Why is a .22 hornet a legal rifle round for deer in one state, but if you cross the state boundary it is suddenly only a legal varmint round?
I don't know anyone who will argue a .22 hornet isn't a gun though, or that a snare isn't a trap. Do you ?
NEW61375interesting stats for sure. IF they go up - what will happen in your opinon ?
Whats funny is most are not even trad shooters. And Duane must be going thru some real rough times. Usually he can debate ok, but now, he is looking rather rediculus, with circular arguments.
bigcountryfor once you're seeing my bare soul - its an internal issue that I can see both sides on, and don't know which to really settle myself on
Is that what bowhunting is to you? That one aspect of the hunt, the drawing and holdingof the bow? Of course it's not so while I understand the point I don't see how it is that significant.
NEW61375 I think there can be a really good argument put forth that hunting itsself gets lost when technology is introduced. What hunting IS .... its degraded, eroded, bastardized, chiseled away at etc with technology and all that comes with it.
I honestly DO believe that.
I am, however, semi-retired from deer hunting, in part because I got tired of all the nonsense and bickering that seems to accompany it nowdays.
Lanse couche coucheI don't get what the above means. I can't imagine not deer hunting.
Schultzywhat about all the public land hunters ? Thats when the competition for hunting seasons reallt hits the fan
And if you have ever heard two guys screamng at each other out in the woods over who gets to put a stand where, then you would know that some folks do bicker while out there.
$1000 says they were NOT trad hunters
I just took the oportunity to state my opinion. Honestly I was suprised at the attitudes displayed--the staunch defense of crossbows as being "just another bow",but especiallythe methods used to "defend" them. I expected better from this bunch.
What did you expect?
I can't knock crossbows LBR because its a fact they ARE bows (thus the name) they are steeped in archery history, they have limbs and a string that deliver an arrow, they can't shoot any further than a compound, they can't shoot as high a score on a 3D range, they're cumbersome and not as well suited for hunting as some might think ......
Question LBR - lets say 20,000 crossbow kills in Arkansas had NOT been using crossbows but compounds. How many kills do you think it WOULD have been ? 18,000 ? 17,000 ?
Now, put a recurve in the hands of those hunters, maybe 2,000 kills ?
Compounds are the CHOICE of bowhunters in states that allow compounds. For now anyway. There is a reason - they're all the weapon and more, they're easy, fast, quiet, light, easy to reload, triggered, sighted, .... they're designed to SHOOT
I can't knock one without knocking the other. I don't see how its possible for anyone to do it to be honest.
Allow it all, or ban the technology back. Which to believe is the issue for me
And who cares if they are making bows better. The challenge should be in getting into the postion to make a good shot, not playing a game of using the most difficult thing you can find to make the shot.
Lanse couche coucheand right there shows you've never hunted with a bow and especially not traditional archery. There is SO MUCH more to than getting within g30 yards. So much more. The difficulty IS the hunting, the kill has less and less to do with it the more you get into the hunt itsself.
Thats what I was saying, technology breeds that belief
Lanse couche coucheand its bad for Hunting IMO