Thursday, February 16, 2012

SHARK hunting.

Animal rights group says drone shot down.
A remote-controlled aircraft owned by an animal rights group was reportedly shot down near Broxton Bridge Plantation Sunday.
Steve Hindi, president of SHARK (SHowing Animals Respect and Kindness), said his group was preparing to launch its Mikrokopter drone to video what he called a live pigeon shoot on Sunday when law enforcement officers and an attorney claiming to represent the privately-owned plantation near Ehrhardt tried to stop the aircraft from flying.
"It didn't work; what SHARK was doing was perfectly legal," Hindi said in a news release. "Once they knew nothing was going to stop us, the shooting stopped and the cars lined up to leave."
He said the animal rights group decided to send the drone up anyway.
"Seconds after it hit the air, numerous shots rang out," Hindi said in the release. "As an act of revenge for us shutting down the pigeon slaughter, they had shot down our copter."
"Smile you sonofabitch."


Anonymous said...

Maybe a 10 ga. goose gun should be on the "shopping list"?

Anonymous said...

It does LOOK like a Pidgeon.

Anonymous said...

You can beat them. They are a great goose gun. I love my SP-10.

My longest confirmed kill was 90+ yards, hell of a lead and one magic BB.

My hunting buddies couldn't believe the shot, they still say that goose died only because it was laughing so hard at me for taking the shot.

Hefferman said...

Whats the big deal? Everyone needs target practice some time.

They thought it was a real big pigeon.

Sean said...

Screw them bastids.

swiontek3625 said...

Nice drone. Good design. Clearly an invasion of privacy. If the drone was over posted private property, then it was trespassing and could be seized by the property owner. Of course, to be able to seize the drone it must be brought down to earth (by any means). If the owner of the drone self-identifies, then the owner could be charged with trespassing by proxy. It might be off-setting charges of destruction of personal property (the drone) and trespassing by proxy. Of course, the property owner could just keep the drone (as a trophy?) and the owner of the drone would just be out of luck. I look forward to seeing how this plays out.

Anonymous said...

This Hindi guy cracks me up! I personally have seen him laying on the road, giving mouth to mouth, to a runned over squirrel...swear to God. Other than that, great shootin boys!!!!

Happy D said...

Flying a remote controlled aircraft over an aerial shooting event and then being surprised when it is shot down talk about a group of stupid people.

SHARK is a low grade cowardly terrorist group with an fixation on flying as a means of intimidation.

Anonymous said...

If you use one of those things to take video of your neighbor sunbathing naked in her back yard, you're going to jail.

Self defense, IMHO.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the drone is going to be mounted like a trophy head and hung on the wall along with all the other trophys.

Anonymous said...

A 1 Watt blue spectrum laser can't be good for the drone's CCD.

J. Croft said...

Perhaps a load specifically for taking out these RC wonderplanes can be cooked up. Just need some RC planes to experiment on and some enthusiastic shooters and reloaders.

Anonymous said...

Here is how to deal with drones: Get the Hollywood celebs to pass privacy, no-trespassing, no warrant-less search laws against these kinds of drones so that the paparazzi can't harass them. The law works just as well for us, and for once we can get the lefty's to spend money on something we need. We both need it, actually. The lefty celebs have privacy rights, too.

The warrant-less search implications of drones really has me concerned. I predict lots of messy cases about that.

Anonymous said...

Dont go getting all anti-drone just yet.

WE are going to need these things in the future. Think of them just like a firearm, they will passa ll the laws to keep private citizens from using them but companies and the LEO's will have free run.