Halcon,
I guess that is why I had a phone call from a hunter from OR about 2 years or so ago, that was feed up with inefficient "primitve" muzzleloaders. He shot and hit 4 different bull elk with his "primitve" muzzleloader, at well under 100yds each. And he failed to find a single one, eventhough all 4 were hit and all 4 left a blood trail. He wanted to buy one of my custom built smokeless muzzleloader, but I saved him about $3,000, and told him to buy a Savage 10ML.

That is 4 bull elk out of the herd in a single season, by a single hunter. Now would you care to multiply that by 10-15% of the total number of muzzleloader hunters in your state? That would be an approximate representation of the number big game animals wounded, crippled, and lost by either the an inexperienced hunter, a low powered inefficient "primitive" muzzleloader, and/or a combination of both. I think the numbers would almost make you sick to your stomach. You can call it "primitive" all you want, but I call it a darn shame.

If you noticed I said nothing of one these type muzzleloaders in the hands of an experienced and disciplined hunter. In this case a "primitve" muzzleloader, may certainly be adaquate for the job. But are you going to force a novice muzzleloader hunter to play by your rules and standards? Would it not make much more sense to let a novice muzzleloader hunter, have the option to hunt with an in-line or sidelock, open fiber optic sights or low powered fixed scoped 1 or 2x, pellets or loose, and saboted bullets or conicals, in whatever combination that works best, so that he may gain experience and knowledge about muzzleloading. Or are you just going to hand him a flocklock, a powder horn, a hand full of patches and round balls, and throw him to the wolves, to figure it out on his own? If that is the case, the game animals are going to pay a very high price, indeed.