isn't that how it starts LBR ? Glass in the limb laminates for additional FPS, then more radical R/D in the design, which goes even more radical with new materials available, new epoxy/glues and finishes, then you have Adcock building high tech with no wood in them, concave designed limsb that push it even further ...... or add wheels, cam's, sights, triggered releases ....... remember the original compiounds were those weired recurve/hybrid ones with the cam on the bottom and a recurve limb on the top !

Is hunting and bowhunting so secure that we don't need additional hutners LBR ?

Quote:

You totally missed the point, and I'm not convinced it was accidently.

Quote:

The "so what" is this: one of the main pro-crossbow arguments that keeps coming up is "it's a primitive weapon/it has ancient roots", so that should make it acceptable for archery season. I say gunpowder is primitive/ancient in it's roots, but nobody seems to want to argue that any weapon that uses gunpowder should be allowed in the primitive weapons season--why not?

Because what you're failing to acknowledge and discuss ( and I'm not convinced its by accident) is that gunpowder is a clear cut difference between archery and firearms. Its what MAKES them two different things ! One used limbs and a string to deliver energy to the arrows - one uses gunpowder and the energy from the ignition of it to shoot a bullet.

Two completely differnt things.

You cannot say a crossbow is completely differnt. Its VERY similar to all bows - and most of them are more so BOWS than compounds because of the way they work.

Quote:

I repeat myself yet again--if crossbows were accepted asregular/standard archery, then nobody would be required to meet certain criteria and get a special permit to use them during archery season.

Why do you use that argument, you don't believe it. If MS allowed them for everyone tommorrow, you've already said you wouldn't accept that anyway. What MS or any other state says in its bylaws doesn't matter to you, right ?

Quote:

One uses ignited gunpowder to propell a bullet down a barrel. Muzzleloader or .270?

Could be either, could be a handgun, could be a cannon, could be a lot of things. more information is needed

Quote:

The other uses energy stored bent limbs with a string or cord pushing a long dart. Longbow, recurve, orcrossbow?

all 3 fit that definition

Soooo...If a crossbow weighs the same as a DUCK it's made of WOOD!!!!

Big Duane, you really love to twist things around it seems! One minute its this and then the next minute your defending someone that you were just knocking down. Sounds pretty 2 faced if you ask me!!![:@]

It started with someone figuring out that some woods work better, some designs work better, some designs work better with some woods......but I get the point. My point is you get to a place where you have a totally different weapon than what you started out with--cars started as horse and carriage.

Probably not, but I'm pretty selective with my definition of a "hunter". By my definition, just anyone in the woods trying to kill something by whatever means available isn't necessisarily a hunter.

Quote:

Because what you're failing to acknowledge and discuss ( and I'm not convinced its by accident) is that gunpowder is a clear cut difference between archery and firearms. Its what MAKES them two different things ! One used limbs and a string to deliver energy to the arrows - one uses gunpowder and the energy from the ignition of it to shoot a bullet.

Two completely differnt things.

Of course they are two different things--but that only makes my point. What would you bet that the idea for firearms originated with crossbows or similar weapons? Anyhow, my point (maybe you didn't miss it on purpose) is the fact that just because crossbows have ancient/primitive roots doesn't automatically classify them as archery equipment any more than firearms, since gunpowder also has ancient roots.

Quote:

You cannot say a crossbow is completely differnt. Its VERY similar to all bows - and most of them are more so BOWS than compounds because of the way they work.

I never did--I said they are a bow-plus, just like a semi-auto .270 is a muzzleloader-plus. Just for giggles, where would you classify a compound crossbow? I bet the one Matt referred to is a compound type.

Quote:

Why do you use that argument, you don't believe it. If MS allowed them for everyone tommorrow, you've already said you wouldn't accept that anyway. What MS or any other state says in its bylaws doesn't matter to you, right ?

Just to point out the huge flaw in one of the main arguments. No, I wouldn't accept them as simple archery equipment if every state allowed them in bow season. That decision was made years ago, and nothing will change it. If crossbows were simple archery equipment and nothing more, there never would have been any argument to begin with--they would have been allowed from the beginning. Even now, most states have strict regulations and require special permits--why is that if they are just another type of bow?

Quote:

Could be either, could be a handgun, could be a cannon, could be a lot of things. more information is needed

Why? That's all that is needed to call a crossbow a bow--why is it good for one, but not the other?

Quote:

all 3 fit that definition

Yep, just as a rifle, cannon, handgun, muzzleloader, etc. all fit the other description--yet with the crossbow, it's a bow because it fits, but with a muzzleloader, we need more information. Hmmmm........

Chad

Power is flickering here, so I'll leave it with this. I don't see why folks don't be honest with themselves and everyone else and simply say "I like them, I like to shoot them, I like to hunt with them, so I want them included in archery season" rather than try to come up with 900 excuses as to why they "really are just another type of bow".

I'm being as honest as I know how. I don't have anything against them, or those who use them--they simply aren't a bow, and don't belong in the archery-only season. Fine and dandy for primitive weapons or firearms though, in my opinion.

Chad

Schultzy I can se it both ways, I've not fully decided to be for banning all tech stuff in archery or for allowing it all. I mean, when we talk about the FACTS, not once has archery season been shortened or canceled or bag limits reduced strictly because of sheer number of archers that I know of. Ever, and that includes states that allow crossbows to everyone.

In light of that, and the fact that we NEED more bowhunters, allow it all. Obvious choice,right ?

But like a compound sees a crossbows as being too easy and cheating to "get in" so too can I see a compound for the very same reasons.


the only argument I can see on banningtechnology to be honest, and yes, the weapon DOES in some way contribute to what kind of hunter takes the woods.I believe that is true

Quote:

Anyhow, my point (maybe you didn't miss it on purpose) is the fact that just because crossbows have ancient/primitive roots doesn't automatically classify them as archery equipment any more than firearms, since gunpowder also has ancient roots.

its not the age that makes them LBR its the WAY they operate, 2 totally differnt things

Quote:

That decision was made years ago, and nothing will change it. If crossbows were simple archery equipment and nothing more, there never would have been any argument to begin with--they would have been allowed from the beginning. Even now, most states have strict regulations and require special permits--why is that if they are just another type of bow?

Realize that a short 10-12 years ago, mechanical releases were not allowed in some states. greater than 65% wasn't allowed. Fiber pins were not allowed. Mechanical broadheads, not allowed. Several states that now allow crossbows didn't then.

Things DO change. I think its the subtle changes that when you look back you go "wow, we've come THAT far that fast ? really ? "

I predict more legalization of crossbows in general archery season. Be ready to welcome those bowhunting brothers, they're coming, just as surely as compounders.

Imagine in 15 yeards the compounds are as rare in the bowhunting woods as recurves are today ?

Quote:

Why? That's all that is needed to call a crossbow a bow--why is it good for one, but not the other?

Because you didn't break it down the correct way, its not an apples to apples comparison, thus the way you chose to word it

Quote:

I'm being as honest as I know how. I don't have anything against them, or those who use them--they simply aren't a bow, and don't belong in the archery-only season. Fine and dandy for primitive weapons or firearms though, in my opinion.

I don't doubt your honesty LBR. With all you've typed I think you're inclined to dislike compounds too, though I'm wagering that your argument there would be "we've already got them .... "


My core argument here is that WHY can compounders look down on crossbows, and thats fine, but trad shooters can't look down on both ? I'm called an elitist for thinking it, but I'm only doing what compounders are doing, and that is seeing an easier shooting weapon than what I choose and calling it a short cut.

Almost all compounders can shoot recurves, they just don't want to spend the time to do it. Just like crossbow shooters COULD shoot compounds, right ?

Every argument against a crossbow I can counter with the same reason to ban compounds. Every one. But you cannot apply those across the board to longbows and recurves, they do not apply.




I think in the end .... I'm inclined to allowed eveything. I can't find a single valid reason to not allow everything and no one else can either. Sure, we can say we don't see a certain bow as a real bow, but thats not factual and its not proveable, its just an opinion and that won't hold up in any debate at all.

Allow it all - welcome tens of thousands more crossbow shooters with easier to shoot weapons, just like trad shooters had to welcome compounds. Same deal, and in 10 years if there is a negative ? THEN pass rules to draw the lines on technology.

Pandora's box has been split wide open anyway.

I agree--lots of folks will admit that learning to use/care for some weapons just takes too much time, is too much trouble, too hard, etc.

Quote:

its not the age that makes them LBR its the WAY they operate, 2 totally differnt things

Of course--but a big part of the argumentis simply because of the ancient/primitive roots of the crossbow--and that has nothing to do with whether they should be allowed in the archery-only season. If it did, then you could use the same argument for rifles/gunpowder. That's the argument I'm exposing here--just because it's been around "forever" doesn't mean it should be included. How about allowing big rocks as a weapon in archery season too? Doesn't get any older than that.

Quote:

Realize that a short 10-12 years ago, mechanical releases were not allowed in some states. greater than 65% wasn't allowed. Fiber pins were not allowed. Mechanical broadheads, not allowed. Several states that now allow crossbows didn't then.

Did archery change, or was it attitudes and laws. Let a rock sit for 1,000 years, it will still just be a rock--it will never be a bow, no matter what people call it.

Quote:

Because you didn't break it down the correct way, its not an apples to apples comparison, thus the way you chose to word it

By who's defintition? It's the same comparison, the same argument--the difference is you agree with one, but not the other.

You can judge one group of weapons to all be basically the same thingby the projectile and the means of propelling it; but not another. Who's being biased here?

Quote:

With all you've typed I think you're inclined to dislike compounds too,

Nahh--I don't dislike them at all. Just not the weapon for me, at least not right now. I will say that putting them in a "primitive" weapons season is a joke though.

I see your point, and can agree with some of it. Personally, I don't look down on the weapon or the person using it just because of the weapon. My point has been that a crossbow isn't just anothertype of bow, anymore than a .270 is just another type of muzzleloader.

Not squat I can do about it, just voicing my opinions--take 'em for what they are worth.

Chad

LOL!!!

Lol. Greatest movie ever made.

"Hmmm...this killing deer thing is pretty easy now that I switched to a crossbow..."