Drone Hunting Season May Open Soon In Deer Trail, Colorado

Formaldehyde

Both Fair And Balanced
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
33,999
Location
USA #1
Want a Drone-Hunting License in Colorado? Get In Line.

Is it just me, or are things really coming off the rails in Colorado? Earlier this summer, a handful of northern counties got all hyped up on freedom juice and started talking about secession. (The rural counties were reportedly upset over “restrictive gun laws and clean energy mandates.”) Now, a town to the south has been inundated with requests for drone-hunting licenses—and we’re not talking about using flying robots to shoot deer on the ground. Naturally, it doesn’t matter that there’s no such thing as a drone-hunting license.

Here’s how the whole brouhaha began. In June, some dude in Deer Trail, Co., proposed that there should be a town-wide ordinance to shoot down government drones, complete with a $100 bounty should one successfully ground one. (FYI: You’d have to provide a piece of the drone to prove your “kill”.) Despite the fact that the town won’t even vote on the ordinance until October, the story snagged national media attention, which in turn spurred red-blooded Americans everywhere to send Deer Trail a check for $25 (the proposed cost of the license that doesn’t exist). When the town clerk stopped counting, they’d received $19,006.

In all, Deer Trail received 983 personal checks, which means there are whole lot of Americans who’d like a chance to legally fire guns in the air. It also means some folks apparently put their drone-hunting license on layaway, since 983 x $25 is more than $19,006. (And what’s up with that extra $6?! This isn’t a free-for-all, people. It’s a hypothetical license to hunt robots in the sky. Show some respect.)

For some reason, the buzz-kills over at the Federal Aviation Administration aren’t nearly as excited about the prospect of drone-hunting season. In a strongly worded statement the agency warned, “Shooting at an unmanned aircraft could result in criminal or civil liability, just as would firing at a manned airplane.” (Subtext: “Do not cuss with us.”)

The agency also appealed to the public’s common sense, arguing drones falling out of the sky could cause damage to property or people on the ground. Honestly, this line of reasoning seems like the least of our concerns in a discussion centered around firing ammunition into the clouds—but just this week a Queens teenager died from wounds inflicted by an out-of-control model helicopter. So I guess the FAA isn’t just trying to rain on our gun bash.

There doesn’t seem to be much chance Deer Trail (or any other town) will actually legalize drone hunting, but that probably won’t stop people from shooting at them. “We do not want drones in town,” said Phillip Steel, the guy who initially proposed the license. “They fly in town, they get shot down.”

Personally, if drone season in Colorado is anything like deer season in Pennsylvania, I’m in. When else do you have an excuse to go on a nature hike with your buddies and eat weird pickled meats out of tins all the while not seeing a single specimen of the thing you’re hunting?
Do you think the FAA is wasting their time appealing to the "public’s common sense"? Or can this be properly managed by providing shooting ranges to minimize the hazards to others?


Link to video.
 
Not sure if a drone flying near your house would be a good thing to have. Maybe someone will decide to shoot it, or throw a rock at it. The drone will have to play some taped message urging him to stop the needless violence. Of course the drone can be programmed to fire back with real ammo if the bad citizen does not comply and put down his weapon.

Pretty much like the prototype ED-209 :)


Link to video.
 
“They fly in town, they get shot down.”
Say what you will about the license proposal itself, they do have a catchy slogan.
 
:lol:

I read this and thought 'Oh, someone's going to be hunting deer using a drone? That's possible. Though strangely daft'.

I was wrong, apparently.
 
This sounds like an amusing alternative to skeet.
 
Wouldn't you be liable for damaging government property?

(Not that I want to spoil anyone's fun, you understand.)
 
I read this and thought 'Oh, someone's going to be hunting deer using a drone? That's possible. Though strangely daft'.

Rednecks have mounted guns on RC helicopters with cameras. I think the noise would chase deer away though.

Anyway, a $100 bounty wouldn't even come close to covering the cost of all the ammo that would be needed to bring an actual drone down. Much less the possible property damage and injuries caused when the bullets come back down.
 
Drone hunting shouldn't be subject to regulation. Let us not be concerned with killing too many drones -- our desire is to drive them to extinction.
 
What drones exactly are they talking about? I thought most government drones flew too high to be brought down by small arms.
 
Rednecks have mounted guns on RC helicopters with cameras. I think the noise would chase deer away though.

Anyway, a $100 bounty wouldn't even come close to covering the cost of all the ammo that would be needed to bring an actual drone down. Much less the possible property damage and injuries caused when the bullets come back down.
Imagine a light-weight, possibly gas-filled dirigible, drone. With an electric motor.

But yes, yes, I know drones are thought of as quite large things capable of flying over large distances.
 
It's not about the cash, it's the 75 XP from bringing down each UAV that counts.
 
We already have drone hunting in the UK.

The hunt saboteurs (e.g. townies and veggies) had fox hunting abolished by convincing the last labour government to pass a law against it so as to pretend to stand up to the toffs class that is ripping us off.

So the hunts introduced fake hunts without foxes.

A lead horseman towes a bundle soaked in anniseed or suchlike.

But some of the dogs trained to hunt foxes picked up the smell of foxes and
hunted foxes instead.

The veggies claim that this is often used as a spurious cover excuse for simply continuing with illegal fox hunting.

So they sent up drones to take photos.

These annoyed the huntsmen what with their buzzing noise.

So the huntsmen started shooting them down.



I suppose it beats clay pidgeon shooting.
 
It's called drag hunting.

Instead of the normal hunting "pink" (which isn't pink at all, but red), the huntsmen dress up in women's clothes.

(Apart from the huntswomen. I don't know what they dress in. Probably fox fur.)
 
So I could buy a hundred of these;


... break them and turn them in, making a $7500 profit?
 
Top Bottom