Laws are created to keep order with in the community so no matter what either a right or a privilege the law can take it away from you. Everyone is born with there rights but people have to earn their privileges.There is no test that needs to be taken to have the freedom of speech or the right to a fair and speedy trial but you must take a test and prove you are capable of handling the privilege like a hunting license or a drivers license. But once you have broken the rules of that privilege or right it can be taken away. If you have committed a serious crime they can take away your right to bear arms or if you get caught pouching your privilege of hunting can be taken away. Not all rights can be taken away but some can.
I'll jump on this one. I'm actually friends with Brackett - and I'm not sure I saw him shoot anything in the head - but I'm not defending that. Chris is getting people who would normally not get into what we do - get into it. I like that! I haven't honestly watched too many of his shows, but from what I've seen - I think they are good quality and far more entertaining than most. Is he outragious in real life just like his show - heck yes! I've known him since his early days 10+ years ago, so I respect what he's gone throught to get to the point he is now without much help in the process! With that being said, happend to catch my first ever "Relentless Pursuits" or whatever the heck that show is called with Tim Wells. I actually like Tim, he's a nice guy, laid back, and a great shot. We see him at a ton of shows each year. With that being said, he was shooting at coues bucks last night at unknown yardages and eventually hit one in the base of the skull and dropped it. He then did his interview with the arrow still sticking out of the bucks head. He was proud of this you could tell. How anyone can think that is good for the archery industry, for the future of hunting, or for anything positive related to hunting????? Blows my mind. Some people in this industry will do ANYTHING to get the attention they need, regardless of class. Tim, I like you, like most of your show, but you got to look at the big picture here man!
I could be wrong.....but it seems like we've gone from a "head-on" shot and trangressed into actual head shots.
Like I said earlier, the only show I watched, he shot a pig in the head because that was his only shot. I was told that was OK because it is only a pig .
Correct Jeff. A head shot was not the issue I brought up with Chris Brackett. It was a head on shot. He stated that the "vital area" to shoot at is, "between the shoulder and the brisket". To ME,( and every other IBEP instructor I know), thats not a shot.
I found this on youtube and listen to where he talks about shooting an animal. In the clip he talks about his arrow equipment but he states where to put a shout with a broad head thought it was relevant to the topic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pn8-nvaXg4
I like to wake up, drink a large cup of coffee with a sick amount of caffeine, and just hunt. I mean just walk out there in the dark, wait until that beautiful sun rises, and just wait for things to unfold. Damn we have too many laws in our country and too much bs.
Brett, I agree. Man, I live my life to hunt another day. I wish it were as easy as that (just walk out there), but it isn't. I recognize the severity of the issue (my peers in England and Australia do as well). I take offense when arrogant yahoos jeopardize my privilege(s) I agree LBG, I revise and amend. Both rights and privileges are conditional upon their proper application. Yes, you are born with one intact (for example, being able to vote when a person turns 18) while you must conditionally earn the other (taking a hunter ed. course before a person is given a license to hunt). Yes, both can be taken away. The question at hand is whether or not hunting is a right. Some say yes and this may be so, but, in the present context, can it be so if every animal (within the United States) belongs to "we the people"? If a hunter does not have permission, then he cannot hunt. His permission to hunt is granted and not innately given. You can talk all you want; you do not need permission. Nobody can stop you unless you scream "fire" and/or endanger general welfare (cause disorder as stated). It is still a simple majority which defines “order” and "disorder" (i.e. draws the lines). Let’s not emote and conduct a simple poll (maybe the subject of another thread). Each person’s opinion will be tabulated. Obviously, you cannot be a member of all three groups per se, but you can reason as if you were in that group’s shoes. Question one: Are head shots (with archery gear) acceptable to: 1) the 10% of us which make up the hunting community, 2) the 80% which sit on the fence but value their natural resources, and 3) the 10% who are opposed to hunting all together? My answers would be: no (due to low probability), no (cruel), and no (cruel). Question two: Are head on shots (with archery gear) acceptable to: 1) the 10% of us which make up the hunting community, 2) the 80% which sit on the fence but value their natural resources, and 3) the 10% who are opposed to hunting all together? My answers: no (low probability), not sure/undecided/need more info and actively seeking it (leaning towards no-less care and responsibility), and no (cruel). Question three: Are straight facing away shots (with archery gear) acceptable to: 1) the 10% of us which make up the hunting community, 2) the 80% which sit on the fence but value their natural resources, and 3) the 10% who are opposed to hunting all together? My answers: no (low probability), not sure/undecided/need more info and actively seeking it (leaning towards no-less care and responsibility), and no (cruel). Question Four: Are complete broadside shots within effective range (with archery gear) acceptable to: 1) the 10% of us which make up the hunting community, 2) the 80% which sit on the fence but value their natural resources, and 3) the 10% who are opposed to hunting all together? My answers: yes (high probability), not sure/undecided/need more info and actively seeking it (leaning towards yes-more care and responsibility), and no (cruel).
Huck, I DO see where you're comming from, but again, I beg to differ. If you're a "legal citizen" of the USA and are of age, is it not your "right" to vote? Yes it is. But, in some states you lose that right if you commit a felony. The "right to bear arms" (forget hunting) will get taken away if you are a felon. This could go back and forth until the cows come home, the problem is they never do.
That is the stupidest thing I have read on this site. I hope your not serious, or you need some real help my friend.
I met chris this past weekend at the ohio deer & turkey expo. He is a really down to earth guy. He is also going to be at the deerasic classic outdoor expo this year, in cambridge,oh.
Yes and no we started out with maybe 3 pages about his shot placement then everyone got into the nonsense about if hunting is a right or a privilege and if driving was a right or a privilege but yes he did do the head ON shot but i thought it was good of him to mention the most desired shot placement behind the front shoulder
Nonsense? I adamantly do not believe the fact that some guys take their hunting privilege for granted and jeopardize that privilege for the rest of us is anything close to nonsense! This game we play is definitely about you, me, and more importantly WE. Both the written and the unwritten rules are there and must be adhered to-it is a mater of putting on your big boy pants. It's pretty simple, if you want to lose, then disrepect the players (10% hunters, 80% nonhunters,10% anti-hunters). They are all entitled to their opinions and they can and do vote. When and if I (Greg) ever meet Chris, I assure you, I (Greg) will have this nonsensical conversation with him. If he's "all that" and truly loves the sport and wants to keep participating like most of us, I'm sure he'll understand. Hmmm...then again, maybe he already understands.
Good post Will!! Been on your side of this conversation the whole time. I wasn't going to post In this thread but I'm just having a hell of a time not doing so after reading some of the stuff on here. High percentage shots mean one thing, high percentage recoveries on them shots. I've been bowhunting 24 years not Including this upcoming year. I've wounded one deer In 24 years and one bear In 20 years. There's reasons for that, high percentage shots. I can assure you not too many non hunters are going to be upset with me when talking hunting. My hunting story's are respectful, my hunting pictures are clean (no blood), and the way I present myself to the non hunters shows nothing but respect. The non hunters are the ones you have to Impress, not the antis (their a loss cause) or other hunters show boating risky shots that you were successful In doing. You have nothing to prove to other hunters or antis but you do have something to prove to the non hunting public. You have to show them that you are respectful In what you do. My dad preached to me as a young kid long before I was of legal age to hunt to have respect for the animal your hunting and to also present yourself to other people (non hunters) the same. I'm very glad my dad and mom brought me up like this. I will do the same with my daughter as I know It has made me a better bowhunter and a better spokesperson of hunting. There's no way everyone's story or recovery Is always going to have a happy ending but why not up the chances for It. There's only one way to do that.
Good post. I am VERY against head shots or low percentage shots. My predatory instincts are very strong, and many times my brain is telling me to "kill" why my common sense is telling me to "slow down". One must master their inner voice when hunting. It will guide them in the appropriate manner. I can guarantee you my inner voice has never told me to shoot a deer in the head.
The question remains, who draws the line? If shooting at a deer head on is 'wrong', then what about other shots? I see Heartland Bowhunters mentioned here alot, a couple members were even on the show, I've seen that show 1 time and guess what they were hunting ... they were shooting flying pheasants out of the air. Who's going to step up to the plate right here and now and call that unethical, or doesn't that cross YOUR imaginary line? How about running deer? Gene Wensel made a video back in the 80's, named something like October bucks. On the video, he shoots and kills a running deer. Anyone want to go on record and say Gene Wensel's an unethical huter? Anyone hunt rabbits with the bow, awful small target there? When I shot recurve, squirrel hunting with a few buddies was one of my favorite hunts. Guess I'm a 'bad guy'. I don't watch most of the garbage on t.v. , but I agree that hunting celebs should set a good example, and ALL hunters should respect the animals they hunt, but I refuse to back down from what I do. I hunt and kill animals. Evey time we give in, water down, comprimise what we do ... we lose a little more freedom. Personally, I would never shoot at a deer head-on, but I don't feel that's any of the non-hunting public's goddamn business.
Keith, Answer to question one....."We" Anwers to question two....High probability, high recovery shots are acceptable to "We". Answer to question three... Me, if the non-recovered rate grossly exceeds the recovered rate and this is a waste of life and a natural resource." We" think hunters should be conservationists first and foremost. Answer to question four....see answer to question three. Answer to question five....$10 says Gene Wensel thinks that shot was unethical. It is a shot he won't take today (at least not on television). Let's ask him. Anwer to question six...Yep, rabbits are small targets. Means you need to be closer to successfully place an arrow. Also, see answer to question three. I won't back down either. I hunt and kill animals too. However, as a conservationist, I do it with the utmost respect for wildlife. I also take into consideration the opinions of hunters, non-hunters, and (believe it or not) anti-hunters. Each of these groups are entitled to there opinion-it would be arrogant of me to think otherwise. I take it seriously because "We" demands that of me. I couldn't agree more! Presumptuous aren't you? They make it their business...they vote and there are more of them than you. Did I miss anything?
I agree again Will!! We make It their business when we/hunters get their attention with non sense. So many people haven't a clue on the Importance of the non hunter.
