What would you say if I told you I could take someone who had never shot a bow before, let them take two shots, and then put them in a stand to kill an animal? Would you consider this to be at all ethical or responsible?

I would say it depends on the person who shot the 2 arrows. If he is already a deer hunter, took 2 shots at say 30 yds and hit a circle the size of a fist with both arrows, then I see no reason why he wouldn't take a few more shots. but he could be a prodigy and needs no more assistance. Ethical and responsible is in the eyes of the shooter. Only they know how good they are. People who shoot year in and year out that still can't hit a target consistently stillgo hunting. I took my son to the range a few years ago and let him shoot my slug gun for the first time and he did better than this shakey old man.

But a person who has NEVER SHOT A BOW BEFORE will less than likely know anything about trajectory, judging distance, etc.

Whats your point? And yes i suppose it would depend on the person.

My point is should someone be on TV hawking the drawloc saying ANYONE can now shoot a bow? Ever see a show called Knockout Hunting Adventures which is basically a 30 minute commercial for the drawloc and looks to be filmed on a game farm?

Yeah, LMAO thats a joke aint it.

I watch that show on occasion as well and I too wondered about the Drawloc. It is definetely a deadly weapon but I don't see how it can be considered anything but a crossbow. That guy basically took a bow and made it into a gun so I think that with that particular bow, you can be good with it after a couple shots since it is basically like shooting a gun. Now, if someone were to shoot a recurve with fingers two times and then head to the woods, I don't think it would be ethical, but I think the Drawloc is a case apart from ethical bowhunting skill and adequate practice time.