Should Mechanicals be legal here?

[predatorpro]

No appologies needed bearpaw. It was a very respectfully written and well though out argument against the use of mechanicals for western game.  I don't necessarily agree with it but you did bring up good points. 

I would say that there are more than a few newer mechanical broadheads out there that have smaller cutting diameters to improve penetration and increase blade strength/durability and some that were designed specifically for elk (Grim Reapers, Ulmer Edge, Swhacker ) which are also built out west. Those heads out of a well tuned bow are more than capable of penetrating an elk shoulder. I think the majority of mechanical failures are due to the person doing the shooting, not the fault of the broadhead.

 
ted nugent the other day was outraged on his show that some states make this illegal! haha not that im a bow hunter....but he believes they are a better more ethical (deadly) broadhead than a fixed blade broadhead and why a state does not allow a faster more ethical kill he has no idea!.....id had to agree with him on that

[pianoman9701]

No appologies needed bearpaw. It was a very respectfully written and well though out argument against the use of mechanicals for western game.  I don't necessarily agree with it but you did bring up good points. 

I would say that there are more than a few newer mechanical broadheads out there that have smaller cutting diameters to improve penetration and increase blade strength/durability and some that were designed specifically for elk (Grim Reapers, Ulmer Edge, Swhacker ) which are also built out west. Those heads out of a well tuned bow are more than capable of penetrating an elk shoulder. I think the majority of mechanical failures are due to the person doing the shooting, not the fault of the broadhead.

 
ted nugent the other day was outraged on his show that some states make this illegal! haha not that im a bow hunter....but he believes they are a better more ethical (deadly) broadhead than a fixed blade broadhead and why a state does not allow a faster more ethical kill he has no idea!.....id had to agree with him on that

Although I have no problem with legalizing mechanicals, this type of argument ignores the primitive aspect and the increasing tendency away from that. I'm sure there are many devices that would make a clean, quick kill much easier, like scopes, crossbows, electrical devices, and firearms, etc. However, this is where the DFW (and a whole lot of WA bowhunters) has drawn the line. I also disagree that the mechanicals are necessarily more accurate. If you take the time to tune correctly, they aren't. Fixed blade broadheads are as deadly and accurate if they're tuned correctly. The Nuge is a great proponent of hunting and our 2nd Amendment rights. That does not make him the expert on ethics and primitive hunting technique and equipment. He rarely takes part in fair chase, un-fenced hunts on public land. He's got lots of cool stuff and all, but primitive? Not so much.

[bearpaw]

No appologies needed bearpaw. It was a very respectfully written and well though out argument against the use of mechanicals for western game.  I don't necessarily agree with it but you did bring up good points. 

I would say that there are more than a few newer mechanical broadheads out there that have smaller cutting diameters to improve penetration and increase blade strength/durability and some that were designed specifically for elk (Grim Reapers, Ulmer Edge, Swhacker ) which are also built out west. Those heads out of a well tuned bow are more than capable of penetrating an elk shoulder. I think the majority of mechanical failures are due to the person doing the shooting, not the fault of the broadhead.

So more or less the mechanical manufacturers and yourself do realize that some mechanicals don't penetrate as well and are weaker? 

It is a little unfair that I have not investigated some of these new mechanicals built for elk, but, lets say we legalize mechanicals, what is going to prevent an unknowing archer from getting one of these inadequate mechanicals that you and I both know are "less than best" for elk and going elk hunting?   

How would you write a law that allows the use of "adequate" big game mechanicals? 

[buckfvr]

With all the fantastic fixed blade heads out there right now, there is still a ton of guys who go to wallyworld or other discount stores and buy the cheapest junk broad heads they can.....products get better, but some people dont get  it, or cant afford it.

Meaning even with superior mechanicals out there, tons of the junk ones will be bought and used.....

[colockumelk]

Bearpaw I agree with you on some points.  Now I'm playing the devil advocate here.  Like buckfvr just mentioned.  IMHO there are alot of fixed blade broadheads out there that are inadequate for use on elk.  Just like I feel that there are some arrow set ups (ie IBO weight arrows) that are inadequete for elk. 

Currently there are no laws that keep people from using inadequate hunting setups whether or not its a fixed or mechanical broadhead or weighted arrow.  IMHO a person shooting a 50lb bow with a 300 grain arrow with a fixed blade broadhead (legal in accordance with the game regulations) is far worse of an elk setup than a person who is shooting a 70lb bow with a 420 grain arrow with a mechanical broadhead. 

No matter what type of broadhead a person uses shot placement is key.  If the shot is bad no matter what type of broadhead a person uses most likely an animal will not be recovered.  It is up to the individual on how well a broadhead performs.  With todays mechanicals they are extremely reliable and failure rates are almsot non-existant.  Most of the bad stories or failures we hear are not the fault of the broadhead.  Just like with stories of fixed blade failures 9 out of 10 times the failure is not becuase the broadhead failed its because the person made a bad shot or didn't have their bow set up properly.  Human nature is to blame your equipment not yourself. 

If mechanicals were not efficient or humane enough then why is it that all Western states (including Alaska) allow mechanicals to be used except for 3 (WA, OR, ID)  Like with all broadheads shot placement and quality trumps design and type of head any day. 

Like I said I am merely playing the devils advocate here.  If I were to go hunting in MT for elk (where mechanicals are legal) 125 grain Slick Trick Magnums would be in my quiver.   

[RadSav]

So more or less the mechanical manufacturers and yourself do realize that some mechanicals don't penetrate as well and are weaker? 

It is a little unfair that I have not investigated some of these new mechanicals built for elk, but, lets say we legalize mechanicals, what is going to prevent an unknowing archer from getting one of these inadequate mechanicals that you and I both know are "less than best" for elk and going elk hunting?   

How would you write a law that allows the use of "adequate" big game mechanicals? 

What is currently stopping unknowing archers from purchasing Allen broadheads or Atom or shooting a traditional head without realizing they are only rough sharp out of the package? 

Those archers you mention made a conscious effort to break the law.  Putting themselves and your guide service in jeopardy.  Would additional regulation have stopped them from that?

I've seen guys with broadheads that have had the same stainless blades installed and sitting in the quiver for five years.  Duller than heck because they believe a high carbon stainless blade does not rust because it is called stainless.  They unknowingly made that decision and ended up with an inadequate "legal" broadhead.

There is no maximum broadhead diameter.  And, I have heard no demand for one.  Even though a 1.5" steep angled broadhead required a very heavy arrow combined with a lot of velocity to penetrate bone or dense muscle. 

Longbows are encouraged in this state even though few shoot them well and resulting penetration is often minimal. 

No regulation restricts the use of varmint bullets for the taking of large game animals as long as bore diameter is met.  You probably have more stories of that nightmare than you do broadheads that did not work.

We can not regulate people into making smart decisions.  No matter what our intentions stupidity will show it's face.  The government and good doers desire to save us from ourselves without fully understanding the depth of the human stupidity.  For some, no amount of regulation can save them from themselves.  Taking away the right to chose from those who can to protect those who can not never does work out in the end. 

Expandable broadheads have been in production since the early sixties.  Long before replaceable blade broadheads ever hit the scene.  So they are in all reality more traditional archery equipment than many of the other "improved" models available as legal choices.  They pose no real advantage, and their reliability is far greater than they used to be.  Rear deployment heads like the Rage are perhaps even more reliable than many of the more popular fixed blade heads on the market.  So many of the traditional blasts against them no longer apply.

Myself I would rather see a novice properly use a mechanical head than improperly use a traditional or modern fixed blade head.  But we can not regulate the proper use of either of the three styles.  So why regulate just one?

"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then? "  George Orwell, 1984

[huntnnw]

yes, but Ill stick to my Shuttle T's

[grundy53]

yes, but Ill stick to my Shuttle T's

 

[Jordanskylery]

Yes they should.  If it's a question of effectiveness then it's no contest, bigger wound channel = less tracking and less lost game.  If effectiveness is the issue then they should at least allow the broad heads that are a combination of fixed blade and expandable.  These are getting the best of both worlds, guaranteed with the fixed and the added help of the expandable as a second helping.

[BOWHUNTER45]

YES I will stick with my WASP ... 

[bearpaw]

I certainly agree with Radsav and the others that broadhead sharpness is a major concern, more than most people realize, there is no easy way to write laws regulate sharp broadheads either.

Here's another story to illustrate the importance of sharp broadheads and this was with fixed blades, I think they were wasp.       

I had a couple guys here bobcat hunting, we killed nice bobcats and they were still here when my next cougar hunter arrived and decided to go along. We hunted very hard, I'm talking all night and most of the day looking for tracks. We finally cut a nice tom track in the early afternoon and turned the dogs on the track, it was a pretty quick chase and in an hour or so we had the cat treed.

He wasn't very high in the tree, maybe a 15-17 yard shot and right in the wide open. The guy had some old compound bow but it was of legal draw weight. It was obvious the hunter wasn't an experienced archer, but he said he could make the shot so I tied the dogs back and he got ready.

He released and missed, arrow was gone.... it seems like the next arrow hit the tree, then maybe the next arrow he hit the cat and bounced off the cat and fell to the ground. 

The cat was pissed, he jumped out of the tree and I cut the dogs loose immediately, they treed him again very quickly and we quickly got to the next tree. The hunter nocked another arrow, released and missed, arrow gone, nocked another aroow and it bounced off the cat again. Long story short, we recovered any arrows we could and we shot at this cat until we were out of arrows, only about three even hit the cat and none of them penetrated.

So we had a serious discussion and decided to get one of the other hunters recurves out of the truck. He hiked out, got the bow and brought it back to the tree. We had the hunter practice a few times at an old rotten stump and he was shooting pretty good so we decided to take a try at the cat. I thnk it was the first arrow he hit the cat good and killed it with the recurve immediately, the cat diodn't even get 20 yards from the tree. The difference was the broadheads were sharp.

I've got a few incredible stories regarding all types of weapons and it's usually a lack of practice and knowledge that resulted in less than satisfactory experiences. I definitely have to agree that the most important thing for bowhunters is to practice often and keep your broadheads sharp so nobody is telling stories like this about your hunt.   

(actually I can't remember what broadheads they were, it was a bowhunter45 joke) 

[Whitetail freak]

For sure 

[throttlejocky20]

No for me. I never have to worry about a fixed bladed broadhead working after it leaves my bow.

Does that mean you want to take away others right to chose for themselves?  Or just "no" for you personally?  Just curious to know if your vote is accurately answering the posted question.  I'm not arguing either way.  Just trying to clarify.

If it was put into a patitian I wouldnt vote on it. Its a personal preferance.

[Mudman]

Yes, they dont have electrical parts. We should be able to shoot any arrow of choice within reason.

[colockumelk]

YES I will stick with my WASP ... 

You know WASP makes the Jackhammer which is a mechanical right. You could shoot mechanicals and still shoot the Wasp.