RE: Elitist attitude
 

Now i am really confused as I would think that there should only be one traditional bow and everything else would be some sort of "bow plus."

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Apparently you might be new to traditional bows, thats cool.;) They have been around for years and there's not just one. A Traditional bow is a Recurve, Longbow, Selfbow, these are pretty much your basic trad bows. Some on here may say a self bow is primative, thats fine with me. Whatever is your fancy.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

I know very little about bows. I come on these threads from time to time to learn a little, but then get sidetracked by threads where people seem too busy bashing other styles to discuss their own styles. But then i can always take a break from this thread and go to a gun thread where some folks are bashing the people who use buckshot, .223's for deer, etc., etc., etc.[:o] At least it keeps things lively around here.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

I hear ya there! A little argument here and there isn't so bad but after a while it does get old. I've got the flu bug so I'm taking a break, I feel like ass!!!

RE: Elitist attitude
 

My mom always suggested a glass of 7-Up to sooth the stomach during the flu. I've improved on that strategy by adding two shots of Segrams 7 to it.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Thanks bud!!

RE: Elitist attitude
 

that reminds me that it is almost Miller Time, so i yield the floor.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

you'd think that would be at the top of everyones list wouldn't you ?



You used that analogy more than once - the "so what" is that gunpowder is the root os what defines modern gun vs muzzleloader, its what makes those weapons tick. So too is how a bow can be defined, by what is the driving force behind the arrows - its why nowhere is it legal for arrows with powder charges to be used in archery season, because it eclipses what archery is.

Remember, crossbows are allowed almost EVERYWHERE in regular archery season. Who gets to use them is what varies LBR, even your state os MS allows them and recognizes them as archery.

no, a .270 isn't muzzle loaded - its breach loaded, its a casing with enclosed powder and primer, all in one. There is a fine line now between single shot rifles and muzzleloader, I'll grant you that, but a flint lock is STILL worlds different than both, just like a recurve is worlds differnt than compounds and crossbows.

but no, a .270 is clearly NOT a muzzleloader plus. A Knight breach loaded with powder pellets, 101 primers, sabot's and bullets - thats a muzzleloader plus



gunpowder - that seperates guns from bows



I could say the same about the compound for all the same reasons LBR. And by your reasoning, its the compound manufacturers that demand allowing the compounds in archery season - its all about the money, right ?


Schultzyyou don't pull the compounds back in the prescence of game either, thats a fabrication for the P&Y anti-crossbows movement and for years has been false. Watch the next deer hunting video on tv - the bows are drawn before the animals get into presence - obviously, draw, hold, wait, put the sights on the animals and pull the trigger - perfect compound shot

Lanse couche couche its true when fiberglass was put into recurve and longbows, it changed them in a matter of FPS. Little else changed from them and self bows. Same bows, same arrows can be shot, same broadheads, same WAY of shooting.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

i hunt with both types of bows so i can't speak agaisnt either, and i also think that they each serve a purpose on different styles of hunting

RE: Elitist attitude
 

How so? Materials have improved, machinery has made production faster and easier, but the very designs have changed very little--there have been cave drawings of deflex/reflex longbows discovered.


Gobs of people, many who wouldn't bother to get into the woods, will fall for the hype and advertisements and go buy what they percieve to be a killing machine. Of course the majority will find out soon enough they were duped, but they have alreadyspent the money, and manufactures are busy working on the next round of advertisements for the next group of suckers.

Why is the sporting goods market so huge? How can they spend millions and millions on advertising, tv shows, etc. when a gun/bow/whatever that was made 20 years ago will kill just as effectively as one made today? Because people are, collectively, stupid when it comes to these things. Slap on a different paint job, call it "new and improved", and you just made last year's model obsolete and everyone is beating down the doors to get the "new" one. I learned that several years ago when working in a friend's archery shop. It's as bad as computers.

Quote:

---

You used that analogy more than once - the "so what" is that gunpowder is the root os what defines modern gun vs muzzleloader

---

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

Quote:

---

Remember, crossbows are allowed almost EVERYWHERE in regular archery season. Who gets to use them is what varies LBR, even your state os MS allows them and recognizes them as archery.

---

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.

Quote:

---

but no, a .270 is clearly NOT a muzzleloader plus.

---

It's every bit as much a muzzleloader-plus as a crossbow is a bow-plus. If you disagree, tell me which weapons I'm referring to here. One uses ignited gunpowder to propell a bullet down a barrel. Muzzleloader or .270? The other uses energy stored bent limbs with a string or cord pushing a long dart. Longbow, recurve, orcrossbow?

Quote:

---

I could say the same about the compound for all the same reasons LBR. And by your reasoning, its the compound manufacturers that demand allowing the compounds in archery season - its all about the money, right ?

---

Like I said, I'm leaving compounds out of my part of the discussion--for simplicities sake.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

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.

---

:D

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

RE: Elitist attitude
 

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

RE: Elitist attitude
 

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!!![:@]

RE: Elitist attitude
 

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

RE: Elitist attitude
 

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

RE: Elitist attitude
 

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.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

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

RE: Elitist attitude
 

LOL!!!:D

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Lol. Greatest movie ever made.:D:D:D

RE: Elitist attitude
 

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

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Here is the only traditionalist who truely deserves to be out there hunting.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

This fella might disagree, lanse...;)

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Sorry, but the ones used by Great Plains indians were "bows pluses" compared to those used by Kalahari Desert Bushmen.[8D]

RE: Elitist attitude
 

So you're advocating using poison arrows like the bushmen?

RE: Elitist attitude
 

They've been doing it for 30,000 years, what could be more primitive and traditional than that?[:-]

I've now found my calling. I am going to champion the use of ultra primitive bows (also known as a "bow minus") and poison. Of course, we will require our own season where we wont be bothered by those hordes of people withrecurves, compounds, and crossbows. I think that the entire month of November will suffice:D

RE: Elitist attitude
 

"So you're advocating using poison arrows like the bushmen?"

I am sorry I started this...I was just trying to be funny :)

Wyvern

RE: Elitist attitude
 

LOL!

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Naturally we will also be lobbying to implement a universal right of trespass law in order to retrieve the deer that we shoot, since they can run a long damn way before that poison takes affect.[:o]

RE: Elitist attitude
 

But then the state will come in and regulate how much poison you can use and what type....then there will be a market for "Bobs Deer Poison" in easy to use bottles with "Fresh Doe Urine Scent" to not only kill the deer, but attract them as well...

One flaw in your plan...Up here, November is stinkin cold and there is NO WAY anyone wants to see my bare, shiveringblue ass running thu the woods wearing nothing but that piece of rope covering my "primitive hunter".......

Wyvern

RE: Elitist attitude
 

And you call yourself an outdoorsman...

[8D][8D][8D]

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Sorry, but there will be absolutely NO commerically marketed arrow poison that uses current technology. You can only use the traditional recipe as developed by the bushmen. Anything else will be considered "poison plus." And those damn poison plususers can go get their own season[:@]

RE: Elitist attitude
 

I guess if you can't confront an opinion you disagree with usinglogic, facts,and/or intellect, the next best thing is to poke fun at it.

Oh well.....it's just an opinion--not like it will affect the price of gas or anything like that.

Hope it doesn't roll around and bite you in the butt one day. It wouldn't be any stretch to get the converted 10/.22 arrow guns allowed in archery seasonusing the same "logic". Hey, they shoot a bolt, you load them basically the same way, they are single-shot, they have a stock, forearm, trigger.......it's just a different type of crossbow, right? They have as much in common with a crossbow as a crossbow has in common with a recurve. They are still a challenge, and they still have limitations, and they still have disadvantages......so they are just as much archery equipment as a longbow, right?

If you don't like them, or consider them archery equipment, it's just because you are scared, biased, hypocritical,ignorant, etc. We'll sit on the sideline and poke fun until you agree with our side. Don't bother with facts or details--I like them and that's all that matters.:eek:

Chad

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Well, sometimes poking fun ata position (in a cerebral kind of way)is the best way to demonstrateits flaws. Some folks get that, others don't.....

And I'm not worried about getting bit in the butt. Because as far as I'm concerned they should just have one big deer season where people can use what they want, whether it is a pointed stick propelled by a string,a chunk of lead propelled by ignited powder, or anything else that a given state deems acceptable to knock down a deer. Then we could put aside all this arguing, which isoften far sillier than anything i've said here.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Back to being serious for a minute. Have any of you considered just how far these things might go? Once they are accepted (read as profitable)to the point that companies are willing to pour the cash into r/d, there's no telling what they will come up with.

There's two BIG differences I can think of off the top of my head with a crossbow vs. a bow--compound, recurve, longbow, selfbow, flatbow, whatever.

#1 Regardless if the thing has 95% let-off, you still have to be able to pull the peak weight, even if just for asplit second. That is going to keepbows within the boundaries of human physical abilities. Not so with crossbows--with prods and other cocking devices, you can get them in outrageous weights, which will mean in time you will be getting outrageous performance/distance.

#2 You can't prop a bow. Sure, somebody will come up with some special situation where they were able to get off a shot like that, but it's not normal or usual. Propping up a crossbow is as simple as propping up a rifle. Add scope and 300#+ limbs, 80+ yd shots are feasable. The race is on--who can make the fastest, longest-range, EASIEST weapon on the market.

Is this really what bowhunting is all about? What happened to the old adage about bowhunting being about getting close? About the challenge? Or has it gone down the same road as most everything else--make it as quick and easy and simple as possible?

Chad

RE: Elitist attitude
 

I can relate to poking fun to demonstrate flaws--I can be downright sarcastic at times, and enjoy it.

However, I usually use it to make a point. I've yet to see where the point was made--nothing but poking fun at points that evidently couldn't be confronted or argued.

Lanse, are you a bowhunter?

Chad

RE: Elitist attitude
 

I think that i've made a lot of points that some folks here seem to get.

And I've never bow hunted and don't really plan to, although i like to hear bowhunting stories just as much as gun hunting stories. My father compound bow hunted until he became physically unable to and started to use a crossbow. And my uncle (who is not in very good shape either) started hunting this year with a crossbow when Illinois started allowing anyone over 62 to do so. Neither of them did as well as my dad's hunting partner who uses a compound bow because he puts a lot more effort into his hunting.

Interesting to note that some might think that the new law would result in the woods being flooded with a bunch of senior citizen new crossbow hunters that would slaughter all the deer. But to the contrary, the harvest for the 2007-2008 archery season was slightly lower than the previous two seasons when only the disabled could use crossbows.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

I don't mean this sarcastically, but that explains a lot. It's human nature to look at something and say "it doesn't affect me, so who cares".

Unless you are a bowhunter, you won't and can't understand our perspective. By bowhunter, I really mean bow/bowhunting enthusiast. Not the guy who buys a bow to extend his hunting season--pulls it out a week or two before the season starts, shoots a few arrows to be sure the sights are still "on", and goes hunting with it. This guy can very much still be a hunter--you still have to do the work to be sucessful, especially with a bow--but could really care less about a bow in general, it's just a way to get more time in the woods. Then you have those of us who can't wait for the season, who shoot our bows year-round because we love the sport, many of us shooting in tournaments and gathering together with our friends just to fling arrows. There is a huge difference.

We had some dedicated people who fought hard to get a season established for bows only. They appreciated the challenge, the solitude, the experience that only bowhunting offers. Often having to wait until the animal is so close you can count eyelashes, you can see nostrils flare, even smell it--there's nothing like it.

Anyhow, don't take this the wrong way but it seems you participated in this thread just for the sake of argument--you really don't have a clue what bowhunting is about, how it feels, or seem to care if there is a bow season or not. That doesn't give much foundation to those "points" you made.

FWIW, I'm not worried about the "seniors" invading the woods--not at all. For the umpteenth time, my argument against allowing crossbows in the archery season is because they simply aren't bows.

Chad

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Uhhh, following that logic then you shouldn't be talking either because you don't really know what crossbow hunting is all about and therefore aren't in a position to make a truely informed and objective assessment. And I respect your right to feel that crossBOWS aren't bows, but given the places that now allow crossbows during archery season, you will have to pardon me if i am a bit skeptical (well, actually amused) of your argument.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

Wait a min. I cant see the pic very well, but that looks like a Penobsco bow. That is too high tech. Thats not traditional.

RE: Elitist attitude
 

You're right. And upon closer scrutiny those look like stone tips instead of fire sharpened. FOUL FOUL. I guess that we will have to go with the pre-Bushman, Neanderthal bows to get to the real root of the tradition.;)