with these operations and should be stopped before they hurt someone. BTW I do not fish, hunt, or have a gun. I do fly RC aircraft.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    4. Re: Land of the Free! by JWW · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm more in favor of not infringing on PETA's rights to harass hunters with drones. But I'm also in favor of the hunters destroying PETA's drones, especially if they are harassing the hunters on private land.

      Also depending on the level of harassment and monitoring, I am also in favor of the hunters and fisherman pressing charges against PETA.

    5. Re:Land of the Free! by rwise2112 · · Score: 3

      deliberately use their loud RC aircraft to harass people and spook wildlife

      Spooking wildlife with an aircraft is already illegal according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

      --

      "For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert"
    6. Re: Land of the Free! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      You're in favour of "free" speech that nobody listens to, destroying things with guns, and lawsuits.

      You, sir, are a Yank.

    7. Re:Land of the Free! by mosb1000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't like people who hunt for entertainment

      I hate people who assume most hunters hunt for sport. Every hunter I've ever known hunts for food.

    8. Re: Land of the Free! by jythie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, one question is, is PETA infringing on rights? Their stated goal is to monitor for violations since in many areas enforcement of hunting and environmental regulations is pretty much non existent. While I am no fan of PETA, there is something to be said for citizens steeping up when local governments refuse to implement the laws or are so budget starved that they do not have the resources to actually do any monitoring or enforcement of their own.

      So in a way, what this law has done is made it illegal for a group with a weak lobby to determine how badly a group with a strong lobby is breaking the law.

      Sad thing is, I suspect the push behind this law is not coming from hunters but from private industry. There has been a lot of grumbling at how it is increasingly easy for local watchdog groups to catch environmental violations via drones after farms and factories spent so much time making sure the local police and regulators don't come looking, so there have been pushes to make such things illegal. Activists are a lot harder to pay off or threaten then local officials, so making it illegal for activists to aid in enforcing the law is a high priority for some.

    9. Re: Land of the Free! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      if this thing flies onto my property and interferes with a cull, then PETA has not only trespassed, but it is harming the very animals that it is trying to protect. Unless PETA expects vets to go into the woods and start neutering every woodchuck and deer in a thousand square miles, culls are the most effective way to deal with population explosions.

    10. Re: Land of the Free! by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good. Peta are hypocritical arseholes. Anything that is bad for them, I'm in favour of.

      I actually happen to think that a large asteroid colliding with Earth doesn't sound like a good idea.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    11. Re: Land of the Free! by tacokill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, all this does is prevent PETA from harassing hunters via nefarious means. I assure you, the hunters are all for this as PETA has shown itself to be consistently irrational (to put it mildly). Do you not think they will use this "monitoring" for harassment? Of course they will.

      Hunters have hunted for longer than this country has been around and now, all of a sudden, we need an adversarial group like PETA "monitoring" for compliance? Give me a break.

      If PETA were a bit more rational (not counting on it), they might be welcomed to the table for constructive solutions to the problems they see.

    12. Re: Land of the Free! by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 3, Funny

      I find them hilarious. One year an activist trespassed on school property wearing a large fish costume and handing out flyers equating fishing to murder. It was a particularly hot day and eventually he succumbed to heat exhaustion and flopped around like a trout before the paramedics arrived. I wish I can find the link to the local news cast.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    13. Re: Land of the Free! by Quila · · Score: 3, Informative

      PETA has a long history of hunter harrassment with the purpose of preventing them from legally taking game. There is no reason to believe they only want to use drones to document violations of existing game laws, which are already usually well-enforced with draconian punishments.

    14. Re: Land of the Free! by hazah · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Probably the most ignorant thing I've ever read in my life. The delusion is strong with this one.

    15. Re:Land of the Free! by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Its a little of both (and I say that as an avid hunter).

      I eat what I kill, and several deer in the freezer per year go a long ways in lowering how much meat I need to actually buy at the grocery store. Still, even hunting on a budget, the time commitment is still pretty steep. When you account for days when you see nothing and straight up scouting time, each deer taken is probably a 12-15 hour time commitment. With the idea that "time is money" I'm certainly not coming out ahead there, but I do actually enjoy the challenge and process of going out hunting, so it is indeed a recreational/sport activity as well.

      I'd compare it to working a 2nd job - its pays a little but not much, but I enjoy it enough that I keep working.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    16. Re: Land of the Free! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure they do, an issued permit means they have a legal right to kill animals within the confines of said permit.

      PETA, on the other hand, does not have a legal right to harass people, especially on private land. If they want to change things, a sound arguement and political campaign is a better idea than publicity stunts and rhetoric. If states are actually legalizing weed, who knowns maybe hunting can be outlawed.

      Something PETA completely fails to understand though, we have kind of killed off most of the natural predators. It is funny because I have heard PETA complain about this but never realize the implications. If the predators are gone, the prey doesn't stop breeding. Hunting permits are carefully issued to maintain wild population stocks. We already did the damage to the predators and now have to clean up our mess. If the wild predator populations climb back up to a level that can keep the prey levels in check, I would be happy reassess my positions. I don't actually like hunters, but my personal distaste with them and what they do doesn't mean they don't have a role to play.

  2. Do I need a license? by blocsync · · Score: 5, Funny

    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 :)

  3. Those aren't drones! by capebretonsux · · Score: 4, Funny

    They're the next gen of skeets!

  4. Re:clearly... by TWiTfan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    peta cares about animals (does that mean they don't care about humans?

    My experience with PETA is that the only thing they care about is themselves. They've done way more to serve their own smug senses of self-importance than they've ever done to help any animals.

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  5. Good! by Murdoch5 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

    1. Re:Good! by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're clearly a hunter or know a few, ever know someone to have a few beers at lunch and head back out? Or gawdawful hungover?

      Nope, never met one. Course, the hunters I know are the strict "no alcohol Christian" types.

      How about baiting? Ever see the old "Warning! Deer eating this corn will be shot!" gag sign?

      Nope, never met one. Course, the hunters I know are mostly farmers.

      BLOCKQUOTE> And now to the one that bugs me the most: as a target (only) archer, I don't know how many really terrible "archers" I've seen hanging around the shop/range bragging about "yeah, I hit him, but then lost the blood trail after an hour...".Bow hunters injuring and maiming animals is just a dirty little secret of the sport.

      Where I come from, those guys are known as "liars". That's what you say when you miss.

      BLOCKQUOTE>Of course, rifle/slug hunters always go for the heart/lung shot, because all they care about is the head. If they were hunting for meat, they'd go for the head shot, where you get either a clean kill or a clean miss.

      Umm, no. Only an idiot goes for a headshot. And the hunters I know hunt for meat, not for trophies. And still aim for center-of-mass, just like you're taught in any marksmanship course.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  6. Comments are missing the point by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  7. Re:Staged hunt? by Charliemopps · · Score: 3

    Actually, the way it works is lame. I'm a hunter... There are places you can go where they raise the birds, clip their wings and fence them in. The wings are clipped in such a way that they can fly a "bit" but can really fly off. So they'll still get up when your dog gets on them, but they cant get far. They raise so many that walking through their land pretty much assures you will get some.

    Most of the other hunters I know consider this "cheating" because you're basically just shooting Livestock. There are even worse places where they keep the birds caged and just have guys release them to fly so you can pick them out of the sky. Again, totally lame. I'd agree that, if that were the kind of hunt her were on, he wasn't doing much more than using the birds as targets.

  8. Shooting Them Down by sycodon · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.
  9. Re:PETA, contact the NSA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah, these off-topic NSA references sure don't get tiring. Keep 'em coming. We all admire your fresh and on-topic humour. I'm sure somewhere around here Fouad is laughing at your cleverness.

  10. Re:clearly... by Wootery · · Score: 4, Informative
  11. What a complete joke of a quad copter. by DroneWhatever · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  12. Re:clearly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    I can. There was a faction of them at my college. Mostly privileged folks with a guilt trip so they flew around the world, crashing through Nicaragua and the Florida Keys and other places they could YOLO about telling the natives not to hunt squirrels. I'm exaggerating only slightly. Mostly they're just idiots. My most recent encounter with them was they're protest over a python hunt in Florida. Pythons are an invasive species in Florida and they're devastating the local environment. Doesn't stop a bunch of the PETA idiots from protesting how they're killed (decapitation, which is the most humane way to kill them).

  13. Re:Staged hunt? by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It is a lot of work, however it isn't the "hunter" who does it. The owner of the "hunting ground" is the one who does it and then charges parties to go out and shoot the animals. Lots of paying jobs are work.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canned_hunt

    and from that article; doesn't talk about that particular incident, but one a couple of years before:

    Another less well-known incident occurred two years prior to the Dick Cheney hunting incident when the vice president participated in a canned hunt at the Rolling Rock Club in Ligonier Township, Pennsylvania. Cheney and nine companions killed 417 out of 500 ringneck pheasants, of which the Vice President himself is credited with killing 70, and an unknown number of mallard ducks.[8]

    What kind of dick uses live animals just as targets and kills more than many families could eat in a single session? Dick Cheney does. Which I mean, I have no problem with animal slaughter for food or clothing but, we don't call people who work in slaughterhouses hunters.

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  14. As long as I can... by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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...
  15. Re:clearly... by Valdrax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What hyperbole? I'm not sure you actually know what the word means.

    My experience with animal rights activists has been pretty similar. People with too much privilege to have personal experience with human problems and an utter lack of strategy in pursuing their agenda that results in a bunch of actions that only sound clever to people inside the group, that alienate everyone outside of it, and that more often than not hurt the cause of animal rights by being the worst living strawmen against it.

    My law school had an animal rights program that overlapped a lot with the environmental program I was in, and most of the animal rights people were pretty flaky -- harmless and not nearly as self-sabotaging as PETA activists, but prone to stupid things like running around "casing" Asian food markets for sharks fin while all being a bunch of suspicious-acting white people who didn't speak a bit of Chinese and not really realizing the cost of shark's fin vs. the income bracket the stores they went to serviced.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").