Stealthy,Let me say this, and then with this thread I am finished. Crossbows are an individual decision and an individual stance that must be determined by each state. I made my stance and have my own personal feelings. No amount of discussion will persuade anyone to change their opinions.

Now, on September 14th of this year I was involved in a head on collision that was not my fault. The accident, among other things, caused a slight tear in my left rotator cuff. The pain was excruciating and I was physically unable to draw my bow. Bow season had just started and I was faced with a couplef of decision. 1. Grunt through the pain and draw my bow anyway, possibly causing further damage. 2. Do not hunt. 3. Take the use of the free crossbow offered to me by my local archery shop until my shoulder healed. I went down, shot the crossbow, and then gave it up. I could not bring myself to hunt with it, even though the state now recognized it as a legal archery weapon. The only thing I could think was the old saying "to thine own self be true." I did. I hung up the bow until I had healed enough to hunt again.

As I said, and will say again. I do not look down upon those that choose to hunt with crossbows where they are legal. I did attempt to keep them out of archery season, but I will not attempt to now have them restricted. To those that choose to hunt with a crossbow, I wish good luck and kill a biggun.

I am done with this thread.

Everyone who wanted to shoot a crossbow but couldn't. Everyone that wanted to hunt in the bowseason but was to intimidated to try a compound. Everyone that would have liked to hunt with a compound but didn't think they had the time through out the entire to shoot a compound enough to be capable of quick humane kills. You were fighting to keep all of those people out of the woods. So maybe I need to type slower..............................

In other words you don't have any well thought out reasons, you just don't want them hunting in "your" archery season. Gotcha!

Well for two primary reasons. The first one being that by restricting bait you aren't taking away an instrument that could help bring people into the sport. The second is that there are some negative impacts of baiting that can affect not only the deer herd but the hunting of them as well. That can't be said of crossbow hunting.

I can't even figure out what that is supposed to mean so I can't really comment[>:][&:][8D]

I'll make this my last reply too then


That is a quote from a too proud and stubborn man. I use to be VERY anti-crossbow until challenged to prove WHY I was. I use to be pro-choice, I use to believe a LOT of things I do not believe now.

Why did I change ? Because instead of being hard headed and unchanging, I took the harder path and actually THOUGHT about what I believed, how I believed and the hardest part - WHY I believed.

Concerning crossbows - everything negative I can think of about them- and they are many things negative about them - I can also applying directly to compounds. if I am anti-crossbow, so would i have to be anti-compound. There are no seperate roads there - they travel the same paths.

If you don't understand that, if you don't see that, you need only look at the states that are waking up, the tides of changes of peoples attitudes towards crossbows, and the growth or popularity with them. you are in the growing minority - and that is a fact, and until you can give an honest reason WHY you are in that minority, then the statement

Does apply to you and probably not only to crossbows. Food for thought - ya'll have a great Christmas, this has been another good crossbows thread.

We should argue about something more constructive next time. Maybe we can accomplish something.

I dont know if your refering to my stance on this topic from last years debacle , but if you are I'm glad somebody was listening and not just hearing what I had to say.
I've noticed a few people here have had a change of heart since last year.

Dont make that your last post Stealthy , it saves me alot of typing! Silentassassin also!

Yeah, GMPT, I fell into that same trap not long ago myself. But it's a fallacy. With compounds, power is limited by the physical limitations of the human body. Some few guys might be able to handle a 150 pound bow, but they are few and far between. The thing about crossbows is, you can put a crank cocker on the things, run 'em up to 500 pounds for extra distance and power. Most of the guys who use the high end, 150-175 pound class models claim a 40 yard max on deer (although one manufacturer claims outstanding accuracy at 70 yards with their 175 pounder).

Also, I don't think crossbow manufacturers have put much effort into making efficient cam designs for compound crossbows yet. Much more draw weight PLUS more efficient cams? What will be their effective range when they are no longer trying to hold their power levels down to where they're comparable with compounds? Would a 500 pounder with high performance cams have a 120-150 yard effective range? Honestly, I don't know myself. But it does bear some intense scrutiny before we roll out the red carpet for them.

Most states have minimum draw weights for crossbows. I don't know how many states have maximum draw weights for them. I think Ohio does. I know Texas does not but, of course, they're only legal in the all-weapons general season here.

Of course, because you still shoot compounds A compound is absolutley nothing like a crossbow.......................................... ..unless you add a release and then it's the exact same thing[:-][>:][&:][8D] I think we got it.

Actually, no. I don't. Switched to lefty because of my wrecked shoulder (50 years of shooting a bow and has taken it's toll) and I don't have a lefty compound. Don't intend to get one, either. Except for a few rare ocassions, I only used compounds in tournaments anyway and I can't shoot tournaments any more.

Another thing to think about GMPT, is that even though most everyone out there is hunting with a compound, there are still those who go out with recurves, longbows and selfbows. Even though they only make up some 5-7% of the total, depending on which survey you read, they are bowhunting the way it was originally intended and do deserve some consideration.

People originally walked to where they were hunting. Is that the way it was intended to be? Do people who walk to their hunting area deserve special consideration? Also, was it "intended" that hunters should shoot carbon or aluminum arrows or is that OK so long as they are shot with a traditional bow. How about plastic vanes, are they OK? How about fiberglass bows were they what was inteded? But really it's a non issue because no one is advocating that traditional equipment should be made illegal.

Well, if you really want to get into historical points, SA: Crossbows were invented in China about 340 BC as a weapon of war. They came into Europe about 300 years later. The Romans had a siege machine called the ballista. (If you'd like to see how powerful crossbows CAN be made, check it out.) The Normans introduced crossbows into England in 1066.

Crossbowmen have always been scorned by archers as limp wristed weaklings and cowards. In 1139, the Lateran Council of the Catholic Church ruled the crossbow was an evil weapon and banned it's use by Christians against Christians, though they were perfectly fine for killing the infidel Moslems in the Crusades. Midieval muster rolls show wages for crossbowmen were half what was paid to archers. At Crecy, in 1346, the French wiped out their own crossbowmen - Genoese mercenaries - because they turned tail and ran from the battleground.

In 1503, England passed the first laws forbidding the use and possession of crossbows except by the military after the King was assassinated with a crossbow. It became the weapon of choice for criminals, assassins and mercenaries until it was eventually replaced by the gun around the late 1500's.

See? It's traditional for archers to hate crossbows.

I've researched crossbows, as I have a lot of ancient weapons and technology. I've been berated for opposing something I've used myself. For Pete's sake, how is someone to form a genuinely INFORMED opinion on something without hands-on experience? I think I at least deserve a little credit for having an informed opinion.