Should trail cameras be outlawed?

[bobcat]

I once shot a deer at 300 yards, one shot kill.  I didn't like it at all.  In fact I was real disappointed in myself.  It didn't feel good to make that far of a shot, in fact I know that I could have gotten closer, much closer.  It just didn't do anything for me.

You don't feel right about shooting deer at 300 yards and your name on here is 300rum?       

[Curly]

 

[pianoman9701]

I know it is a new thought in our world but let me try to explain it.

I once shot a deer at 300 yards, one shot kill.  I didn't like it at all.  In fact I was real disappointed in myself.  It didn't feel good to make that far of a shot, in fact I know that I could have gotten closer, much closer.  It just didn't do anything for me.  Now, I could say that shooting game at long distance is unethical or amoral.  I do get that "feeling" that it just isn't the way that it should be done, but, that would be wrong to call it unethical.

Using your 200 yard bow shot on an animal, you could replace it with a 1000 yard rifle shot.  What about a 100 yard bow shot?  For me, bow hunting is about how close I can get, not how far I can shoot.  But, once again, a long shot with a bow isn't unethical, although it may be stupid. 

We are juggling knives when we go around saying something is amoral and unethical, saying it easily and then believing it.  Against the law, yes or no, that is mostly straight forward.  Run a pole on here if a 20 yard bow shot is amoral, then go to Pike's Place Market and ask 100 people if it is.....     

There is no such thing as "ethical" or "moral" hunting, it exists only in your mind and believing what someone else told you to believe.  It is all killing when you get down to it.  The two words began to be associated with hunting when people went from hunting for food to hunting for enjoyment/sport.  It gained further traction when Boone and Crockett and others (hunting magazines) who "felt" something might be wrong so they called it "unethical" and "amoral" and then had laws passed against such activities.  Ethical/unethical or moral/amoral, then gets passed down in magazines, hunters ed, and such and is just someone's view of what should or shouldn't take place.   

What it is about are rules, laws.  What the government (by our laws who owns the game) tells you is o.k. to do versus what is right to do.  To some hunting is unethical and amoral in any form but the law says it is o.k as long as you follow the "rules".  To Boone and Crockett, a deer killed swimming across a river is unethical and amoral, to someone who is hungry, it is food.

Morality and unethical sure get thrown around a lot in the hunting world, we have been duped into believing that it exists.   

I must respectfully disagree. It's about more than laws. It's also about doing the right thing. It's perfectly legal to see an elk at 200 yards and point an arrow into the air and try to hit it. It's completely unethical to do so, however.

The ethics of using trail cams are definitely person to person judgment call; some say ethical and some don't. But the example I gave above is clearly unethical hunting behavior. 300RUM, I doubt seriously that you hunt without ethics. I think your statement is probably not representative of your true attitude for hunting. I may be wrong.

1000 yard rifle shot is only unethical if you're not proficient out to 1000 yards in the given conditions at the time of the shot. Shooting an arrow up into the air (hail Mary, if you will), hoping it will come down on the animal is completely different and is absolutely unethical. There are clearly unethical practices in almost everything we do. Hunting is no exception. I don't know how you can dispute that, but you are. 

[boneaddict]

I would like to think I give the quarry I hunt a bit of a sporting chance, otherwise I might as well hunt in my little high fence.   There are very few good surprises left in this world and the anticipation of not knowing what animal I am after is one of them.   Its my choice that I also don't like baiting.   

[turkeyfeather]

1000 yard rifle shot is only unethical if you're not proficient out to 1000 yards in the given conditions at the time of the shot. Shooting an arrow up into the air (hail Mary, if you will), hoping it will come down on the animal is completely different and is absolutely unethical. There are clearly unethical practices in almost everything we do. Hunting is no exception. I don't know how you can dispute that, but you are. 

If someone practices in the right conditions, how is a 1000 yard shot with a rifle any more ethical than a 100 yard shot with a bow. That sounds a bit hypocritical P-man.

[lghtnquik]

turkey he never said it was. In the previous post 200yd was referenced and that by any and all standards I believe would be considered unethical with archery tackle.

[BNAElkhntr]

 

I heard Obama is wanting to monitor our trail cams.  He is borrowing the funding for it from China as we speak.

[turkeyfeather]

turkey he never said it was. In the previous post 200yd was referenced and that by any and all standards I believe would be considered unethical with archery tackle.

Yeah he did. He referred to it as a "hail mary". Now I personally dont think either shot is a good shot, but I am not going to tell one guy hes good to go and the other hes not.

[pianoman9701]

1000 yard rifle shot is only unethical if you're not proficient out to 1000 yards in the given conditions at the time of the shot. Shooting an arrow up into the air (hail Mary, if you will), hoping it will come down on the animal is completely different and is absolutely unethical. There are clearly unethical practices in almost everything we do. Hunting is no exception. I don't know how you can dispute that, but you are. 

If someone practices in the right conditions, how is a 1000 yard shot with a rifle any more ethical than a 100 yard shot with a bow. That sounds a bit hypocritical P-man.

Because I didn't say a 100-yard shot with a bow was unethical. I said a Hail Mary 200-yard shot. I know bowmen who are proficient out to 100 yards. I wouldn't take a 100-yard shot, but that doesn't make it necessarily unethical. No need to call me a hypocrite, either. I was simply making the point that most people understand that ethics exist, in direct opposition to the opinion of 300RUM who says there is no unethical behavior.

[turkeyfeather]

1000 yard rifle shot is only unethical if you're not proficient out to 1000 yards in the given conditions at the time of the shot. Shooting an arrow up into the air (hail Mary, if you will), hoping it will come down on the animal is completely different and is absolutely unethical. There are clearly unethical practices in almost everything we do. Hunting is no exception. I don't know how you can dispute that, but you are. 

If someone practices in the right conditions, how is a 1000 yard shot with a rifle any more ethical than a 100 yard shot with a bow. That sounds a bit hypocritical P-man.

Because I didn't say a 100-yard shot with a bow was unethical. I said a Hail Mary 200-yard shot. I know bowmen who are proficient out to 100 yards. I wouldn't take a 100-yard shot, but that doesn't make it necessarily unethical. No need to call me a hypocrite, either. I was simply making the point that most people understand that ethics exist, in direct opposition to the opinion of 300RUM who says there is no unethical behavior.

Sorry maybe the hypocrite comment was a bit uncalled for. I apologize. But I still dont see how one can say that a 200 yard shot is unethical if the shooter is confident and has practiced. You can make the exact same argument for a 1000 yard rifle shot. It's your opinion, that doesn't make it un-ethical. This is the problem everyone bases ethics on their opinions. That's fine for them, but they should not use their standards to judge everyone else.

[Curly]

Can an archer (even if he practices all the time) really shoot accurately at 200 yards to be able to kill cleanly in hunting situations?   

[pianoman9701]

1000 yard rifle shot is only unethical if you're not proficient out to 1000 yards in the given conditions at the time of the shot. Shooting an arrow up into the air (hail Mary, if you will), hoping it will come down on the animal is completely different and is absolutely unethical. There are clearly unethical practices in almost everything we do. Hunting is no exception. I don't know how you can dispute that, but you are. 

If someone practices in the right conditions, how is a 1000 yard shot with a rifle any more ethical than a 100 yard shot with a bow. That sounds a bit hypocritical P-man.

Because I didn't say a 100-yard shot with a bow was unethical. I said a Hail Mary 200-yard shot. I know bowmen who are proficient out to 100 yards. I wouldn't take a 100-yard shot, but that doesn't make it necessarily unethical. No need to call me a hypocrite, either. I was simply making the point that most people understand that ethics exist, in direct opposition to the opinion of 300RUM who says there is no unethical behavior.

Sorry maybe the hypocrite comment was a bit uncalled for. I apologize. But I still dont see how one can say that a 200 yard shot is unethical if the shooter is confident and has practiced. You can make the exact same argument for a 1000 yard rifle shot. It's your opinion, that doesn't make it un-ethical. This is the problem everyone bases ethics on their opinions. That's fine for them, but they should not use their standards to judge everyone else.

You're completely missing the point. The point is that there are ethics and ethical decisions to be made. I was debating what 300RUM had said when he said there are no ethics. The specifics of a shot are besides the point.

I was referring to a Hail Mary shot. This is not a practiced shot. This is when you point the bow up into the air hoping that the arrow will come down where you want it to but really having not idea what'll actually happen.

[turkeyfeather]

1000 yard rifle shot is only unethical if you're not proficient out to 1000 yards in the given conditions at the time of the shot. Shooting an arrow up into the air (hail Mary, if you will), hoping it will come down on the animal is completely different and is absolutely unethical. There are clearly unethical practices in almost everything we do. Hunting is no exception. I don't know how you can dispute that, but you are. 

If someone practices in the right conditions, how is a 1000 yard shot with a rifle any more ethical than a 100 yard shot with a bow. That sounds a bit hypocritical P-man.

Because I didn't say a 100-yard shot with a bow was unethical. I said a Hail Mary 200-yard shot. I know bowmen who are proficient out to 100 yards. I wouldn't take a 100-yard shot, but that doesn't make it necessarily unethical. No need to call me a hypocrite, either. I was simply making the point that most people understand that ethics exist, in direct opposition to the opinion of 300RUM who says there is no unethical behavior.

Sorry maybe the hypocrite comment was a bit uncalled for. I apologize. But I still dont see how one can say that a 200 yard shot is unethical if the shooter is confident and has practiced. You can make the exact same argument for a 1000 yard rifle shot. It's your opinion, that doesn't make it un-ethical. This is the problem everyone bases ethics on their opinions. That's fine for them, but they should not use their standards to judge everyone else.

You're completely missing the point. The point is that there are ethics and ethical decisions to be made. I was debating what 300RUM had said when he said there are no ethics. The specifics of a shot are besides the point.

I was referring to a Hail Mary shot. This is not a practiced shot. This is when you point the bow up into the air hoping that the arrow will come down where you want it to but really having not idea what'll actually happen.

Ok, but nobody at any time has suggested that they thought or would even try just pointing the bow in the air and letting an arrow go. Unless I missed something, I didnt see where anyone did or would condone a shot like that. So I'm confused as to what exactly your referring to.

[rtspring]

200 yds with a bow!!! Bad idea, I don't care who is the shooter...

[pianoman9701]

1000 yard rifle shot is only unethical if you're not proficient out to 1000 yards in the given conditions at the time of the shot. Shooting an arrow up into the air (hail Mary, if you will), hoping it will come down on the animal is completely different and is absolutely unethical. There are clearly unethical practices in almost everything we do. Hunting is no exception. I don't know how you can dispute that, but you are. 

If someone practices in the right conditions, how is a 1000 yard shot with a rifle any more ethical than a 100 yard shot with a bow. That sounds a bit hypocritical P-man.

Because I didn't say a 100-yard shot with a bow was unethical. I said a Hail Mary 200-yard shot. I know bowmen who are proficient out to 100 yards. I wouldn't take a 100-yard shot, but that doesn't make it necessarily unethical. No need to call me a hypocrite, either. I was simply making the point that most people understand that ethics exist, in direct opposition to the opinion of 300RUM who says there is no unethical behavior.

Sorry maybe the hypocrite comment was a bit uncalled for. I apologize. But I still dont see how one can say that a 200 yard shot is unethical if the shooter is confident and has practiced. You can make the exact same argument for a 1000 yard rifle shot. It's your opinion, that doesn't make it un-ethical. This is the problem everyone bases ethics on their opinions. That's fine for them, but they should not use their standards to judge everyone else.

You're completely missing the point. The point is that there are ethics and ethical decisions to be made. I was debating what 300RUM had said when he said there are no ethics. The specifics of a shot are besides the point.

I was referring to a Hail Mary shot. This is not a practiced shot. This is when you point the bow up into the air hoping that the arrow will come down where you want it to but really having not idea what'll actually happen.

Ok, but nobody at any time has suggested that they thought or would even try just pointing the bow in the air and letting an arrow go. Unless I missed something, I didnt see where anyone did or would condone a shot like that. So I'm confused as to what exactly your referring to.

Wow, again, the choice of shot makes no difference. My point was that there are ethical dilemmas. That's all. The whole point. Forget the shot.  This thread is about outlawing cameras.