vc1111

Muley69:.

You know no such thing. There is no empirical evidence one way or the other. It is pure conjecture to make such a statement, not fact. For example: Bowhunters as a rule, do not shoot at running deer or other big game. In fact, I've never heard of or seen a bowhunter shoot at a running deer. Gun hunters are known to do this quite regularly. The difference is gun hunters don't know whether they've wounded the animal or not, it usually running so fast and it just keeps running. I've seen "results" during deer gun season that I don't even want to post on a hunting message board.

And many, many gun hunters have next to zero practice before the season. They sight their gun in at 100 yards; a few rounds to get her "sighted in" and thats it. They never practice at 300 yards (and if they do is usually from a bench, almost certainly not under field conditions), but some will take a shot at up to 300 yards, and as you've accurately described there is no margin for error.

Hmmm no practice and no margin for error? Field conditions, no bench rest and add perhaps wind, rain, fatique, nerves, glare, elevation, limited time to get off a shot, what have you...all factors further reducing accuracy. Wonder what happens with regularity in those situations? Some gun hunters tend to overestimate their personal effective range under hunting conditions because of scopes and a cartridge's supposed ballistics.

My point is that a statement like muley69's cannot be proven and most certainly should not be accepted as fact. That argument can go both ways and anecdotal evidence is all you've got.

Both the gun and the bow take skill. With the bow, the animal is usually much closer and it could be argued that the chances of being winded are usually somewhat greater depending on the circumstances. But things happen that are unfortunate for both types of hunting.

I've hunted with bowhunters that make enough noise with their outdated climbers to wake up bucks that died years ago.[8D]

silentassassin

You all know where I stand but......

for one more deer per hunter maybe wounded by bowhunters but the actual number of deer wounded is far far greater by gun hunters. Just look at the discrepancies in the number of deer killed in your state by gun hunters verses bow hunters.

for two having come through the ranks of rifle hunting, I would much rather take a 300 yard shot with a rifle that a 30 yard shot with a bow. Everything that can go wrong with a gun can go wrong with a bow plus several others. When I was gun hunting it didn't matter how much the blood was pumping or how fast and furious it got, all I had to do was get the crosshairs in the right spot and squeeze and that was a dead deer. Bowhuting, even if I get the pin in the right spot, I am going to miss if I didn't anchor right, or if I gripped too tight, or if I hit my sleeve with my string etc. At 300 yards I don't have to be worried about the deer seeing or smelling me so I am in no hurry there. I am not even thinking about shooting without a good rest (which I don't have bowhunting) and I am not thinking about shooting unless the deer is just standing there so again no real hurry. Not to mention I have had big deer at 30 yards and at 300 yards and there's as much difference in the adrenaline rush as there is between ice cream and poop that you also have to contend with while bowhunting. I have been there and done both and I will take the 300 yarder everday and twice on Sunday from a "sure kill" stand point.

HAZCON7

My nomination for 2005 poet of the year lol.


The only people that argue for the gun hunters are those that don't bowhunt and therfore have nothing to argue, and those that do bowhunt - thereby qualifying them as bowhunting type hunters and nullifying their entire argument.

Conversely I know bowhunters that the 2 end stuffers Fieldmouse was referring to would ask to keep the noise down.

Just yesterday I was bowhunting with a friend that was so noisy and rude I thought I was going to have to double lung him to save my hunt. He understood that he was ruining my hunt because he mentioned it several times yet he could care less.

So I guess they come in all shapes sizes and specialties. If you're a gun hunter that treats his gun hunt like a bow hunt then more power to you - you are definately one of the few ( I fall in to that category myself as I like to hunt with every available legal weapon.)

Even though I gun hunt I am a bowhunter at heart and can honestly say that bowhunters take hunting to a higher level. If you don't agree then you obviously haven't achieved that level yet.

justhuntitall

Ok silentassassin just for sake of arguement you guys talk elitism and ethics.
Humm lets take you . You are a acomplished hunter from what I get from you you have walked a lot of ground been around awhile .

You know when you shoot a bow lots of things are against you maybe a loose knock you know equipment failures ( we all have had them ) wind, distance, weather , some times just the slightist thing means bad shot .

Some of that stuff goes for gun too but not so much. Guns are alot more forgiving and reliable so a deer at 30 yards with gun or bow the possibility of a clean kill with a gun is a lot more probable than with a bow most rational pepole will agree with me that thats the case ( RATIONAL).

So if you are proficient with a bow and take the same effort with a gun the probaility of a humane kill is in the use of a gun in your hands .

So this Elitism with a bow has some Q:

SO are you ethically obligated to hunt deer with gun instesd of a bow?

So with ethics throws this elitism out the window.

Elitism = SNOBBERY

Iam a life long bow hunter live for it I'm not on either side yes it does mean more to take game with a bow because of its primitive challenges but that goes against ethics. (this ot to get you guys going)

TeeJay

OK so we all agree it is the individual not the weapon he/she so desires to cary that makes them the "hunter or nonhunter"agreed pefect!

silentassassin

I think every hunter is ethically obligated to take shots that they are 100% confident in their ability to make. So that's what I do. The fact remains that mistakes do still happen. I try to put myself in situations where even if I make mistakes it will still result in a clean, quick, and ethical kill. I think that is as high of an ethical standard as anyone can be expected to be held to. That being said, I have more confidence in the 300 yard shot with a rifle than I do in the 30 yard shot with a gun. With the Rem. 700 you don't even think real seriously about killing something around it because it might just take matters into it's own hands............ I swear that thing had auto pilot back in the day

Choctaw-Brave

I Understand Your Frustration! However, It's The Individual Not The Weapon Of Choice That Differentiates A Good Hunter From A Bad Hunter. At Least They Were Hunting From A Stand. Here, They Drive The Deer From Their Bedding Areas And Have Blockers On The End To Make The Shot. It Not Only Changes Their Pattern But Many Go Nocturnal.

Wulgeur

for bowhunters

< gun hunters

and i will take a 30 yard shot on a buck then a 300 yard shot ANYDAY.

Archer18

Wulgeur,

first of i see your a new member, welcome to the forum, second, thats really not the nicest way to start your reputation off! everybody has thier own opinion and here on huntingnet, i think i speak for everyone when i say this, but all different views and opinons on things are welcome, we are all here to help.


archer

Wulgeur

okee dokee when i need help i will ask!!!