I think you are arguing with too many people here, you can't keep your facts straight.
If that is true, show me where I'm erring ?
Read the post where you accused me of thinking recurves are just as easy to shoot as compounds and where you accused me of thinking xbows were more effective than compounds.
No, I'm not against compounds - I am in favor of using the most effective weapon available for the season. So if your criticisms of the crossbow are true, then what is the point of allowing another weapon into archery season that is (by your definition) less effective than a compound?
CHOICE ! I choose a recurve (currently) and its by far less effective. And yes, its been said by several that compounds are their choice and that they are MORE effective for them to use deer hunting. Why NOT allow them ? If they are less effective few people in the great scheme of things will use them because of that and much like AR, OH, GA and TX their impact will not be as great as feared, will it ?
You're starting to piece together the argument I've been making all along. Crossbows are not nearly the weapons that compounds are - just like recurves/longbows/self bows. Their impacts on archery season will not be huge, no more so than they are in the mentioned states.
There you go again making false assumptions.
I have never once argrued that xbows were more effective than compounds
I told you from the beginning that I knew nothing firsthand about the effectiveness of a xbow. I have been agreeing with you that they are less effective based on information you provided - WHEN are you going to get that through your thick skull!
I'm saying - why allow the xbow in archery season if it is less effective than a compound?