A new California bill would punish Internet hunters who shoot at targets by remotely operating rifles linked to video cameras. The measure, approved unanimously by an assembly committee on Tuesday, would ban shooting at or killing any animal over the Internet, forbid bringing animals slain via the Internet into the state, and penalize violators with up to six months of jail time and fines of up to $1,000.
Fourteen other states are weighing similar bans, and earlier this year, Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., introduced a House resolution that would outlaw Internet hunting nationwide and punish violators with up to five years in prison.
This is the most outrageous thing I think I've heard yet this year. Don't these legislators have anything better to do than pass laws that interfere with individual rights? Isn't there a budget crisis in California that these people should be concentrating on? Is hunting over the internet really such a problem?
I don't see how hunting over the internet would be as big a problem as to require legislation, especially an outright ban. This is not a popular thing and it is doubtful that it would ever achieve the popularity of traditional hunting. People who hunt nowadays do it for the sport. How is it sporting to sit in front of a computer and move a mouse to aim a gun? If that's what people want to do, most likely they will buy video games because it is less expensive. Almost no one depends on hunting to provide sustenance. Furthermore, the vast majority of Americans do not hunt at all.
This appears to be another knee-jerk reaction from the legislative world, similar to what happened when the Patriot act was passed. The bi-partisan support this is receiving is especially troubling and is another example of why we need to start electing people who are independant or from other political parties. Sometimes, I think it would be better if congresscritters would just sit on their hands and hum quietly to themselves when in session, rather than passing more needless regulations.
I wish the legislators would spend MORE time taking care of the REAL business of the state and country and stop passing needless legislation (for all the reasons you stated) and voting themselves pay raises!
Chamtech's spray-on antenna uses a nano material to provide a low-power boost to antenna range. The wireless-in-a-can product may some day bring an end to unsightly cell towers.
Whether Apple will release a new iPad next month doesn't seem to be the question as much as what day it will happen. A new rumor has it down to the day.
Tommy Jordan, the man who shot his daughter's laptop for YouTube, gets a visit from police and child protection services. Oh, and Good Morning America.
Along with green-lighting Google's buy of Motorola, the Justice Department today OKs an Apple-Microsoft-RIM partnership deal to buy Nortel patents, and Apple's plan to acquire Novell patents.
EnerG2 opens a plant to make an engineered carbon that will improve performance of energy storage devices and make storage for start-stop hybrid cars less expensive.
"Never Stop Playing" campaign for upcoming portable marks Sony's largest platform launch marketing spend, with ads to reach YouTube, Facebook, TV, and billboards in major cities.
As UC Berkeley students, the co-founders of "Back to the Roots" discovered they could grow mushrooms using recycled coffee grounds. Now their mushroom kit sells at grocery stores across the country.
I don't see how hunting over the internet would be as big a problem as to require legislation, especially an outright ban. This is not a popular thing and it is doubtful that it would ever achieve the popularity of traditional hunting. People who hunt nowadays do it for the sport. How is it sporting to sit in front of a computer and move a mouse to aim a gun? If that's what people want to do, most likely they will buy video games because it is less expensive. Almost no one depends on hunting to provide sustenance. Furthermore, the vast majority of Americans do not hunt at all.
This appears to be another knee-jerk reaction from the legislative world, similar to what happened when the Patriot act was passed. The bi-partisan support this is receiving is especially troubling and is another example of why we need to start electing people who are independant or from other political parties. Sometimes, I think it would be better if congresscritters would just sit on their hands and hum quietly to themselves when in session, rather than passing more needless regulations.