Reply To: B and C

[David Petersen]

#56409

Thanks, Shane. Wow, it’s almost as if the author of this is a tradbow.com member, so clearly does he or she echo our majority sentiments. Not even P&Y (who have done nothing but cave in to technology for years now), but B&C. In this case at least, the rifles are ahead of the “bows” in seeing and owning-up to the truth.

So far as “numbers” and what good would they do? First, as the B&C statement points out, they become irrelevant unless we specify numbers for every rifle caliber, scope, etc. (and same for “bows”). Indeed it’s the shooter’s intent more than the weapon or distance. However, some form of formal “official” statement on max ethical ranges, or max ranges acceptable for trophy book entries, might at least keep magazines from proffering the “farther the shot, the better” BS they’ve been spewing in recent years. One techy compound-device rag, a year or so ago, had a cover banner “If you’re not regularly making 50-yard shots, here are some tips.” That establishes 50 yards as the minimum you should be “competent” at.

Regarding the compounders shooting craps at a recent shoot–take away their range-finders and they are babies with no diapers and poop all over their butts.

To paraphrase a well-known Dire Straits tune: “That ain’t huntin’!” That ain’t even archery.