The premise here is a logical fallacy - if getting close to game species included mortal risk, it’s far more logical to become a better SHOOTER than to become a better hunter. A shooter killing their quarry from a secure long range position has far less mortal risk than someone attempting a foolhardy mission of getting ever so closer to the danger. While dangerous game is oft hunted from short range, how different our world would be if whitetails had fang and claw, and how different hunting might be.

So by classic measures - stalking, fieldcraft, and huntsmanship - we’d all be a lot worse HUNTERS if all of our game could “kill us back,” and much better shooters.