HARTFORD — No one really expects that computerized, remote-control hunting of animals and birds is going to happen in Connecticut, but some lawmakers don’t want to take the chance.
The legislature’s Environmental Committee voted last week in favor of bill to make it a Class A misdemeanor to use computer software or computer services to stage remote-controlled hunting in this state.
"There’s no sportsmanship in this," said state Rep. Patricia M. Widlitz, D-Guilford, one co-sponsor of the bill. "It’s slaughter, not hunting."
Bob Crook, spokesman for the Coalition of Connecticut Sportsmen, agrees with Widlitz, which is something that doesn’t happen often when it comes to legislation about hunting or guns.
"When you go hunting, you’re supposed to go into the woods and give an animal at least a fair chance to survive," said Crook. "The hunters were all over this (proposal for remote control hunting). They hate it."
The furor over this issue began about three years ago when a Texas businessman set up a Web site that used a camera and a computer-controlled rifle aimed at a pen on his 220-acre property.
Inside the pen were live deer, wild hogs, antelope and other animals. Subscribers to the Web site could, for a fee, aim and focus the camera on an animal and, with the click of a mouse, fire the rifle at whatever creature was in range.
The businessman, John Lockwood, or his employees, would make certain the animal was dead, cut it up and send the meat or head to the Internet "hunter." Lockwood argued his service would allow handicapped people or servicemen overseas a chance to experience hunting.
But his plan brought immediate protests, including some from the NRA. Texas banned the practice, as have several other states.
"There’s no sportsmanship to it," said Widlitz. "The animals are penned… It’s just ridiculous."
A similar bill to ban remote-controlled hunting was proposed in the General Assembly last year but never won approval. Widlitz says she doesn’t believe there is opposition to this year’s bill, but that the press of legislative business in the short, three-month 2008 General Assembly session could cause problems for low-priority bills.
Cook said he hasn’t bothered with the legislation very much.
"There’s no good reason for this," said Cook, noting Lockwood’s operation was out of business in a month and he knows of no similar Internet hunting site.
Also, Cook doubts that there is "any way to enforce what’s in the bill… You can’t regulate what people do on the Internet."
But Cook does have ulterior motive for wanting the bill kept alive: he thinks it just might make a good vehicle for an amendment to authorize hunting in Connecticut on Sundays, a proposal Widlitz is totally against.
Gregory B. Hladky can be contacted at ghladky@nhregister.com or at (860) 524-0719