Crossbow exemptions for those over 60

[stoneam2006]

I will be 75 this fall season. I can still pull my 60 and 70 pound bows .

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

And I hope you can till 100 but my dad just hit 50 and with a double kidney transplant and a pic line in his arm for transfusions every Monday he doesn't have the strength to draw a bow but works daily and won't be considered disabled. Bc he's not and doesn't want to be labeled that way either.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[stoneam2006]

I don't fight the crossbows. I just don't support them.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Would you fight for them if only other option was early muzzle?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[fasteddie]

No

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[stoneam2006]

That's unfortunate

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[Four Season Whitetail's]

But what's disabled? My dad works 50 hrs a week but can't draw a compound and hold it...

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Just a Doctors note and he is in. I have had 2 back operations and a broken collar bone. At 52yrs old i am sure i could get a Doctors excuse myself but that should not be needed. Its a string and an arrow and the arrow does the killing. Hence is an item that should be called archery and included in and archery season.

[Five Seasons]

But what's disabled? My dad works 50 hrs a week but can't draw a compound and hold it...

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Honestly a simple doctors note. Sure guys would bend the rules, but those guys are probably shooting illegally anyhow.

Don't make it hard and make it legal for 60 and up.

Edited January 30, 2016 by Belo

[Bowguy 1]

I'm by no means support crossbows in any fashion.

I do support folks that have no other option. Elderly n disabled should be an easy yes

[Nomad]

Define " elderly ".

I've seen people say those in their 50's and 60's are elderly lol .

[Dave]

I'm by no means support crossbows in any fashion.

I do support folks that have no other option. Elderly n disabled should be an easy yes

 

So you do support the crossbow in some fashion. What do you consider elderly?

 

[SteveB]

I'm by no means support crossbows in any fashion.

I do support folks that have no other option. Elderly n disabled should be an easy yes

They are either archery equipment or they are not.

A crossbow does not morph into something else when different people shoot it.

[Bowguy 1]

Not going to get in a pissing match. 60 is fine, but like I said anyone who actually needs it to hunt should be allowed. Some guys are always gonna cry when someone says anything negative about crossbows not sure if you are or aren't.

Outside of those exceptions I'm not for them but if it's a legal tool so be it

[Bowguy 1]

Steve they aren't archery equipment no matter how guys twist it imo

[grampy]

I respectfully disagree Bowguy. The range is the same as a modern compound. Sill shoots an arrow/bolt off a string and just has a different release mechanism, although my compound release has a trigger too. There are always things we don't like that others do in hunting. But if they are legal, does that make them wrong for everyone? Very simply put, if something is not for you, don't use it. Hunt how you want. And let others do the same.

[Bowguy 1]

Grampy n I totally respect your opinion. What you said is all true. The weapons are similar. Crossbows may start out fast but they lose velocity fast resulting in similarity.

There are advantages n disadvantages to them both. Except the fact crossbows require little practice once sighted in the pros/cons of each tool cancel each other to an extent.

Remember though they most not be what game commissions all over the country envisioned when setting archery seasons or they'd already be allowed. Seems most states need the "language" changed in order to legalize them.

Just like liberals have done changing the "language" w what constitutes marraige, drug use, terroristic threats, racism.

It's all in how things are worded. Now granted crossbows aren't a giant leap but imo they are a leap in the wrong direction.

I'm by no means fighting against them it's all just my opinion. As stated I respect yours too

Edited June 8, 2016 by Bowguy 1

[Jmp209]

I don't see them as a problem for aged and disabled hunters but there are a lot of younger guys I've talked to who won't invest the time and work into vertical archery that would jump at a crossbow in a heartbeat. They are similar in range and projectile but there is no doubt they are easier to shoot more accurately with less practice and less movement. By removing the act of drawing and being able to use a rest to steady your aim, in my opinion, makes it much easier than vertical. With in increase in the number of hunters and the technology being used I think this could cause over harvesting in areas with already low deer populations. Then there are areas that could benefit from an increased deer harvest. I'm no deer biologist so this is no more than my opinion but I don't think this is a "one size fits all" problem for the whole state.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

[moog5050]

Who cares whether a crossbow is archery or not. They aren't loud powder burning guns either. Quiet enough not to ruin anyone's archery hunt. So let them be used in early season. Yes, they are easier than a compound, which is easier than a recurve, which is easier than a spear. Again, who cares. Let the hunter decide his preferred challenge level. I have said it before, but I would prefer to see someone hunt with a crossbow than a compound if they are more likely to injure game with the compound. Why should a hunter be required to hunt with whatever level of challenge I choose. As long as the archery season isn't ruined with shots going off (yes I realize that happens for the short youth season and am fine with that), I don't care what legal weapon a hunter uses.

[Jmp209]

Who cares whether a crossbow is archery or not. They aren't loud powder burning guns either. Quiet enough not to ruin anyone's archery hunt. So let them be used in early season. Yes, they are easier than a compound, which is easier than a recurve, which is easier than a spear. Again, who cares. Let the hunter decide his preferred challenge level. I have said it before, but I would prefer to see someone hunt with a crossbow than a compound if they are more likely to injure game with the compound. Why should a hunter be required to hunt with whatever level of challenge I choose. As long as the archery season isn't ruined with shots going off (yes I realize that happens for the short youth season and am fine with that), I don't care what legal weapon a hunter uses.

An increase in hunters wouldn't be a bad thing in my opinion. I think everyone should have the opportunity to hunt the early season. That being said, able bodied people do have that opportunity, many just choose not to take advantage of it. I personally feel like it would be catering to those who want more opportunity for less work.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

[moog5050]

An increase in hunters wouldn't be a bad thing in my opinion. I think everyone should have the opportunity to hunt the early season. That being said, able bodied people do have that opportunity, many just choose not to take advantage of it. I personally feel like it would be catering to those who want more opportunity for less work.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

I understand the sentiment and shoot nearly daily so that I can hunt with a barebow recurve. But really, why should someone BE REQUIRED to show the same level of dedication to hunt early season. I hear the same crap about compounds on traditional bow sites. I would prefer to give everyone the opportunity whether they want to work harder or not. As long as its not hurting my hunt, I don't care. Honestly "the you should work harder to hunt this season" argument is a slippery slope unless you are at the bottom of that slope - i.e. hunting with a homemade selfbow, wood arrows and flint heads.

[Bowguy 1]

Who cares whether a crossbow is archery or not. They aren't loud powder burning guns either. Quiet enough not to ruin anyone's archery hunt. So let them be used in early season. Yes, they are easier than a compound, which is easier than a recurve, which is easier than a spear. Again, who cares. Let the hunter decide his preferred challenge level. I have said it before, but I would prefer to see someone hunt with a crossbow than a compound if they are more likely to injure game with the compound. Why should a hunter be required to hunt with whatever level of challenge I choose. As long as the archery season isn't ruined with shots going off (yes I realize that happens for the short youth season and am fine with that), I don't care what legal weapon a hunter uses.

So what's wrong w powder burning guns? Let anyone chose their challenge level. I think we shouldn't discriminate. Let em all in.

The same weak arguements imo for the crossbow. It's a step up from this, which was a step up from that etc. Supposed to be a "primitive" season. Next step from crossbow is a rifle so let's just skip a step n be done?

[Jmp209]

I understand the sentiment and shoot nearly daily so that I can hunt with a barebow recurve. But really, why should someone BE REQUIRED to show the same level of dedication to hunt early season. I hear the same crap about compounds on traditional bow sites. I would prefer to give everyone the opportunity whether they want to work harder or not. As long as its not hurting my hunt, I don't care. Honestly "the you should work harder to hunt this season" argument is a slippery slope unless you are at the bottom of that slope - i.e. hunting with a homemade selfbow, wood arrows and flint heads.

I do agree with you for the most part. I'd love to see more people enjoying the outdoors and if crossbows make that happen that's fine. My biggest concern is that deer harvest have the potential to increase rather drastically with an increase in both technology and number of hunters. Perhaps this isn't a problem in many zones but there's are areas that currently have low deer populations that could be affected more so than others. Like I said, I'm not a deer biologist so these are only my opinions but I think there needs to be some considerations taken aside from the fact that it allows more people to be involved. In my area people already complain about seeing few deer in rifle season, would they be any happier seeing just as few or fewer deer earlier in the season?

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

[grampy]

It's a BIG jump from a crossbow to a high powered rifle. IMO.

[moog5050]

So what's wrong w powder burning guns? Let anyone chose their challenge level. I think we shouldn't discriminate. Let em all in.

The same weak arguements imo for the crossbow. It's a step up from this, which was a step up from that etc. Supposed to be a "primitive" season. Next step from crossbow is a rifle so let's just skip a step n be done?

IMO powder burning guns change the whole scenario. I wouldn't exactly call compounds "primitive" either but no one takes issue with those because most people hunt archery with them - because its easier. That's cool with me. Guns are loud and allow for long distance kills. Major differences from a crossbow, compound, recurve, longbow, etc.

[Jmp209]

So what's wrong w powder burning guns? Let anyone chose their challenge level. I think we shouldn't discriminate. Let em all in.

The same weak arguements imo for the crossbow. It's a step up from this, which was a step up from that etc. Supposed to be a "primitive" season. Next step from crossbow is a rifle so let's just skip a step n be done?

I do agree with drawing a line and sticking to it. In PA we have a late, flintlock only season. No cap locks, or inlines allowed, and also no telescopic sights. I don't think this is discriminating against anyone, they have the opportunity to take advantage if they want.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

[moog5050]

I do agree with you for the most part. I'd love to see more people enjoying the outdoors and if crossbows make that happen that's fine. My biggest concern is that deer harvest have the potential to increase rather drastically with an increase in both technology and number of hunters. Perhaps this isn't a problem in many zones but there's are areas that currently have low deer populations that could be affected more so than others. Like I said, I'm not a deer biologist so these are only my opinions but I think there needs to be some considerations taken aside from the fact that it allows more people to be involved. In my area people already complain about seeing few deer in rifle season, would they be any happier seeing just as few or fewer deer earlier in the season?

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

I think deer density and control is a different issue that should be addressed by DEC on a local level like you mention. BUT, if you can go hunt with your compound legally based on those densities, I see no reason why anyone should be prohibited from using a crossbow in the same area.

[Bowguy 1]

Will say this. I've only been on here a bit but this is what's supposed to happen. Everyone has an opinion n no one is beating the other up. Shows brains.

Grampy it is a big jump of course. Just playing devils advocate n saying there has to be a line somewhere

Edited June 8, 2016 by Bowguy 1