I have tried to keep up reading all the posts since this began, AND tried to keep them sorted in my pea brain (tough task at times). What I have come to the conclusion of is this.

1. That to each his own. That in the proper hands (properly set up) the faster/lighter setup will gain the shooter certain advantages and be a leathal weapon, BUT in the less skilled hands(i.e. poor shooting mechanics), the same set up can be a dangerous weapon which is more likely to maim or wound an animal than kill it[:' (]. Conversly, a slower/heavier set up (properly set up) will gain the shooter certain (albeit different) advantages and be a leathal weapon, BUT in the less skilled hands (i.e. poor distance judge), the same setup can be a dangerous weapon which is more likely to maim or wound an animal than kill it[:' (]. There for, use the setup you can consistantly shoot good and achieve proper arrow placement with and when you are done practicing go out and practice some more.

2. That we as a bowhunting community have failed to reach a concensus on the optimal measurement for effectivly doing the work we ask our bows and arrows to do. You have all discussed many valid points, each with its merits, each with its flaws (whether admitted or not), but none of which are able to accuratly measure a standard which will apply in the mass majority of the cases. Speed, KE, momentum all factor in and PA said it well, BUT in what combination do they achieve the optimum? (Thats what the debates about isn' t it) Until we do achieve the measurement, we will have to fall back to #1 and use what we are best capable with. I have yet to see someone address the issues as we progress down range (maybe I missed it) knowing we lose speed and energy as we go. I guess that gets back into the momentum issue, but how are we measuring it at the point of impact where it matters? And does this accuratly relfect what we need to know?

3. I know that a well place rock from a sling shot is capable of killing, but will it do the job in an ethical and quick manner with a relatively high degree of success? In hunting, each of us has our own beliefs and dergees of ethics and each of us will defend our position as the right one. All of us, if admitted, have seen shots (distance, angles, obscured, etc.) in the hunting community (either vidio, tv, or in person) that we believe never should have been attempted (in our ethical view) while also seeing shots passed up on that we believe we could have easily acchomplished. Should we allow our capabilities to override or change our views on the ethicallity of a particualr shot (i.e the fast/light thinking " I can out shoot the deers reactions if it were to jump the string" or the slower/heavier thinking " I can only see the back edge of the shoulder, but I can drive right through should the deer move and I hit the shoulder blade" ). I don' t believe out ethics should be changed with or by our equipment. Skill may change our ability, but should not change our ethical view of a particular shot.

My biggest fear in the whole debate is that a person will try to shoot a setup that they are not proficient at because they side with someones elses beliefs.

After 15 years of bowhunting, I know what works for me.But, it has taken that long to know what works within my capabilities. Confidence in a set up goes a long way, confidence in your set up.

If it' s sharp, and it' s placed right, does it matter if it goes through by a foot of by 10 yards...oops...there I go again...that' s what we' re debating... but how do we accurately measure what and arrow will actually do upon impact?

Stay with it though, I' m up for learning even more!