how you arrive that because a crossbow has a bow as "part" of the weapon that it is a "bow" escapes me.
But a compound with a machined riser, non-working horizonal limb technology, huge multi cams that allow >80% letoff, triggered released, fall away rests, cables and string and pulley ........ yeah, THATS a bow huh ?
please tell me one negative about Muzzleloaders......
There are no negatives to muzzleloaders. They are a single shot, primitive (suppose to be anyway) weapon that uses a barrel loaded loose power/then bullet combo that allowed short range accuracy (suppose to anyway) with singel shot capability. They're suppose to be more challenging than a rifle, not as challenging as archery. And moden muzzleloaders have bastardized what muzzleloading is with the funky powder pellets, scoped guns, synthetic stocks, 101 primers, sabot's ...... people want easier and more accurate with less practice and that demand has led to G&F allowing things no one would have though allowable 10 years ago.
But with them, I HAVE seen muzzleloader seasons tweaked and adjusted - the arguement could be made that the inline and modern muzzleloader impact HAS been great enough to make a difference. I'm not syaing thats true - but the reality is potentially there IMO.
I will remain firm in saying that all capable of using a compound or traditional should be required to do so
why not take it one step further and say that anyone able to draw a recurve should be required to use one ?