I just watched the Spitfire commercial portrying a kill as a crime scene. In the past i saw the "Its like throwing an axe through an animal" commercial of another manufacturer. Can we not use positive images and situations in portraying hunting? As the average American more becomes one without connection to the land and wildlife the images they get are more and more the determining factor in their attitudes toward wildlife and those who utilize it. It is the responsibility of manufactures to use the oppertunities they control, such as advertising, to portray hunting in a positive manner in order to help protect our rights and sport.

1st off, spitfire aint worth the box they come in. nor should they be portrayed as a crime scene making devise..they should get with band-aid to make a more surreal setting.

Freeoutdoors; IMO there is nothing wrong with these 2 commercials you speak. I know exactly what ones you are talking about. As we all know, the bow kills by hemorraging (either loss of blood or blodd filling up the lungs). The more devastation a broadhead creates the quicker the kills. A field tip will kill a deer. It will just take a lot longer. So what is better for the public to hear?

Of course we must use broadheads, I dont question that. What is not needed is the portrayal of hunting as a hack and slash movie scene. This is excactly how the anti hunters want us portrayed.

Bronko, most people in the general public who are not hunters do not realize that when you shoot a deer with a bow it doesn't die right away. When they see commercials like these, I would imagine it doesn't sit well with those people because it looks inhumane, when in reality it is more humane to use these products. It is all because most non hunters are ignorant to how things actually happen when you shoot a deer.

I haven't seen these commercials so can't comment whether they are good or bad,
Think what free was referring to was just portraying hunting /hunters. In such a way gives the antis ammo to use against us.
Hunting groups have spent lots of time/money cleaning up hunters image in eyes of the general public.
It has helped us gain/maintain access in various places.
It is part political correctness, part politics, part public relations.
The more negative imagesa/stereotypes there are of hunting, the harder it will be to sway votes when we need it.

i feel what you are saying,
but it will if ya deliver a good shot. i have had them expire under 10 seconds...some take a few minutes. i have had a 360 acre run b4 on a single lung(barely)/liver shot..i have had deer run further with a bullet in them..although i shoot more deer with a rifle, and have had deer take less time to die with a rifle than a bow as well....so either way it can go.

And thats exactly what I expain to people who ask me about it that feel bad for the deer. I just tell them that I does die within seconds if you hit it in the right place and that there are hunting laws in place for a minimum cutting diameter so the kill does happen more humanely.

In this age of 24/7 newscasts and the internet, I don't see how you end ideas and people who are bothered by some ideas. Hunting is hunting. An animal gets terminated sometimes in a hunt. Hamburger comes to the supermarket after a cow is terminated. How do you make that pretty for everyone?

Never worked in sales/marketing/politics have you?