Hacker News Reader

Comment by julianeon | Hacker News Reader

What is the "unfair advantage?" Seems legitimate to me (or no less legitimate than whatever the 'fair' method is).

Hunting is a sport and there is some element of sportsmanship reflected by the laws.

Although with spotlighting in particular I am pretty sure it's because the man doesnt want you shooting guns in the dark. When you light it up you ruin your own night vision and cannot see your backstop.

I don't think this is the primary reason all though it may be part of it. You are often allowed to hunt/shoot animals at night such as preditors or nocturnal animales like coyotes, skunks, racoons etc..

Using the drones to track deer seems unfair. Take an extreme example: imagine using several drones with thermal imaging cameras to follow in real time the location of every deer in an area. The hunter then uses their phone to select the largest and best of them to take. The drones sweep in and frighten the target deer in the direction of the hunter, who is waiting beside their truck on a nearby access road.

People say "just having a rifle makes it unfair to the deer," but I think even if you believe that, using drones seems unsporting to the deer, and unfair to other hunters who don't have access to the same resources.

I don't think the dear is interested in the sport, either way.

I disagree, I think they're more invested in it than anybody.

I don’t really get the idea of any type of hunting as sporting or not, between the hunter and the animal. Sports are games where consenting players agree on some set of rules.

If people want to hunt for animal population control or food—I get it, fine. But any idea of fairness between the animal and the hunter is blatantly absurd.

Sport has an older meaning, of anything one does in leisure for the enjoyment of it. Hunting was always sport, and certainly in English circles, the question of good sportsmanship, and what is sporting, have also always been applied to hunting in those very terms.

It's not a game, however. That's what you hunt.

I’m aware that it is a thing, but it still makes no sense to me, in the framework of fairness. It sounds like it is still a game, just a single-player one, the player is handicapping themself not out of a sense of fairness but in the interest of keeping it fun.

It seems really inhumane, to be honest. However we gussy it up, any rules of sportsmanship that get in the way of a good quick clean kill are just animal cruelty with extra steps.

Lots of traditions, in retrospect, don’t look so great—dogfighting, bullfighting. Times change.

I always figured that the more athletic ability, strategy, and respectable behavior that was required of the humans in order to prevail, the more sporting the pursuit whether there were any games or competitions involved at all.

> I always figured that the more athletic ability, strategy,

But why do people want to do that? I think the purpose is to provide enjoyment, entertainment, fun.

> and respectable behavior

This is where I want to quibble most I think. The only respectable way to kill an animal is in the manner that causes the least possible pain and suffering. If there comes a point where fun impedes the goal of reducing the suffering, then that fun is evil.

I’m probably missing something because I don’t see any distinction between sports and games other than an arbitrary social classification that calls the former more respectable. (The deer don’t see it either, though).

Well, I did want to frame my comment in a way that would still apply for those whose point of view is that no type of hunting is sportsmanlike in their opinion.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com