Somebody else mentioned this, but I think inlines have done what compound bows did to archery. Brought the sport to the forefront and introduced many who wouldn't have atken up a different style of hunting without them. Do you think if Compounds weren't eventually embraced by archers, their would be so many in Archery? I think not.

Personally I have no problems with a crossbow or any other ligitmate and legal weapon. Misconceptions are abound with many of these weapons, like a inline is good to 300 yards, well you know I have seen kentucky long riflers shoot 300 much more accurately than any inline guy. Same can be said about crossbows, many think these weapons are good to 125 yards, but reality many archers both traditional and compound can shoot more accurately to distance of 100 meters. they may not choose to do so when hunting but it can be done.

Change will always spark debate. I find it truly funny to listen to bow hunters debate that a crossbow is so much more advanced of a weapon. Mean while they have a 85% let off Micro size bow, shooting 315 FPs, with carbon arrows and the best broadheads around. Then top it off with a release, vibration aides, fiber optic sights, range finder around their neck and sit in their 300 buck tree climber. Common the sport is hardly traditional in the sense of the word anymore, it still may have the basis but it has changed and adapted with technology and the age.

It can be said with any form of hunting, rifle, shotgun, bow and BP, in all it has put more guys in the field, better success and overall done good for the sport. Sure it has also made for some negatives such as: less practice, knowledge or skill. I think all in all hunters today are more involved in the preservation and heritage of this sport the the days of yester!