The whole point of hunting is to be outdoors, enjoying nature and the authentic experience of it. Without actually being there, there’s no point at all except to know that some animal died because you pushed a button online. It’s RETARDED! FUCK ONLINE HUNTING.
Wow…that’s just fucking wrong.
Yeah, that’s wrong.
Now, if they had first person shooters you could play as they actually occurred in real time, that would be awesome.
I heard awhile back that hunting games consistently sell well. I played one for about 5 minutes and quit from boredom, but there must be plenty of other people who like these games:
I didn’t see this one coming, but should we really be surprised since it’s proven that a potential market exists? Repulsed? yes. Surprised? it was only a matter of time until someone took hunting games to the next level.
The case of the parapalegic customer is an interesting wrinkle in the debate. Maybe he should get a copy of Nintendo’s Duck Hunter. I don’t think he’ll get his chance to shoot a live animal.
Call me crazy, but I always thought the whole point of hunting was to, you know, hunt animals. Otherwise it would just be camping, wouldn’t it? Would the online hunts be more acceptable if the hunters were sitting out in the woods clicking animals to death with WiFi-enabled laptops?
And when you go hunting in the woods, some animal dies because you pull a trigger.
Either way, animals are shot and become food. Online hunting allows people with disabilities to get in on the action. Sure, it may not be the full hunting experience, but I don’t see how that makes it wrong or “RETARDED.”
neutron star, there’s a world of difference between actually stalking prey and then pulling the trigger and pushing a button while sitting in your home.
In the former case, you have to enter the animal’s domain and, at least to the extent you must walk and seek out the prey, earn your meal on a physical level. The deer or hogs or birds don’t present themselves to you and ask you to cap off their lives with a slug. You have to leave your usual comfort zone and enter a different habitat, something most industrialized people never really do.
In the latter case, well, none of the above happens. You sit there and you click buttons. You don’t even need to put down your cell phone and listen for a change.
Yes, I would agree with you that online hunting is not as sporting as the actual act. I just don’t follow the leap from “not as sporting” to “wrong” that many people seem to be making.
The hunters are killing exotic imports, not native animals. Online hunters need a Texas permit. There is an attendant physically monitoring the gun at all times. Disabled people who thought they’d never hunt again get at least a little taste of the experience. Who is being harmed here?
the animals, I’d have thought.
Alright, I guess online hunting is not wrong or stupid for someone who can’t hunt any other way (i.e. someone who’s disabled.) However it’s pretty lame if you can actually hunt for real.
Online Fishing, anyone?
If Lockwood had led guided physical hunts on his ranch, the same animals would be dead and nobody would have raised an eyebrow.
I agree with the OP 100%. I didn’t think hunters could possibly get any more cowardly, but technology and invention have proved me wrong again. Oh for a 360 degree free zoom on the weapon of choice. Oops, I didn’t mean to shoot you in the knee caps Mr. Internet animal slaughter host guy. I guess my 1s and 0s got crossed up. Oh for a species bigger, faster, stronger and smarter than us, who will become our masters and hunt us for sport because we don’t have the mental clarity they do. We created the game of football; thusly we are superior to pigs and they deserve to die at our whim.
I don’t get it. There’s a gun in a shed, and if an animal walks into the field in front of the gun, they shoot off a round? Is it just me, or is this like taking a gun to the zoo? Is the whole point just to wait around until an animal wanders in front of the gun?
Does anyone know what happens to the animals that are killed?
I might be a little bit more accepting if they are being used as food.
Oh, fer crying out loud…
Unless you noodle catfish barehanded or stand naked in the woods and beat prey animals to death with your fists, you are a hypocrite to complain about the technology that some other hunter uses (provided the slaughter is not indiscriminate). I am not morally opposed to hunting, but let’s be clear- the goal is to kill an animal, and we use technology to make it easier for us to do it. Even if a paraplegic paid some other guys to physically drag a deer in front of his rifle, how is he morally different from someone who buys meat from the butcher?
If you, personally, prefer to make it harder for yourself to harvest game animals by, say, using a muzzleloading black powder musket or handmade longbow, well, more power to you and I admire your attitude. However, I don’t think that you can argue that it is more noble, just more difficult.
IMHO, it’s catch-and-release fishing that is the ultimate asshole ‘sport’. Just a pure fucking ego stroke for the fisherman. Catch it and eat it or don’t bother.
As for why hunting games for the computer are so popular - maybe it’s because they’re always in the $9.99 bin at every department store.
I see way too many opportunities for a fuck up. Suppose you fire wrong and hit someone who’s supposed to be monitoring the thing? Are they only set up at certain times, or is it a free for all?
How do you make sure you have a “clean kill?”
Sounds incredibly fucking stupid.
A lot of hunting is that way already.
For example, let’s look at bear hunting in my area, northern Ontario.
Guides go out and leave old meat in piles at specific sites. Bears come along an eat the meat. Pretty soon the bears become accustoned to going to these sites over and over again for the meat. This is known as bear baiting. Come hunting season, the guides build stands (usually just a bit of plywood or tarp, sometimes up in a tree, and sometimes at ground level). Then their clients (usually but not always Americans) arrive and are escorted by the guides to the stands. When a trained bear comes along looking for its accustomed dinner, it is shot by the client who has been sitting in the stand waiting for it. There is no skill what so ever involved on the part of the client, other than pointing at gun at a large object and pulling the trigger.
From that type of hunting, it is not a very large leap to remote-controlled hunting.
Since this is the pit, I’d like to give a hearty fuck you to people who participate in bear baiting. It gives hunting a bad name, confusing hunting by skill with slaughter. It also tends to occur in areas that used by other outdoor recreationists, creating a hazard for them by attracting bears to trailheads and campsites.
Samantha Bee reported on this on a recent episode of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.
However, I forgot anything that she said about it.
It’s not about procuring food, it’s just about the cheap, pathetic, masturbatory thrill of killing an animal with a mouse click. I’m not even saying that should be illegal and I don’t care if people want to buy or sell this kind of service but let’s just call it what it is…it’s a first person shooter where something really dies and that’s what the customer gets off on. Let’s at least be homest about that.
Damn, none of you smell a hoax here? I haven’t even read the article yet, but just from what I’ve read here I see what’s going on, and I’m saying hoax. You guys do remember that the “Hunting for Bambi” hoax was picked up as a real story by major news-sources all over the country, right?
It’s not a hoax. I know someone who has tried it. And no, I don’t approve of it. As far as being stupid, what do you expect from an activity where the participants spend thousands of dollars on equipment to keep them from falling out of trees, while they’re waiting for a deer to show up?