using illumanock in Wa

[boneaddict]

Do you think the people that would use these the most would be the guys like this.

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,83903.30.html

[boneaddict]

probably *censored*s like this that make some folks feel like policeing the ranks.    So that arrow that was sticking out of the ass of the doe in downtown Twisp last week, I wonder if it was lighted if the non-hunters would be able to see it better. 

[flinger]

http://www.clean-shot.com/
NEXT
 
 

[boneaddict]

   Nice

[JimmyHoffa]

But those spot on laser broadheads say they can only adjust to 70 yds.  That's not nearly enough.   But can you really see that laser that far on fur?

[WildWind1]

Killing/aiming aid, I say no way...

[Lowedog]

Do you think the people that would use these the most would be the guys like this.

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,83903.30.html

C'mon now, I remember a longest shot thread where the mighty Boneaddict claimed a 500+ offhand shot on a running deer with a rifle. 

[pianoman9701]

Do you think the people that would use these the most would be the guys like this.

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,83903.30.html

C'mon now, I remember a longest shot thread where the mighty Boneaddict claimed a 500+ offhand shot on a running deer with a rifle.

And another on a different thread killing a buck at over 80 yards. I'm going with the "no" camp on this.

[Snapshot]

Killing/aiming aid, I say no way...

The only reason I want to see them allowed is because of the guys who say they shouldn't be because it doesn't meet their criteria of what they consider archery hunting.  I have never used them and don't plan to.

I still have not read one legitimate excuse why a lighted nock should be illegal.  The slippery slope argument is just lame. 

But Wildwild1, then Lowedog will be forced support the laser broadhead because of your saying he shouldn't be allowed to use it... It could be a vicious cycle we would enter into if one exception is made but not another. There is always someone out there whose nose will be bent because some toy they used in another place isn't allowed here.

[Lowedog]

Killing/aiming aid, I say no way...

The only reason I want to see them allowed is because of the guys who say they shouldn't be because it doesn't meet their criteria of what they consider archery hunting.  I have never used them and don't plan to.

I still have not read one legitimate excuse why a lighted nock should be illegal.  The slippery slope argument is just lame. 

But Wildwild1, then Lowedog will be forced support the laser broadhead because of your saying he shouldn't be allowed to use it... It could be a vicious cycle we would enter into if one exception is made but not another. There is always someone out there whose nose will be bent because some toy they used in another place isn't allowed here.

Nah, I wouldn't support that because I can differentiate between what actually would aid in aiming/killing and what only is an aid to revover an arrow. 

That and because you made this post. 

[WildWind1]

  Kinda like you with the lighted nock, huh snapshot?

[Snapshot]

IF you mean, WW1, that I don't support electric nocks because of some post on a website forum then that is absurd. I don't support electric nocks because we have taken big game with archery gear for tens of thousands of years without them. It is a choice to hunt the archery seasons; it is a choice to shoot a black arrow that costs $25; it is a choice to send it downrange at 300 fps; it is a choice as to when to begin following up on a shot. Respectfully, I think everyone should live with their choices and not try to change archery hunting in an effort to make up for shortcomings.

[pianoman9701]

IF you mean, WW1, that I don't support electric nocks because of some post on a website forum then that is absurd. I don't support electric nocks because we have taken big game with archery gear for tens of thousands of years without them. It is a choice to hunt the archery seasons; it is a choice to shoot a black arrow that costs $25; it is a choice to send it downrange at 300 fps; it is a choice as to when to begin following up on a shot. Respectfully, I think everyone should live with their choices and not try to change archery hunting in an effort to make up for shortcomings.

Respectfully, your reasoning is unsound, even though I agree to "no". We haven't been using archery equipment for thousands of years like it exists today - compound bows, sights, stabilizers, 350 FPS, carbon, aluminum, etc. Through your reasoning, lighted nocks should be allowed. But again, I think we're reaching a point where technology has made bows an incredibly more effective weapon than they were even 20 years ago.

[Lowedog]

I laugh at the reasoning some have that because others don't view archery hunting as some type of elitist activity and only as another hunting season in which they choose to use modern equipment it is to make up some sort of short coming in their ability.  Does it really feed your ego that much to think of the way you do it as superior to anothers choice? 

[WildWind1]

IF you mean, WW1, that I don't support electric nocks because of some post on a website forum then that is absurd. I don't support electric nocks because we have taken big game with archery gear for tens of thousands of years without them. It is a choice to hunt the archery seasons; it is a choice to shoot a black arrow that costs $25; it is a choice to send it downrange at 300 fps; it is a choice as to when to begin following up on a shot. Respectfully, I think everyone should live with their choices and not try to change archery hunting in an effort to make up for shortcomings.