RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

Actually, I'm very much FOR compounds, and crossbows, and archery tackle. Why does it bother you that my choice of weapons are so much more challenging ?

Mattiac - I item lined and replied in VERY detail to your points. Didn't I ?

No - I speficially addressed that I believe. Its all inclusive

If I believed that I would not have shot a Q2 last fall, would I ?
ANd I sure wouldn't be shooting a Hoyt Gamemaster ! LOL - so much for what you thought you knew huh ?


Good question - I'm not sure why the compound was allowed back then when crossbows were not. Perhaps because of how poor compounds were then - they were not percieved to be anything that could take away from archery ? I'm not sure - it might have been an agreement to allow one but not the other.

Hmmmmmmmmm - isn't that what YOU'RE doing ??

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

DC,

Your kidding right, I make all these points and the only thing you can say is I have the wrong abbreviation for Arkansas? Should I start to point out all the misspelled words I have been trying to decipher? I would be here all day! You knew what I meant but I guess I should have expected it from a side that is seeing their argument running out of steam.

You guys keep floating them over and we will keep smacking them back.

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

lol some of you guys are taking this really personally. Ok i havent read all the 70 odd pages of this thread but ill tell you what i think lol. Crossbows in my opinoin are just slow rifles, thats all they are. the only difference is they shoot an arrow instead of a bullet. other then that theres really no difference. they are trying to legalize them here in illinois because some guy wants his daughter to hunt with him but she cant pull it back? im sorry but tuff luck practice with her until she can it wont take that long she will probly be hunting by next season. i dont want xbows to be legalized in illinois. some of you guys will say o we dont tell u what to hunt with so dont tell us, well you know what im not its my own opinoin. illinois should stay the way it is by only letting disabled people use them instead of everyone. because if that happens its just like a rifle season all the time during bow season. and illinois has already royaly screwed up for next years hunting with the NR tags and taking away the checkinstations, but you know what its ALL ABOUT THE MONEY and thats never goin to change so i guess we have to live with it.

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

Ma Jay,

I'm not picking on you I just think you are on the verge of a breakthrough. You have been very civil (probably more than me:D) If I understand you. You think a crossbow is more bowlike than a gun but can't bring yourself to allow them into the archery season because of the differences that they do have from the hand held and drawn bows right?

Well that leaves us with where to put them? Now because they are not firearms we can rule them out of the gun season. Yes I know some states have them in gun season and some states have them in archery season so thats a wash, fair?

So if not the gun season then where? Well there are only two other choices and that is 1. It's own season and 2. With the archery season.

The problem I see with crossbows having there own season is the bow hunters would have a fit if their season was shortened for crossbows. Could you imagine if the crossbowers were given the first two weeks of the season, having first crack at all of those big bucks you guys have been scouting all year? I can feel the collective blood pressure rise by just typing this. No wait, lets give them the first two weeks of the rut, again the bow hunters would blow their tops to know the crossbowers were out there when all of those elusive monster bucks stopped being elusive and started paying more attention to "what comes naturally". So when? Stick them at the end of the season when the rut is over but the food is scarce and the deer must feed longer into the mornings to get their fill and thus exposing themselves to the hunters? If I were to guess the last is what most would choose, afterall at least you all would have had your crack at all the good bucks and there would be nothing left but scraps for the crossbow hunters because after all they really aren't hunters anyway. No that's not too elitist is it?

Do you see the problem that some states would have? I am talking more about the states with very short (just two weekends) gun seasons like here in Illinois but it still could apply to most states.

Again the only logical season would be the archery season. Why do you ask? First because a crossbow is by it's definition a bow and because I have not seen any negative thing from the states that do allow crossbows in their seasons. So why would I expect to see it in mine?

But mostly I ask, why not? What do you stand to loose? This talk about a infusion of "slob" hunters is nonsence, it hasn't happened in the states that do allow them why would people think it would happen in their state? Too many deer would be killed? Hey by most accounts deer populations have been on the rise all over the nation and get this.....even in the states that have allowed crossbow hunters into the archery seasons. Go figure, how in the hell did that happen if all of those "slob" gun hunters picked up crossbows and marched into the woods as some of you would have us believe?

Again I ask...Why not?

"Well BigJ It's just not archery."

But the Websters dictionary says it is.

"It's not how archery was intended by the ones who started the bow hunting movement."

Neither were compounds but they were allowed to thrive.

"It's just not the same as pulling back your bow and holding it with your hand....errr release."

Yes it's not, but it still is a bow, just another form of one. Holding a shoulder mounted scoped rifle is not the same as a hand held pistol with open sights is it? I don't hear the pistol crowd saying rifle hunting should be separate from them because it's "just not the same" why, because they are both firearms.

"But BigJ, we can't let our pristine and sacred hunting fraternity be compromised by these "mouth breathing" cretins. How would that look when we are supposed to be the chosen ones in the hunting community?

Now we are getting somewhere! I bet most of you, when nobody is around to judge you are thinking just that.....sad but true, because as hard as you try, some of you just can't help it and it shows in your posts.

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

BOY Im glad I live in Ohio. Hunt, Hunt, and Hunt more often.

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

Lets make it even easier....:D

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

Im with you Bowfanatic. Aluminum risers are sooo traditional...[:-] The point is all makes of bows have advanced dramatically since the Pope & Young days. You cant criticize compounds for being 'too' advanced before you look at the modern recurves and longbows. As far as I know (which isnt far) the only company that makes true recurves is Black Widow. Once again Im no expert. But its really hard to find a classic longbow or recurve thats in hunting shape. So you could tell me to make my own bow like they did in the real archery days. Sorry, way to busy. I could never make my own bow and arrows with the limited free time I have. So if I cant find a real classic longbow or recurve with out breaking my back over it, why would I? So I go with a compound. Reason being is because Im far too busy to get a recurve or longbow and shoot 50 arrows a day to be decent, and because X bows are far too modern. So with my lifestyle, the most challenge I can get out of bowhunting is using a compound. OK?

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

Well I don't shoot trad gear and I certainly don't have any other agenda rather than to enlightened people who are uneducated about the use of crossbows to the complete and utter non-impact they have on my hunting.

Looks like you have done the same thing but you didn't like it when it was done back to you. The way I see it is if you are prepared to jump into the debate then you better be prepared to defend your responses. You were making unfounded assumptions of which your have no idea based on your own predjudice and misguided fear.

data, does have an elititist attitude towards his equipment but all of his points are valid and his elitism is no different than what the compounders on this thread are showing toward the crossbow. The difference between data, myself, and you guys is that we don't believe are own particular beliefs should be forced on others. I would rather see guys shoot compounds and i try to encourage them to do so but I have seen several guys over the years start out shooting a crossbow and wind up going to a compound later that by their own admission whould have never started archery hunting. I just have a hard time seeing that as a negative. Now you couple that with the fact that you open up the archery season to many that it hasn't been open to before and that outweighs any negatives they may have.

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

This discussion is going no where, neither side will budge. So I present you with this.

Im a reasonable person, Ive seen EXACTLY what you're talking about since the begining.

In some cases it does seem unfair that a short range weapon lauching broadheaded arrows is made part of firearm seasons. I can see your point.

I also see your point about recurves and longbows being more difficult to hunt with than a comound. There is NO denying that, I tried to make the switch, but just couldnt master it well enough to justify shooting at an animal.

I also agree that there are some advances in compounds that make it much more unfair. I dont believe hunting bows should have over 75% let-off. These new concept bows that are 99% let-off are too easy to hold back. Its unfair.

Ive mentioned all of that from the start though.

So we agree on most of this, right?

Now that we agree on most of this, please answer these yes or no questions for me;

Do you see the difference in having the bow cocked (drawn) back, and having to draw when the animal is near you? (Yes) (No)

Do you think its fair to incorporate draw locks into the archery seasons? (Yes) (No)

Should we eliminate the compound bow, and not allow the crossbow, allowing only primitive archery tackle to be used (hoyt gamemasters and the like, would be included)? (Yes) (No)


Data, you're right on a LOT of your points, but to say that you're not drawing a compound in the presence of the deer is incorrect. Not all deer stop behind foliage or a tree. Sometimes you have to draw when they turn their head. Recurve and Longbow users rarely draw in the "presence" of game then either. I was taught much of what I know by a die-hard traditionalist. He taught me to draw the bow at the moment you cant see the animals eyes. So by your definition, hardly any bowhunters are drawing back in the "presence" of the animal.

However, the definition of presence is; pres·ence Pronunciation Key (przns)
noun
The state or fact of being present; current existence or occurrence.
Immediate proximity in time or space.
The area immediately surrounding a great personage, especially a sovereign.
A person who is present.

A person's bearing, especially when it commands respectful attention: “He continues to possess the presence, mental as well as physical, of the young man” (Brendan Gill).
The quality of self-assurance and effectiveness that permits a performer to achieve a rapport with the audience: stage presence.
A supernatural influence felt to be nearby.
The diplomatic, political, or military influence of a nation in a foreign country, especially as evidenced by the posting of its diplomats or its troops there: “The American diplomatic presence in London began in 1785 when John Adams became our first minister” (Nancy Holmes).


Seems rather clear that any animal with in close proximity would be in your PRESENCE.

Cocking the bow back when you are 500 yards from your stand, or even when your in the stand and do not have the animal within your presence would be different. I dont think you could say that you drew in the animals presence. Which to me is the challenging part of bowhunting. Taking this away, is removing the reason we bowhunt. Do you really disagree with that?


Think about it this way; Why not allow motorcycles in a bicycle race?
Why not allow motorcycles in a car race?

Where are the negatives there? Sure the motorcycle has an engine and can blow the bike away, but both have wheels. One guy just chose the easier ride.

Why not allow the motorcycle into the car race then? They both have wheels, and a motor powers those wheels. Wheres the negative? So the motorcycle can out accelerate the car, and out handle it in turns. The guy on the motorcycle chose the better tool for the job.

How about suicide, there arent any negatives, yet you're not allowed to do it. Why, you arent harming anyone else? You want to take your life, and the law wont allow.

What Im getting at is, sometimes there arent clear and valid negatives to disallow stuff. Somethings just arent fair, or they dont fit into the category well enough. Some things just dont make any sense. This falls in between.

In a way it makes seems unreasonable to disallow a cross"bow" from a "bow" season. But when you look closer you can see how it doesnt really fit into the category that all the allowable bows do. They are all hand-held, and hand-drawn in the presence of game. Granted some of them are becoming so far advanced, they have almost lost the whole draw in the presence of game aspect. But they still barely retain it.

Sorry I got nasty in my last post, I wasnt in a very good mood.

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

BigJ we are close .. but at the very end we just differ in our opinions.

I just don't follow your logic, and please try and see it from my side. I told you I agree that a crossbow is not a gun, but has some gun like similarities. I see the stock, the trigger mechanism, the safeties and the magnified rifle scopes as gun like. I also see their bow like similarities, the limbs and string generating energy, a bolt that resembles a short arrow, their range and effectiveness .. but as I have said, I don't consider them a bow. I consider them something different.

So that leaves my mind with 3 choices. 1. It's own season. 2. Archery Season 3. Firearms Season.

Now if you factor 3 states have allowed them during Archery season, about 30 allow them during firearm season (rough estimate on checking regs of various states) 5 have "Crossbow Seasons" we have some historical info to draw from. I don't think lumping them in with archery is a good idea and it is related to this point-

The answer is not on the decline, but steady would be a better description. NH has approximately 10,000 deer killed a season, in total! If you look at the deer harvest numbers here in New England across Vermont, Maine and NH you'll see what I am talking about. Due to the fact one bad winter can kill a 1/4 of our herd, we don't have the huge deer numbers as you down south. You have County's that kill more deer than exist in our whole state. So when you state that 30% of archery kills can be attributed to crossbows, even if that is 10 years from the passing of the law, that would increase the deer harvest significantly enough to lose at least a third of the season. So when I stated that I thought NH did the right thing by allowing them during firearm season it was because I think it did what was right for our state. That being it allowed crossbow hunters an opportunity to hunt with their weapon of choice. It allowed archers the time necessary to harvest approximately 20% of the kill, and ML and firearms season were just long enough to meet the Fish and Game's harvest numbers while providing time to both weapon types. Do I think crossbow hunters deserve more time in the woods? Right now they get just short of a month in the woods, which I feel is fair. As I said before, they are not bows or require archery skills to shoot so to me they are not considered archery. I think many here miss the point of why archery season is so long. It's not because archery is more deserving, it is because as a collective group of "archers" it takes far longer for us to harvest a certain percentage of the deer herd. In my state that is approx 20% of the kill. I believe crossbows in some states, such as a Pennsylvania or New York could sustain a crossbow season on its own as they have the deer herds to warrant the extra pressure, but require the ability to at times to limit kill in certain areas. I think Arkansas has the luxury of just adding the crossbow to archery season as it was not concerned with adding to the overall kill, even though it probably is a more effective deer harvesting weapon. I say "probably" because I do not think that 30% of the hunters in Arkansas's woods during archery season carry crossbows .. based on the remarks of people here, the feedback I have heard while shooting archery with people from Arkansas and the overall popularity of crossbows. I assume that crossbows have a greater harvest percentage than bows .. which we could debate why... but many states could not afford to allow archery season to kill even just 10% more deer than they currently do. Which I think is why you don't see the crossbow being utilized during archery season except in very rare instances, or 3 states.

So while you may be able to use Arkansas as an example where allowing crossbows is NOT a problem, I am telling you the numbers of deer killed during their archery season with crossbows will cause them to have shorter time afield than archers here in Northern states. There is an actual reason they are not allowed in most states.. it was not anti-crossbow sentiment, it is many factors. That is why I am confident they will not ever be just "considered archery" here where I hunt.