There has got to be a line drawn somewhere. Otherwise you could argue that ANY shot, taken by a person of ANY skill level, could be deemed ethical, as long as personally they felt that way (however delusional they may be) Correct?
I'll disagree with you there. The shot situation determines whether it is high percentage or low percentage. A deer running is extremely low percentage whether the person behind the bow thinks it is or not. That is not an opinion, that is fact. Just like a baketball shot at 10 feet is higher percentage than one at 60 feet. Regardless of skill level or what the bowhunter thinks, some shots are very low percentage and some are very high percentage. You can have the most skilled archer in the world but, to use a different scenario, a 100 yd shot is a much lower percentage shot than a 15 yard shot. That is fact, not opinion.
Good point Ryan. Another thing to consider is that, fair or not, TV personalities are held to a higher standard when it comes to ethics than the everyday hunter. If you are the host of a TV show your are deemed as a "professional" and thus your actions are expected to be of a "professional" level whether that be real or perceived. Brackett knows this and should have thought better of taking that shot. Regardless of skill level or outcome it was a poor choice on his part as a TV personality. I've met Brackett, he's a pretty cool guy and very personable. He's also an amazing shot with a bow. That said, I'd be surprised to see him take a shot like that again, at least on film.
Who is going to draw that line? Where else are we going to draw lines? Ethical to carry a concealed handgun? Ethical to drive a car over 30 MPH? Ethical to use camouflage to get closer to game animals?
Your basketball analogy is a perfect example. You state that a 10 foot shot is a higher percentage shot than a 60 foot shot and I completely agree... but that does not mean that the 60 foot shot is low percentage to some folks out there it just means that it is a lower percentage shot than the 10 foot shot. It is still opinion no matter how you view it. You cannot cast your own personal ethics onto another for they are not you.
I don't play basketball but I would bet my paycheck against yours that I can make the 10 foot basket against anyone you want to pick to shoot the 60 foot basket. It's a low percentage shot for anyone, even the best long shot shooter in the world. He may have a better chance than me at 60 feet but that doesn't make it a higher percentage shot than the 10 footer.
Never said it was a higher percentage... but just because you may feel that you have no chance of making a 60 footer, doesn't mean that they kid down the street can't drain those shots on command. That is the point I am trying to make.
Put the basketball shot at 20' and you've got a stronger argument (and more realistic). There's "A" line, somewhere, though. I've read that head on shots on elk were NOT so "iffy". "I" won't be attempting one. Would I chastise you for it? The person behind the bow determines whether ANY shot is low or high percentage.
The point I'm trying to make is that no one can drain those shots on command. They cannot make 100% of their tries on low percentage shots.
That's good stuff... Same for distance questions with a bow...no doubt I can hit a deer target at 70 yards evertime...but cannot see any situation where I'd consider it on a live deer...at least this thread makes each of us think this through now than waiting until it's reality...
what the hell ? we are hunters. not peta we kill things to eat them and enjoy it.if you dont think you can stomach the thought of bambi's mama going in the pan and that it might have hurt a wee bit then you dont need to be hunting cause i tell you now it hurts the animal unless you shoot them between the eyes and they die instantly but the few minutes of pain they cant comprehend b4 they die is better than the alternatives they face if there wasnt huntingand the chance for not so perfect shots.
just like nobody can make 100% of the 10 foot shots and how a 20 yard broadside shot isn't a gimme and a five foot putt isn't an automatic green jacket... It all comes down to personal opinion and your own personal code of ethics. If you don't agree with it, fine... but attempting to push your own ethics onto another is wrong. Think about it like this. There are plenty people in this country that believe that bowhunting as a WHOLE is too unethical to be legal. Do you agree with them?
Personally i think the hunting shows especially deer hunting shows are so fake now. The tapes are cut and edited to much. They will show the deer come walking in and then the hunter starts jumping up and down in the stand grabbing his bow and telling the camera man there is a huge buck with in 20 yards then they are arguing about when to take the shot if its in the camera talking with a deer 20 yards away then the shot goes off. I know from personal experience that when i deer comes walking in and i try to stand up most of the time they will spot me so for those guys to be doing 360 in the stand grabbing their bows and stuff is unreal. Second i have never hunted with a partner for deer but when a deer is 20 yards away it cant be possible to have a conversation with your camera man but i could be wrong on that one. Brackett shows what hunting is about and he teaching younger people the anatomy about animals that if you do shoot them in the head they will die. I dont ever recall Brackett stating that a head shot is the way you should kill an animal . If people want to hate on Brackett for making an "Unethical" shot than their are many people on the TV shows that should be in his category for taking spine shots and im pretty sure IBEP instructors dont teach kids to shoot animals in the spine
I don't think anyone in this thread is trying to push their ethics onto anyone else. I do not think anyone is trying to say what shot a person should and should not make. We are just stating that, in our opinion, a head shot is unethical. None of us are pushing to outlaw the shot. If that were the case, then yes, we would be trying to push our ethics onto someone else. Some people take a position on some issues and others are ambiguous. No big deal.
It wasn't a head shot, it was a head-on shot, through the brisket. Aiming for the boiler room from the front. Also, what Txjourneyman was doing by bashing Chris Brackett... was attempting to push his own personal code of ethics on others. That is the only reason I responded to this thread.
See, we will certainly disagree there as well. I could care less if you stuff a pig in a 50 gallon drum first before beating it to death with a sock full of quarters... I have no feelings of respect towards them as they are an invasive and non-native species... Wouldn't try that shot on a deer, elk, moose... whatever... but pigs? You can run em over with your truck if it floats your boat.
