Let's throw some gas on the fire - MI Report

[phade]

Who's old?

Weren't you selling out and moving to FL or something this past year? I thought that was a requirement of moving there from NY (old?).

LOL.

[G-Man]

Either way bow or gun you need to be able to get close to your intended target, as for the slob hunters you keep referring too, how many will pick up a bow or crossbow go out and practice of have the skills to nesasary to get close enough to the game, many will jump in (just like they did when compounds were allowed, then more when releases were legal.) But how many will stay? The game in this state is the states, not the land owners, to speak the way you do you must not understand this concept... if legal xbow use is the end all to your experience hunting go pay premium price and hunt a high fenced area where you are the only hunter and get "your" game there.

[Five Seasons]

phade,

you are 100% correct

[phade]

Either way bow or gun you need to be able to get close to your intended target, as for the slob hunters you keep referring too, how many will pick up a bow or crossbow go out and practice of have the skills to nesasary to get close enough to the game, many will jump in (just like they did when compounds were allowed, then more when releases were legal.) But how many will stay? The game in this state is the states, not the land owners, to speak the way you do you must not understand this concept... if legal xbow use is the end all to your experience hunting go pay premium price and hunt a high fenced area where you are the only hunter and get "your" game there.

Another example of the accusatory selfish prognositcation right there. Also note the "what if" scenario, too. The game doesn't make the slob; the slob make the slob. Hard concept?

We have to step away from that if there is ever going to a be a realistic compromise or conclusion.

Edited February 27, 2013 by phade

[SteveB]

62 is the new young - I hope.

[phade]

phade,

you are 100% correct

I'm rarely in the middle on most debates, but this one I'm no doubt a fence sitter. I see good and bad out of it. I see change and people in large don't deal well with it.

I just think both sides of the topic have such polar paradigms that it is essentially trench warfare.

I actually think it is worse than the A/R issue in those terms.

For the record, I do see inclusion coming sooner rather than later.

Edited February 27, 2013 by phade

[phade]

62 is the new young - I hope.

It's all what you make of it, that's for sure. If I can still sling arrows at 62, I'll be one happy dude.

[WNYBuckHunter]

phade, I never said it was the difference between right or wrong, I said it was the difference between elitist and non-elitist.

[phade]

phade, I never said it was the difference between right or wrong, I said it was the difference between elitist and non-elitist.

Is there something wrong with someone being or thinking they are elite? I don't fully know the answer to that question myself.

I used to think so, but not so sure anymore. I "think" elite is just selfish and selfish isn't necessarily right or wrong.

Edited February 27, 2013 by phade

[WNYBuckHunter]

I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle. How do you least disrupt vertical bowhunters while at the same time making room for xbows? Maximize the opportunity while at the same time mitigating the risk. I think some of the dynamics are not similar to the compound vs. trad situation decades ago as context has changed (less access, fewer bowhunters v.s more, emphasis on mature bucks vs. any buck), while the apples to apples remains (inserting a weapon into another's season).

Some people try to argue that there is no disruption, some argue there is. Most people argue this point based on experience because stats are almost always questioned on this topic. In risk management, a perceived risk is as legitimate as a realized risk. I think for debate sake, increased disruption should be a given with crossbows based on that premise. In addition to my writing, my career is based on looking at data and intangibles and coming up with direction. In this case, I believe numbers indirectly show evidence that disruption occurs in some form - but I digress there. The problem is, that the "disruption" is perceived as being selfish.

I've hunted heavily in xbow states and I can say there is added pressure from it. Slob hunters abound in all groups no doubt, but if I could rank the % of slob hunters based on my experience: Firearms>Xbow>Vertical bow. I witnessed major "slob moves" the last two seasons in Ohio and I had to bite my lip at the bigger picture. Both were xbow hunters. I don't equate slob to illegal, but these were poor behavior. Again, everyone brings their own experiences into the topic, but answering the question needs to be the focus and not why someone comes from where they do and assigning right or wrong to it.

I don't think there is an easy answer here. xbow proponents are not happy unless full inclusion occurs and vertical bowhunters don't want infringement. I think more bowhunters would be open to limited inclusion along the lines of age/disability, but I think more xbow proponents still wouldn't be happy. That is one of the biggest things that kills me about it. Allowing the tool with its benefit (shooting) to those that need it the most seems prudent. I knwo that didn't happen with compounds, but again, I think the dynamics/playing field has morphed a bit as the hunting focus shifts toward today's landscape.

The way I see it, allowing crossbows is no disruption to other archery hunters. Its just another bow.

[Five Seasons]

I'm rarely in the middle on most debates, but this one I'm no doubt a fence sitter. I see good and bad out of it. I see change and people in large don't deal well with it.

I just think both sides of the topic have such polar paradigms that it is essentially trench warfare.

I actually think it is worse than the A/R issue in those terms.

For the record, I do see inclusion coming sooner rather than later.

that's how I feel with ARs. But those entrenched on either side can never seem to understand the other's point of view. You're truly doing yourself a favor when you can understand why someone feels the way they do and not just label them as selfish.

I do see why there is a push for crossbows. I get it. Another cool thing too use to hunt deer with. Most of us have muzzleloaders, shotguns/rifles and bows. So here is another option. I dislike the disabled argument though because most of us "anti's" support use by the elderly and disabled. What I dont like is that "let me use what I want and mind your own business" attitude. I dont see how that makes a point in the favor of crossbows being legal. I've expressed my concern with crossbows several times in several threads and I'm not going to keep rehashing it. I just wish those in favor could come up with better reasons on why it should be legal.

Edited February 27, 2013 by Belo

[WNYBuckHunter]

Is there something wrong with someone being or thinking they are elite? I don't fully know the answer to that question myself.

I used to think so, but not so sure anymore. I "think" elite is just selfish and selfish isn't necessarily right or wrong.

So now you get it. If you want to be an elitist, fine, but just admit to it.

[phade]

The way I see it, allowing crossbows is no disruption to other archery hunters. Its just another bow.

Doesn't make you right or wrong. It is just important that when other people do, that is equally valid when brought to the table.

[phade]

So now you get it. If you want to be an elitist, fine, but just admit to it.

I've been called worse, that's for sure. Doesn't make what I bring to the table any less valid.

Edited February 27, 2013 by phade

[phade]

Honest question, is there a reason proponents and antis don't want or will not accept a compromise (say disabled/elderly)?

Never really heard much on that. It would take compromise from both sides, I think.

Edited February 27, 2013 by phade

[WNYBuckHunter]

that's how I feel with ARs. But those entrenched on either side can never seem to understand the other's point of view. You're truly doing yourself a favor when you can understand why someone feels the way they do and not just label them as selfish.

OK, so heres where your missing the point. Just because someone doesnt agree with your opinion, doesnt mean they cant see your side of the discussion. Now when you try to argue facts, its a whole different story.

Also, not agreeing with someone does not make the opinion selfish. Saying that you dont care what the rest of people want just because it might affect what YOU do, now thats selfish.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Honest question, is there a reason proponents and antis don't want or will not accept a compromise (say disabled/elderly)?

Never really heard much on that. It would take compromise from both sides, I think.

One reason I personally want full inclusion is basically simple. Its less complicated, and easy to enforce.

Another reason I dont want the elderly/disabled deal is because that is currently in place for draw locks, and take a good look at how difficult it is to get the permit.

Lastly, its not an elderly/handicapped issue to me, its about allowing everyone the choice to use whichever type of bow they want to use. I have no issue with regulating the poundage, physical size of a crossbow, etc. They already do that with all other bows, so it falls right in line.

[SteveB]

Honest question, is there a reason proponents and antis don't want or will not accept a compromise (say disabled/elderly)?

Never really heard much on that. It would take compromise from both sides, I think.

My thoughts are they need to either be accepted as archery equipment or not.

Compromise could be in equipment restrictions such as lbs, limb minimum length, etc.

[phade]

OK, so heres where your missing the point. Just because someone doesnt agree with your opinion, doesnt mean they cant see your side of the discussion. Now when you try to argue facts, its a whole different story.

Also, not agreeing with someone does not make the opinion selfish. Saying that you dont care what the rest of people want just because it might affect what YOU do, now thats selfish.

Interesting point, indeed

What is the difference in selfishness between these statements?

I don't want crossbows because it negatively impacts my hunting experience.

I don't want more taxes for welfare because it negatively impacts my quality of life experience.

Do you see #1 as being selfish in a bad way? Do you see #2 as being selfish in a bad way?

We need to step away from "selfish" as a topic and get more to the actual end result. How do we mitigate the risk of vertical bowhunting disruption (percieved or not) and still seize the opportunity of xbow?

[Five Seasons]

OK, so heres where your missing the point. Just because someone doesnt agree with your opinion, doesnt mean they cant see your side of the discussion. Now when you try to argue facts, its a whole different story.

Also, not agreeing with someone does not make the opinion selfish. Saying that you dont care what the rest of people want just because it might affect what YOU do, now thats selfish.

And you call me a cherry picker? You're just cherry picking one of the points we make when arguing against crossbows. There are several reasons and I'm not alone. However, because I tend to be more vocal on the subject and a member of an organization you dislike you get all up in arms. Despite the fact that its much larger then the organization supporting the legalization of crossbows. You've made it clear at least a dozen times you're not a fan of NYBH, despite the charity and conservation efforts. Despite the compromises they've made with the muzzleloader crowd and DESPITE the fact they're a group of hunters. You yourself criticize them as being anti-hunter though and ask why we cant all get along. But just like any group we have our opponents because something we believe in, is something you dont believe in. Exo facto then, we're a bunch of elitist snobs... So we should disband and there will be one less pro-hunting organization in liberal NY.

i've posted link after link and study after study. I'm not sure what other facts you're looking for. The pro people in this thread are the ones throwing around percentages as facts. Remember this initial thread was started based off a study. Those are facts.

[Five Seasons]

One reason I personally want full inclusion is basically simple. Its less complicated, and easy to enforce.

Another reason I dont want the elderly/disabled deal is because that is currently in place for draw locks, and take a good look at how difficult it is to get the permit.

Lastly, its not an elderly/handicapped issue to me, its about allowing everyone the choice to use whichever type of bow they want to use. I have no issue with regulating the poundage, physical size of a crossbow, etc. They already do that with all other bows, so it falls right in line.

1. so things are too complicated. make them easier for me to understand? What's so difficult? you can hunt with a bow, you can hunt with a crossbow with a permit. simple stupid.

2. easy to fix. be a proponent for making it easier to obtain a permit. I'd be on your side there.

3. a crossbow is not a bow. but we will never see eye to eye on that one.

Edited February 27, 2013 by Belo

[WNYBuckHunter]

The difference is that statement #1 is imposing your values upon others at no cost to yourself, and all of the cost to them, therefore giving them less of a choice. Statement #2 only affects those that choose to live off of welfare, it does not affect their choice.

[Five Seasons]

The difference is that statement #1 is imposing your values upon others at no cost to yourself, and all of the cost to them, therefore giving them less of a choice. Statement #2 only affects those that choose to live off of welfare, it does not affect their choice.

how am i imposing my values? you're the one looking to change tradition?

[WNYBuckHunter]

1. so things are too complicated. make them easier for me to understand? What's so difficult? you can hunt with a bow, you can hunt with a crossbow with a permit. simple stupid.

2. easy to fix. be a proponent for making it easier to obtain a permit. I'd be on your side there.

3. a crossbow is not a bow. but we will never see eye to eye on that one.

1. Things are complicated enough as it is. You dont see all of the people that post just on this site alone that dont understand the current laws? Why make them more complicated.

2. see #3, its not an elderly/disabled issue to me.

3. By definition, it is. You can argue it all you want, you are still wrong. Its not an opinion thing, its a fact thing.

[WNYBuckHunter]

how am i imposing my values? you're the one looking to change tradition?

The tradition that has already been changed in the past? Is that the one you are talking about?

If you cant see how limiting other's choices is imposing, then I dont know what to tell you.