fire by wire

Once upon a time, there was email. Then came hyperlinked web pages, followed by e-commerce. Now, virtual shooting has finally made it to the Internet, courtesy of the folks at Live-Shot.com. Just in time for Christmas, too!

Don't confuse this with a Cabela's video game, as there are no pixellated bullets or 32-bit targets. Nope, all the people of the world (at least those with Internet access and a credit card) can now share the joy and satisfaction of firing real ammo at real targets, guided by an on-site video camera. And for just a bit more cash ("$9.95 plus shipping and handling!"), you can preserve the magic of your long-distance marksmanship with a DVD recording. The whole family will certainly want to crowd around the big-screen for that.

I thought these kind of wacky ventures – where anything and everything in the world simply HAD to have online counterpart – got swept away with the Internet bubble. Hmmmm ... maybe the economy really is coming back after all.

But the truly inspired bit about Live-Shot's little techno-range is that soon you'll be able to KILL with it too. The man behind the mayhem, John Underwood, describes his epiphany in a CNet article:

The idea came last year while viewing another Web site on which cameras posted in the wild are used to snap photos of animals. "We were looking at a beautiful white-tail buck and my friend said, 'If you just had a gun for that.' A little lightbulb went off in my head," Underwood said.

CNet didn't report how many watts powered that particular flash. Underwood's rationale is that handicapped hunters and those unable to afford a trip to West Texas can benefit from his system. As nice as it is to see the hunting crowd (and, by proxy, the NRA) take an abiding interest in social equity, I suspect this is simply yet another profit motive that further cheapens an already questionable industry.

I grew up around bird hunting, so my perceptions of the sport primarily involve long walks in the country, bird dogs, and shotguns. Very pastoral, other than the shotguns, and also very active. I've never really understood the passive approach to hunting, particularly the fascination with camping out in a man-made deer blind, waiting to blow the brains out of some farm-raised buck using a semi-automatic man-cannon. How can any self-respecting hunter think this qualifies? Let's consult the Oxford American Dictionary:

hunt v. 1. to pursue (wild animals) for food or
sport.

There's no pursuit, just a lot of flat-ass waiting around. And any animal shot within the confines of a fence is not too terribly wild. Now with the Live-Shot approach, the "hunter" doesn't even have to schlep out to the blind, let alone truck themselves out to Edwards County. Press a button, and get a trophy buck, pig, or antelope shipped to your door. Because that's where the money is, and that's what this is all about. Underwood has opened up a whole new revenue stream from anyone who ever wanted to put an exotic animal above the mantle without the muss and fuss of actually working for it. All it's gonna cost you is money (assuming your dignity probably already went by the wayside long before stooping to online hunting).

Maybe Texas Parks & Wildlife will address this issue by requiring all hunting be done in person. Then again, maybe they won't. This is Texas after all, and common sense often has a hard time passing muster. Either way, I don't really mind much one way or the other. Just please, don't call it hunting. I propose "candy-ass pop-squatting" as a reasonable alternative.

And while I think Live-Shot is pretty sad, if not completely violating the spirit of hunting, it's still better than some alternatives. Given the rate at which Hill Country ranch land is disappearing, the Internet and all its stupidity may be necessary to keep the developer's plow at bay. If the choice ever comes down between online hunting or yet another development of pseudo-rugged Hill Country gentrified subdivisions, then gentlemen, by all means ... click and load!