I'm not sure I really belong in the camp of opposing ARs, but I definitely have reservations. I have heavy concerns that logic, study, and research will not be used when determining where ARs are appropriate. In other words, I hear mostly that people are in favor of broad-brush application of ARs across the state and I have no doubt that eventually that's the way it will wind up.
I have been arounddeer hunting, and deer hunters long enough to realize that not all deer populations are as thick as they are here in 8N. I also know from government publications that not all WMUs have antlerless permits issued in sufficient numbers to serve as alternatives to being forced to let the overwhelming bulk of the bucks walk by. Many issue no permits at all. I also am able to imagine myself put in the situations of those hunters that find themselves with no permits and then told that pretty much all the bucks that walk by are going to be illegal to harvest. Now I am not really in a position to be throwing away good license money and then being told that I am not eligible for a harvest, and I suppose I am not alone on that. So what I am seeing is the possibility of inappropriate AR mandates in certain WMUs that wind up frustrating even more hunters out of the activity. It's obvious that we don't really need more regs that do that. You want to implement ARs in our WMU? .... fine. We are almost always guaranteed to have permits issued (sometimes in bunches...lol). I doubt that I will ever find myself in the position of some of the other WMUs where hunters may wind up sitting in the woods realizing that nothing is going to walk by that they have the legal right to shoot. But if the day ever were to come that I faced the prospect of going into the woods with no reasonable possibility of success, that would be the day when I would spend my license money on something else. I can go sit in the woods anytime without paying money to do it.