PDA

View Full Version : Documenting Lies from Anti Xbow Groups



Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 08:15 AM
It is my contention that leading anti crossbow organizations have resorted to lies. Plesae post any you can find. DO NOT make stuff up or use what some of the anti xbow advocates have said on this forum-ONLY stuff that can be found reading the official websites of the anti groups.

I WILL start with this gem from the New York Bowhunters -WHY YOU SHOULD JOIN section


As a Southern Zone Bowhunter, you don't have the intrusion of muzzleloaders, crossbows or other firearms during the archery-only season. Why, because of NYB

why is this a lie-because crossbows are being called firearms.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 08:22 AM
Here is another whopper from the NYB site-it comes from the odious Marlow Report and has several lies in one sentence

The crossbow which is always cocked, shoulder held, shot from a rest, fired by a trigger and has over twice the effective range of a bow is closer to being a firearm than a hand held bow.


Shot from a rest? it can be but NOT ALWAYS-hence a LIE
twice the effective range of a bow-complete lie
closer to a firearm-such a statement would prevent Marlow from being allowed to testify as an expert in any court I have practiced before since it is clearly a lie

Deer Dave
December 15th, 2005, 09:16 AM
:thumbs_up Great Posts Jim!!!:thumbs_up

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 09:36 AM
:thumbs_up Great Posts Jim!!!:thumbs_up

Thanks-I don't want Anyone making personal attacks on other posters-just acccurate quotes from websites

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 11:25 AM
A few More lies from http://www.newyorkbowhunters.com/New_Folder/xbow.htm

(this is a target rich environment for anyone looking for how truly dishonest the anti xbow movement is in this country)

Look at the comparison between firearms, crossbows, bows, and compounds (I can't copy it to this forum)

Here are some more lies

1) They claim that a crossbow can be shot by "multiple individuals" while a traditional and compound bow cannot. Complete LIE. I have a 29" draw and I can easily shoot my wife's 24" draw target bow. I have joad kids from 5-0 to 6-6 and I can easily shoot any of the Olympic bows they use.

2) They say the trigger on a crossbow "May be adjusted for sensitivity" (true for some, not true for many) but say this is not true for compound bows-Again a lie because almost every release costing more than 30 dollars has such an adjustment.

3)They claim crossbows-you do not hold the physical weight of the device when drawn but you do with compounds. That is a LIE no matter how you interpret it. I and most xbow hunters hold the physical weight of the crossbow when you shoot it. If they are claiming the weight of the bow's limbs, then its a lie for the compound since the machinery holds most of the weight of the limbs "when drawn"

4) and then there is the total nonsense disinformation department from this pathetic chart-saying crossbows have "monte carlo stocks" (a lie-my excalibur doesn't, my barnett doesn't) or that crossbows have SWIVELS FOR A SLING (OMG!). btw I have a sling on my hunting bow-both a wrist sling and a carrying sling.



3)

Deer Dave
December 15th, 2005, 11:30 AM
What is really funny is that.... if any anti xbow hunter suddenly becomes disabled where they cannot shoot a compound or verticle bow....their mind might change real quick.

I have said this before and I will say it again.

All hunters need to stay UNITED...whatever their choice of weapon...the anti xbow poeple are really giving the antis more firepower against all of us....

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 12:12 PM
Jim -
Your characterization of these statements as absolute lies is totally absurd.

You would get LAUGHED out any courtroom if you tried to do this.

You are trying to state that if the condition cannot be met 100% of the time, then it is a lie. That's dishonest in itself.

For example:

1) They claim that a crossbow can be shot by "multiple individuals" while a traditional and compound bow cannot. Complete LIE. I have a 29" draw and I can easily shoot my wife's 24" draw target bow. I have joad kids from 5-0 to 6-6 and I can easily shoot any of the Olympic bows they use.

Not a lie. I guarantee I can find plenty of bows that your wife (and you) cannot shoot, including my 70#, 31" draw Browning Mirage.

Can you find a crossbow that cannot be shot by multiple individuals?



Here's another example of intellectual dishonesty:

The crossbow which is always cocked, shoulder held, shot from a rest, fired by a trigger and has over twice the effective range of a bow is closer to being a firearm than a hand held bow.

Shot from a rest? it can be but NOT ALWAYS-hence a LIE

Where did it say always shot from a rest? Hint - it didn't. It said always cocked, and you distributed the "always" to try and get a cheap shot in.


By the way - I'll give you the 2X effective range part - that's pretty clearly an exaggeration.

centerx
December 15th, 2005, 12:14 PM
From the NABC who is strongly supported by P&Y

We see dangers, too, in promoting the commercial profiteering of crossbows at the expense of our natural resources,” Ballard said. “It’s a slippery slope. No user group exists for crossbow hunting and yet the public trustees of our natural resources are being pandered to by crossbow manufacturers and the commerce of hunting to allow crossbow hunting in bow seasons when no public interest exists.

You know.. I would love to see a organization that protected me from the commercial profiteering of actually using this countries natual resourses.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 12:16 PM
What is really funny is that.... if any anti xbow hunter suddenly becomes disabled where they cannot shoot a compound or verticle bow....their mind might change real quick.

I have said this before and I will say it again.

All hunters need to stay UNITED...whatever their choice of weapon...the anti xbow poeple are really giving the antis more firepower against all of us....


good points. its sad that some people are so greedy and so sure that their religion is the only true faith that the have to resort to lies about other hunters to preserve their entitlements

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 12:21 PM
Jim -
Your characterization of these statements as absolute lies is totally absurd.

You would get LAUGHED out any courtroom if you tried to do this.

You are trying to state that if the condition cannot be met 100% of the time, then it is a lie. That's dishonest in itself.

For example:

1) They claim that a crossbow can be shot by "multiple individuals" while a traditional and compound bow cannot. Complete LIE. I have a 29" draw and I can easily shoot my wife's 24" draw target bow. I have joad kids from 5-0 to 6-6 and I can easily shoot any of the Olympic bows they use.

Not a lie. I guarantee I can find plenty of bows that your wife (and you) cannot shoot, including my 70#, 31" draw Browning Mirage.

Can you find a crossbow that cannot be shot by multiple individuals?



Here's another example of intellectual dishonesty:

The crossbow which is always cocked, shoulder held, shot from a rest, fired by a trigger and has over twice the effective range of a bow is closer to being a firearm than a hand held bow.

Shot from a rest? it can be but NOT ALWAYS-hence a LIE

Where did it say always shot from a rest? Hint - it didn't. It said always cocked, and you distributed the "always" to try and get a cheap shot in.


By the way - I'll give you the 2X effective range part - that's pretty clearly an exaggeration.

There are several problems in your rant.

1) please tell me what bar you are admitted to. AFter that we will discuss courtroom arguments and evidence. I don't think you want to go there

2) If you say crossbows are always shot from a rest-showing one that is not proves the statement a LIE- thus you are wrong

3) the chart says Bows cannot be shot by other individuals-not SOME bows-but ALL BOWS-thus it is a lie and you again are wrong.

4) that you had the nerve to defend that group as being honest is a rather sad statement

5) Many crossbows, especially custom jobs, are hard to shoot wrong handed btw. Many people cannot cock a crossbow without a mechanical or stronger person's assistance (btw My wife can shoot a 90 pound compound if I draw it back for her-same with setting a 200 pound crossbow for her)

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 12:26 PM
Here is the direct quote-it was contained in one of my posts that Source apparently didn't bother to read


The crossbow which is always cocked, shoulder held, shot from a rest

Source says this:

Where did it say always shot from a rest? Hint - it didn't. It said always cocked, and you distributed the "always" to try and get a cheap shot in.

you all be the judge. was ALWAYS limited to "cocked" or was it applied in that statement from the NYB to include Shoulder held, AND shot from a rest?

I think Source has been proven wrong again

doctariAFC
December 15th, 2005, 12:46 PM
Here is the direct quote-it was contained in one of my posts that Source apparently didn't bother to read


The crossbow which is always cocked, shoulder held, shot from a rest

Source says this:

Where did it say always shot from a rest? Hint - it didn't. It said always cocked, and you distributed the "always" to try and get a cheap shot in.

you all be the judge. was ALWAYS limited to "cocked" or was it applied in that statement from the NYB to include Shoulder held, AND shot from a rest?

I think Source has been proven wrong again

Being a writer, I can certainly answer this question. When using the word always, the following the adverb 'always' with either a single verb, or connecting multiple verbs together in a string, using commas to properly separate each verb so the sentence is grammatically correct, the term 'always' in the string applies to all verbs unless you change the adverb to address a different statement within the same sentence. Using this example:

The crossbow which is always cocked, shoulder held, shot from a rest,

The meaning, or implied meaning is awalys cocked, always shoulder held, always shot from a rest.

If this is not the intended meaning, the sentence should read, for accuracy:

The crossbow which is always cocked, shoulder held and sometimes shot from a rest

This isn't a difficult change. However, clearly from the statement as it is made, the intention is to mislead or deceive readers into thinking a crossbow is awlays shot from a rest

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 01:03 PM
Doc is clearly correct. His discussion on the grammatical facts is completely accurate and it is obvious that the purpose of that comment was to tell the reader that xbows are ALWAYS shot from a rest. The statement is thus a LIE.

I would agree that crossbows are always cocked prior to being shot since you can't shoot an arrow out of one without cocking it and I would admit that while you don't have to shoulder a crossbow to shoot it, that is a statement that is FAIR if not 100% accurate

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 01:24 PM
here is some more prevarication-this time from the Suffolk Bowhunters in Long Island-Most of their gibberish is a copy of the Earlier PBS nonsense (Bowhunting is supposed to be hard but compounds make it easy enough blah blah blah) but there are a couple really winners from these guys. I note they advocate boycotting companies like PSE, Darton and Parker for selling crossbows

"The archery hunting season in Ohio has become the "Arrow Gun Season" with gun hunting gang tactics. The Ohio experience shows that allowing crossbows into our archery hunting seasons will destroy the great bowhunting opportunities that New Yorkers have enjoyed for many years and turn our archery seasons into a free-for-all!"

Complete lie.

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:10_y0FNtWX4J:ww w.suffolkarchers.com/crossbow.html+%22anti+crossbow %22&hl=en

Deer Dave
December 15th, 2005, 01:40 PM
good points. its sad that some people are so greedy and so sure that their religion is the only true faith that the have to resort to lies about other hunters to preserve their entitlements



Jim, I could not have stated it any better!:thumbs_up

Deer Dave
December 15th, 2005, 02:00 PM
source


If you are really an avid sportsman and archer...and you enjoy the outdoors and nature and all it has to offer to all of us....God's Wonderfull Creation

WHY do you CONSTANTLY have to split hairs (over words or phrases) and always add YOUR resistance to our choice of weapon? Your input is sad.

To me your "opinion" doesn't bother me in the least.

"ALL" HUNTERS NEED TO STAY UNITED

Apparently you are not too sure about that.

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 02:23 PM
Wow, what a super duper thread:thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Jim you really know how to stick it to 'em.:thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Jim maybe they are not lying, maybe they are just stupid....lol:thumbs_up

good thing that the crossbow shooters dont have thier own agenda and misrepresent thier weapons.:thumbs_up

I can see how this thread will improve realations between crossbow hunters and bowhunters;soon we will all be one big happy family. :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Great Job Jim C:thumbs_up

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 02:31 PM
Wow, what a super duper thread:thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Jim you really know how to stick it to 'em.:thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Jim maybe they are not lying, maybe they are just stupid....lol:thumbs_up

good thing that the crossbow shooters dont have thier own agenda and misrepresent thier weapons.:thumbs_up

I can see how this thread will improve realations between crossbow hunters and bowhunters;soon we will all be one big happy family. :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Great Job Jim C:thumbs_up


If the antis want to post claims made by the crossbow promoting organizations are lies its their right to start their own thread. As to being a happy family, maybe, when the greed is erased and the lies are set aside. Right now when you have groups calling Xbow archers lazy, or their bows "guns" or claim that the only reason why xbows are being legalized is due to the nefarious pecuniary interests of those big multinational billionaire xbow makers you won't have a happy family.

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 02:32 PM
Jim nice job in pointing out that bowhunting is a religion.:thumbs_up :thumbs_up

I am right behind you in your crusade.:thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Down with bowhunters. Nothing but a bunch of greedy liars.:thumbs_do

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 02:35 PM
Jim nice job in pointing out that bowhunting is a religion.:thumbs_up :thumbs_up

I am right behind you in your crusade.:thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Down with bowhunters. Nothing but a bunch of greedy liars.:thumbs_do


nice sockpuppet nonsense. I have no crusade, I just tire of the lies that archery apartheid advocates spew.

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 02:42 PM
If the antis want to post claims made by the crossbow promoting organizations are lies its their right to start their own thread. As to being a happy family, maybe, when the greed is erased and the lies are set aside. Right now when you have groups calling Xbow archers lazy, or their bows "guns" or claim that the only reason why xbows are being legalized is due to the nefarious pecuniary interests of those big multinational billionaire xbow makers you won't have a happy family.

I could not have said it better myself.:thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

three cheers for Jim C....hip hip horray, hip hip horray, hip hip horray:thumbs_up

I like how you baffle them too, "nefariou pecuniary interest" that is priceless.:thumbs_up :thumbs_up

I can see them now just scratching thier Cro-Magnon skulls.:teeth:

Jim for President:usa2:

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 02:48 PM
nice sockpuppet nonsense. I have no crusade, I just tire of the lies that archery apartheid advocates spew.

No need to be so modest. We are with you.:thumbs_up

"apartheid"??? lets get through the bowhunting holy war first and then we will deal with South Africa's race discrimination.:thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Who is the MAN????

YOU!!!:thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Free Range
December 15th, 2005, 03:26 PM
Of the 155,000 archery participants, 70,000 used a crossbow, 55,000 use a vertical bow and 30,000 used both. Of seniors who apply for and receive a free license, 4,000 used a crossbow, 1,000 used a vertical bow and 1,000 used both. Success rates for 2001 were identical for crossbow hunters and vertical bow hunters at 14%."


A lie because they are not identical, they may be similar, or close but they are not identical.


The owner of a well-known archery Web site had this to say about keeping crossbow hunters out of the woods: "I'd rather see less bowhunters of higher quality than more hunters of questionable ethics and experience." It is obvious that he is referring to crossbow hunters, and I have to wonder why he assumes that those hunters will, as a group, be any less responsible, less ethical, or less "dedicated" than he and his bow-toting brethren. In my opinion, that statement is self-serving and inaccurate.

A lie because this was taken out of context, it had nothing to do with the x-bow


Second, our pioneer bowhunting forefathers did not create
archery seasons nor did they ever own the rights to pass seasons
on in perpetuity. States create hunting seasons and have the right
to alter or eliminate them.

A lie because it assumes the state would have created a bow season without the forefathers, pushing for it. The state did not just out of thin air decide “hey why don’t we establish a bow season and see what happens” the pioneers had more to do with establishing the bow season then the state did.


The anti-crossbow archers’ bottom line is that they do not want to
share the woods. They are motivated by selfishness.To the delight of the anti-hunters, the anti-crossbow archers keep
fanning the flames of a senseless fight at a time when the ranks of the
outdoorsman are aging and declining in number at a troublesome
rate. The fact is, the crossbow is a weapon that could be instrumental
in reversing that trend.

A lie for two reason, 1) we have never said we don’t want to share the woods, stated like this would imply we don’t want anybody to take up the bow and join the bow season, a lie. Many bowhunting clubs and organizations spend countless hours and dollars to recruit new bowhunters, and to get kids involved in bowhunting. 2) it is not us fanning the flames, if you would not try to push the x-bow into archery season, then there would be no fire in the first place.


The crossbow has probably allowed us to recruit new hunters into
our ranks

Using the word probably takes this out of the lie category, but it might as well be a lie, because there is no data from any study done to support the x-bow has recruited “new hunters”



We believe the crossbow has allowed for
recruitment of new hunters in several categories – young hunters,
women hunters, hunters with disabilities,

See above, saying it twice does not make any less of a lie


The argument in favor of crossbows is an argument for opportunity.
Who should have the opportunity to enjoy hunting during archery
seasons? Is archery season only for an elite group of archers who
narrowly define what constitutes a bow? Should we disallow access to
all those individuals who, for whatever reason, cannot draw and hold
a conventional bow? Should we disallow access to the conventional
bowhunter who no longer has the time to devote to maintaining his
proficiency or the elderly bowhunter who no longer has the ability to
maintain it?

Lie, everyone has opportunity to hunt during archery season, just because they choose not to take that opportunity does not mean it’s not there

doctariAFC
December 15th, 2005, 03:50 PM
A lie because they are not identical, they may be similar, or close but they are not identical.



A lie because this was taken out of context, it had nothing to do with the x-bow



A lie because it assumes the state would have created a bow season without the forefathers, pushing for it. The state did not just out of thin air decide “hey why don’t we establish a bow season and see what happens” the pioneers had more to do with establishing the bow season then the state did.



A lie for two reason, 1) we have never said we don’t want to share the woods, stated like this would imply we don’t want anybody to take up the bow and join the bow season, a lie. Many bowhunting clubs and organizations spend countless hours and dollars to recruit new bowhunters, and to get kids involved in bowhunting. 2) it is not us fanning the flames, if you would not try to push the x-bow into archery season, then there would be no fire in the first place.



Using the word probably takes this out of the lie category, but it might as well be a lie, because there is no data from any study done to support the x-bow has recruited “new hunters”




See above, saying it twice does not make any less of a lie



Lie, everyone has opportunity to hunt during archery season, just because they choose not to take that opportunity does not mean it’s not there
Where do we start, FreeRange.

1 - If the rates of success between crossbow and compound bow/ stick bows are both 14% (one may be 14.2 and another may be 13.7, for example), these both round to 14%, and, when the DNR reports the success rates, they both show an identical 14% success rate, therefore it is not a lie.

2 - What other motivating factor would an anti-crossbow person have in making such a nonsensical statement? This is pretty clear what the meaning is. If another 30,000 hunters picked up a compound bow, and headed into the woods for archery season, would this statement apply? Would the guy who said this be upset at seeing the compound hunter numbers grow? I think the answer is obvious, here. The only reason any bowhunter would say this is in context of the number of hunters the crossbow may add to the sport. Selfishness creeps inat that point, and the "its my woods and my season" attitude is exposed.

3 - States created the seasons, bowhunters did not. The States created the seasons based on hunter demand and interest, expansion of revenues through increased opportunities and no statistical evidence that allowing a new season would hurt the wildlife populations. BUt, laws are passed by governments, not individual groups. The groups may present a proposal, but the laws are handled by government.

4 - Never said you don't want to share the woods? HA! I guess that is true to the extent that in order to be allowed to share the woods, you cannot choose to use an implement that you disagree with. I wonder what your tune would be say 30 years ago, when the compound was being introduced? We had the same argument from the stick bow shooters. Should we have not shared the woods with a compound bow hunter? Please.

5 - The crossbow IS an implement that does draw new hunters to the sport. See Georgia as a prime example. See Kentucky in the future (next season). The novelty draws new hunters to the sport by default. This has happened with compound bows, before that allowing bows, muzzies, handguns, and in NY, we have seen some new hunters come in on account of the rifle. The challenge is not that this will recruit new hunters, as the facts clearly show the crossbow does just that. Same as the compound bow did in the 1970s. However, will the recruitment off-set the hunters leaving the sport in order to stabilize participation trends? Who knows.

6 - Same answer, see GA, in particular. Look back at other States and get their information regarding license sales the year before crossbows were allowed and the year after. Pay attention to the new license sales (or first time buyers) segment.

7 - So the interested hunter who cannot draw a vertical bow due to arthritis or an injury to his arms/ shoulders has the opportunity, he just doesn't take advantage? So the kid or woman who cannot draw the minimum weight has the opportunity? Really?? Please 'splain, Lucy.

Try again.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 03:53 PM
Free Range is not showing any lies by pro crossbow organizations. THe whining about "identical" is pathetic. I note that Free Range is not trying to defend the PBS nonsense any more. His first claimed lie comes from an Ohio DNR official not any pro crossbow group. statistically the same might be a better term than identical but it clearly has not the intention to mislead nor was it posted with an agenda as is the anti xbow drivel

The second claim that something was taken out of context? what exactly was free range quoting-nothing from this thread of mine

FR post is a lie since he is trying to suggest that this uncited piece he is attempting to rebut came from a pro crossbow organization. It is dishonest to cite something without providing its source

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 03:54 PM
the crossbow more closes resembles a modern firearm than a traditional or compound bow.


Nothing but a bunch of stinkin liars.

those liars claim that a crossbow more closely resembles a gun than a bow.

LIARS!!!

this is a crossbow and as you can plainly see it looks nothing like a gun.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c399/xcalstud/crssbw1.jpg

doctariAFC
December 15th, 2005, 04:00 PM
Nothing but a bunch of stinkin liars.

those liars claim that a crossbow more closely resembles a gun than a bow.

LIARS!!!

this is a crossbow and as you can plainly see it looks nothing like a gun.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c399/xcalstud/crssbw1.jpg
Which came first, the crossbow or the firearm?

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 04:25 PM
This is for all of those LIARS.

This is a gun, clearly it looks just like a bow.
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c399/xcalstud/gun2.jpg

Enough with the lying, you lying liars.

doctariAFC
December 15th, 2005, 04:29 PM
This is for all of those LIARS.

This is a gun, clearly it looks just like a bow.
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c399/xcalstud/gun2.jpg

Enough with the lying, you lying liars.
Answer the question.

Which came first, crossbow or firearm?

Never mind, I'll answer for you. Crossbow. That's the correct answer.

Since this is true, the argument that crossbows resemble guns (long guns) is an invalid argument, as it actually is the firearm (long gun) resembles the crossbow.

Move onto the next argument, now.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 04:39 PM
The thread is about lies we can document from anti xbow organizations. ITs a lie to call a crossbow a firearm. I have proven that the NYB's have claimed that a crossbow is a firearm. IT is not a lie to say that a crossbow is not a firearm.

as i noted in another thread-the NYB's pathetic argument means that an AIRSOFT M16 would be more deadly than say the infamous Pen gun
http://pengun.com/ because the toy looks like a military rifle while the pen gun does not even resemble a firearm but certainly is one

the entire purpose of the NYB is to deceive people into thinking a crossbow is as unfair in bow season as a firearm when in reality, most US laws are based on substance.

putting decals and advertisements on your family sedan doesn't make it go as fast as a NASCAR racer that looks similar to your creation. wearing a jumpsuit like Jeff Gordon doesn't mean you can take hairpin turns at 150 MPH.

the anti xbow liars think that how something LOOKS should determine its place in hunting season rather than how it performs. that is both stupid and contrary to American Legal rules

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 04:54 PM
Which came first, crossbow or firearm?

How is that relevant to how they look?

By the way, does a chicken look like an egg or does an egg look like a chicken?


Since this is true, the argument that crossbows resemble guns (long guns) is an invalid argument, as it actually is the firearm (long gun) resembles the crossbow.

Either way does it really matter; the point is that a gun looks nothing like a crossbow and it looks just like a bow.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------


the anti xbow liars think that how something LOOKS should determine its place in hunting season rather than how it performs. that is both stupid and contrary to American Legal rules

I am sure this is TRUE and i'm sure there are books about it. I just can't find them. Either way, I believe whatever you say Jim.

Power to the Crossbow Hunter!

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 04:55 PM
I've got a whopper for you, Jim. Its not from an anti or pro group, but you'll get a kick out of it anyway.

Giving an impromptu demonstration, Smith bends over and, using a special sling, lets his fingers guide the string of his camouflage-colored crossbow to about 180 pounds pressure before a click signals it's cocked. Then he loads a small arrow called a "bolt."

A guest holds the crossbow's stock to his shoulder, aims through a scope and releases the safety. With a pull of the trigger and a slight kick, the bolt darts away at 300 feet per second, three times faster than an arrow shot from a more traditional compound bow.

Ha! That makes NYB appear nearly saint-like!:)

What's even funnier is that it is from an article that is supposed to be supporting crossbows. http://outdoors.mainetoday.com/hunting/050516crossbow.shtml

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 04:55 PM
the anti xbow liars think that how something LOOKS should determine its place in hunting season rather than how it performs. that is both stupid and contrary to American Legal rules

With the exception of the assault weapons ban.

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 04:57 PM
the anti xbow liars think that how something LOOKS should determine its place in hunting season rather than how it performs. that is both stupid and contrary to American Legal rules

Perhaps they are referring to how it operates, and not how it looks.

Besides, we know how it performs - even Revival and Twogun have admitted crossbows are advantaged over their compounds.

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 04:59 PM
Free Range is not showing any lies by pro crossbow organizations.


LOL - that's because there aren't any pro crossbow organizations.:rolleyes:

Too lazy to form, perhaps?

doctariAFC
December 15th, 2005, 05:03 PM
LOL - that's because there aren't any pro crossbow organizations.:rolleyes:

Too lazy to form, perhaps?
American Crossbow Federation...

That's one.... So yes, there is at least one that I know of.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 05:04 PM
I've got a whopper for you, Jim. Its not from an anti or pro group, but you'll get a kick out of it anyway.

Giving an impromptu demonstration, Smith bends over and, using a special sling, lets his fingers guide the string of his camouflage-colored crossbow to about 180 pounds pressure before a click signals it's cocked. Then he loads a small arrow called a "bolt."

A guest holds the crossbow's stock to his shoulder, aims through a scope and releases the safety. With a pull of the trigger and a slight kick, the bolt darts away at 300 feet per second, three times faster than an arrow shot from a more traditional compound bow.

Ha! That makes NYB appear nearly saint-like!:)

What's even funnier is that it is from an article that is supposed to be supporting crossbows. http://outdoors.mainetoday.com/hunting/050516crossbow.shtml

actually that comment didn't come from any pro crossbow organizations and certainly not the pro crossbow people who were quoted in the article

IT CAME FROM: By GLENN ADAMS, Associated Press

Nice Try source but you missed-just think a journalist who gets his facts wrong.

who'd a thunk?

doctariAFC
December 15th, 2005, 05:07 PM
With the exception of the assult weapons ban.
Don't get me started on the Assault Weapons Ban. How stupid is that? I believe ANY weapon can be considered an Assault Weapon, if you assault someone with it! This is not just limited to firearms. A baseball bat is an assault weapon most commonly used during riots and gang fights.

But, I digress. The crossbow, just like the vertical bow, uses the kinetic energy of the string and arched bow limbs as the propellant. The vertical bow ises a bowstring and the arched bow limbs as the propellant. The firearm uses black powder or modern powder, ignited under pressure to create an explosion as the propellant.

What are the similarities between the crossbow and firearm again?

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 05:07 PM
American Crossbow Federation...

That's one.... So yes, there is at least one that I know of.

Yea - now go try to find ACF.

American Checker Federation, American Cats Forum, etc ....

No website - only you know who's (DJH) money maker, Horizontal Crossbow.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 05:08 PM
LOL - that's because there aren't any pro crossbow organizations.:rolleyes:

Too lazy to form, perhaps?


back on insults based on lazy? I already dealt with that along time ago. most crossbow owners are hunters pure and simple. joining groups isn't a big deal to them. most bowhunting groups (LIKE POPE AND YOUNG FOUNDED 1961) started well after bowhunting became legal. many crossbow archers belong to IBO, NFAA, and NAA (as I do). BTW how many bowhunters belong to organizations? most, 50%, 20%-any guesses?

Maybe you can find lies from the big evil crossbow makers that the anti xbow organizations claim are to blame for all the changes in the laws.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 05:10 PM
Yea - now go try to find ACF.

American Checker Federation, American Cats Forum, etc ....

No website - only you know who's (DJH) money maker, Horizontal Crossbow.


more insults-whining about money again-prove some lies Source. this thread is not about antis complaining that people make money in archery. Does Pope and Young or the lying NYB have dues? or does the organization exist without any money

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 05:12 PM
actually that comment didn't come from any pro crossbow organizations and certainly not the pro crossbow people who were quoted in the article

IT CAME FROM: By GLENN ADAMS, Associated Press

Nice Try source but you missed-just think a journalist who gets his facts wrong.

who'd a thunk?

Do you ever READ what I post, or always fire from the mouth first?Here's what I STARTED the post with:


I've got a whopper for you, Jim. Its not from an anti or pro group, but you'll get a kick out of it anyway.


Duh.

doctariAFC
December 15th, 2005, 05:14 PM
Yea - now go try to find ACF.

American Checker Federation, American Cats Forum, etc ....

No website - only you know who's (DJH) money maker, Horizontal Crossbow.


Link to Horizontal Crossbow Magazine:

http://www.horizontalbowhunter.com/

On this site, you can access the information about joining the American Crossbow Federation, as follows:

http://www.horizontalbowhunter.com/documents/ACF.pdf

Just because they do not have their own website at this time doesn't mean that they are not a pro-crossbow organization. Many orgs do not have a web site. Some that do does not automatically mean they are a meaningful and reputable organization, such as PETA. They have many websites and are linked together through a web ring. DOes that mean they should be considered a meaningful and righteous orgainzation? Nope.

However, ACF is out there and they are apparently making progress, so they are certainly doing something.

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 05:15 PM
Maybe you can find lies from the big evil crossbow makers that the anti xbow organizations claim are to blame for all the changes in the laws.

There used to be a talking points memo from Ten Point that was filled with crossbow nyths and misrepresentations. (I'm too nice to call them llies.) I was gonna tear it apart, but can't find it anymore. Must be some slick lawyer advised them to remove it.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 05:18 PM
There used to be a talking points memo from Ten Point that was filled with crossbow nyths and misrepresentations. (I'm too nice to call them llies.) I was gonna tear it apart, but can't find it anymore. Must be some slick lawyer advised them to remove it.


really-I don't think you are being truthful. why don't you tell us some of those myths-are they anywhere near as pathetic as saying a crossbow is a firearm? BTW I read the Ten Point position paper so post away

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 05:19 PM
Link to Horizontal Crossbow Magazine:


Doc, don't tell me you have a reading problem, too.

I just said you can find ACF on Horizontal Bowhunter.

Is my keyboard broke or something??????

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 05:21 PM
Doc, don't tell me you have a reading problem, too.

I just said you can find ACF on Horizontal Bowhunter.

Is my keyboard broke or something??????


:focus: :focus:

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 05:22 PM
really-I don't think you are being truthful. why don't you tell us some of those myths-are they anywhere near as pathetic as saying a crossbow is a firearm? BTW I read the Ten Point position paper so post away

Yea, I read the position paper, too. Its been cleaned up alot, and they shifted to your technique - putting opponents in the position that they have to prove a negative.

I might just find it yet...be patient.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 05:26 PM
Yea, I read the position paper, too. Its been cleaned up alot, and they shifted to your technique - putting opponents in the position that they have to prove a negative.

I might just find it yet...be patient.


why don't you just go by memory and tell us-to the best of your recollection-what lies Ten Point made. DId they say compound bows were firearms? that traditional archers were lazy and unskilled? that bowhunters who don't join organizations like Comptons or P&Y or the "Professional" BS are anti-hunting?

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 05:32 PM
What are the similarities between the crossbow and firearm again?

who can even keep track at this point? All I know is Jim C has helped me see that the gun more closely resembles a compound bow.

and I think my pictures make it obvious.

Thanks Jim.:thumbs_up

retro-grouch
December 15th, 2005, 05:39 PM
Brad...you ever notice how some folks regularly promote confrontation and others are dumb enough to bight every time?

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 05:39 PM
many crossbow archers belong to IBO

and this is clearly referenced by the 8 shooters that were at thier world championships last year.

way to go jim, you put him in his place.:thumbs_up

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 05:43 PM
Brad...you ever notice how some folks regularly promote confrontation and others are dumb enough to bight every time?


confrontation is promoted when some people want to prevent others from using the bow of their choice in archery season and justify that restriction with what have to be seen as laughable nonsense like calling crossbows a firearm

I started this thread to show that the organized professional opposition to crossbow inclusion purvey lies on their websites.

I would rather have this forum be limited to helping others learn about xbows and how to improve their crossbow archery skills myself but since that isn't the case I think its fair to show what most of the anti crossbow position is founded upon

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 05:44 PM
Brad...you ever notice how some folks regularly promote confrontation and others are dumb enough to bight every time?

retro,

JimC is not promoting confrontation. If he wants to post a thread about lies, he has every right to. It is the stupid liars fault.

and you are right some are dumb enough, but we can't figure out what they do every time.

leave jim alone or he will put you in your place too.:thumbs_do

doctariAFC
December 15th, 2005, 05:51 PM
Doc, don't tell me you have a reading problem, too.

I just said you can find ACF on Horizontal Bowhunter.

Is my keyboard broke or something??????
Just a minor brain spasm. Apologies...

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 06:07 PM
Do you ever READ what I post, or always fire from the mouth first?Here's what I STARTED the post with:



Duh.

yes you did-my apologies

Free Range
December 15th, 2005, 06:13 PM
Those lies came from the papers Doug posted on another thread, who were they from? Who knows Doug didn’t post the author I assumed it was a pro x-bow group.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 06:16 PM
Those lies came from the papers Doug posted on another thread, who were they from? Who knows Doug didn’t post the author I assumed it was a pro x-bow group.


I BELIEVE it came from the OHIO DNR or someone in an official position with the DNR. IIRC its a guy named Mike with a Slavic last name-Budzerik or something similar who works for the DNR.

there is no evidence of any attempt to deceive.

Free Range
December 15th, 2005, 06:26 PM
By GLENN ADAMS, Associated Press

It's a silly fool who thinks killing an animal with one tool is different than killing him with another," said Smith, a crossbow owner whose home's wood-paneled walls are adorned with trophies of caribou, elk and a buffalo.

So killing an animal with a 50cal barrett (sp) from a mile away is the same as killing one with a self bow from five paces, silly fool, who does he think he is lying to.


But he soon crossed swords with those he labels as "purists" - bow hunters.

And some would label him as lazy, but does the Pro x-bow guys call him or their self, bigots for segregating hunters with labels? Funny how that works.


But Moody, a registered Maine Guide who has a bowhunting license, contends that the much-maligned crossbow is ballistically the same weapon as a compound bow. The main difference, he said, is "it is more accurate."

Must be a lie, according to Jim and those Vegas guys


And Max Perkins, a hunting friend of Smith's from the rural central Maine town of Mount Vernon, scoffs at the charge a crossbow makes poaching easier. "A crossbow is noisy," he insisted.

Stand a half mile away and shoot a gun then a x-bow see which one you hear. Noisy? Indeed a lie


Moody, who handed out small crossbow pins during his lobbying effort, called the bill's success "a major accomplishment" that will lead to further inroads for enthusiasts.

No compromise, just take little bites

Free Range
December 15th, 2005, 06:28 PM
Attempts to deceive? I thought we were documenting lies?

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 06:46 PM
Attempts to deceive? I thought we were documenting lies?


I have already documented numerous lies by anti xbow organizations. The best you have is comlaining as to what IDENTICAL MEANS. there was no attempt to deceive even if you were to establish to our satisfaction that 14.2 say versus 14.8 are not identical. The entire thrust of the NYB, the PBS, and other anti xbow ORGANIZATIONS is to DECEIVE people into thinking xbows are not similar-in the areas that count-with compound bows or these dishonest organizations focus on differences that have nothing to do with what matters-the effectiveness, range and deer taking probability

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 07:09 PM
I have already documented numerous lies by anti xbow organizations.

What a pantload.

You have mostly documented grammatical errors or faulty interpretation.

There are times that they go over the top, but there are plenty of times that you and Willie go over the top.

I don't think much of what you reported are lies - they are half truths, misrepresentations, spin.

I could list a half dozen regulars here who commit the same crimes daily.

That list would include you .... and me.:rolleyes:

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 07:16 PM
What a pantload.

You have mostly documented grammatical errors or faulty interpretation.

There are times that they go over the top, but there are plenty of times that you and Willie go over the top.

I don't think much of what you reported are lies - they are half truths, misrepresentations, spin.

I could list a half dozen regulars here who commit the same crimes daily.

That list would include you .... and me.:rolleyes:

MORE of the THAT DEPENDS WHAT IS IS BS.

we have already caught your attempt to say that "always" doesn't apply to Rest-that was a lie and the group that said it was lying

why don't you tell us how "Muzzleloaders, crossbows and OTHER FIREARMS" is a MERE Grammatical errors.

Is there anyone out there that can claim that statement by the NYB is intended to do anything than call crossbows firearms


face it source-your side-the paid organizations lie like rugs. the best you can do is call all that BS half-truths. where is the half truth in that comment I just cited?

why do the anti groups resort to LIEs or "half truths"

because they are DISHONEST

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 07:30 PM
we have already caught your attempt to say that "always" doesn't apply to Rest-that was a lie and the group that said it was lying

That's your interpretation. I read it the first time and thought you an idiot - it seems obvious to me that they mean always cocked and .... whatever follows is separate.

I realize Rich, our resident "Professional Writer" who has a biology degree says otherwise. So what ... those guys are Professional Bowhunters, not professional writers.:cool: You'll have to cross-examine to determine intent.



why don't you tell us how "Muzzleloaders, crossbows and OTHER FIREARMS" is a MERE Grammatical errors.

Again, you are quibbling.

If they had written it "Crossbows, and MZ and other firearms" you wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

You, with your experiences, prejudice, and bias, read it one way. Apparently, I, with my experiences, prejudice, and bias, read it another.

I honestly believe you are as full of it as you apparently believe they are.



Is there anyone out there that can claim that statement by the NYB is intended to do anything than call crossbows firearms

I do not disagree with that - they are clearly insinuating that crossbows are more like a gun than a bow.

When compared to real bows, I agree with NYB that xbows are clearly different.



face it source-your side-the paid organizations lie like rugs. the best you can do is call all that BS half-truths. where is the half truth in that comment I just cited?


In 1000+ posts, I have called out at least 1000+ crossbow advocate half truths. There is no monopoly on spin and misrepresentation.

I won't deny that anticrossbow rhetoric contains spin. You should admit that your rhetoric is spin, as well.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 07:43 PM
everyone here who can read knows EXACTLY WHAT THAT LIE FILLED organization was trying to say. THEY WERE SAYING that crossbows are always shot off a rest and that muzzleloaders, crossbows and other firearms are all in the same group and that crossbows are a type of firearm just like a muzzleloader. Your attempts to justify these lies are amazing and that is really quibbling.

why don't you cite where I have uttered "half truths"- I am merely showing how truly dishonest the groups that oppose xbows are. they have to LIE or mislead because staying the course with FACTS and honesty would KILL their agenda

Tim4Trout
December 15th, 2005, 07:47 PM
Can you find a crossbow that cannot be shot by multiple individuals?


With the possible exception of draw weight limitations ( i.e. a 75# bow might be too difficult for a 12 year old to pull back ) virtually anyone can shoot any vertical bow. It may not fit them properly, but as long as they can draw it back, they can still shoot it.

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 07:48 PM
Of course I disagree, but the point is hardly worth pressing.

Rest assured, moving forward I will delightfully point out your half truths.

Now that I understand what constitutes a "lie" in your book. I should have some big fun with that in the future, too.

retro-grouch
December 15th, 2005, 07:53 PM
confrontation is promoted when some people want to prevent others from using the bow of their choice in archery season and justify that restriction with what have to be seen as laughable nonsense like calling crossbows a firearm

I started this thread to show that the organized professional opposition to crossbow inclusion purvey lies on their websites.

I would rather have this forum be limited to helping others learn about xbows and how to improve their crossbow archery skills myself but since that isn't the case I think its fair to show what most of the anti crossbow position is founded upon


Jim..I don't think the organizations lie any more than anyone else. Its just how they see things.

I tend to think that often times one's vision is blurred by their desire to push forward or protect their agenda. I see times where your zeal causes you to be a tad dis-ingenuous and likewise for Source.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 07:56 PM
Jim..I don't think the organizations lie any more than anyone else. Its just how they see things.

I tend to think that often times one's vision is blurred by their desire to push forward or protect their agenda. I see times where your zeal causes you to be a tad dis-ingenuous and likewise for Source.


you will have a hard time finding ANYTHING I have ever said that approaches a claim that a crossbow is not part of archery or that a crossbow trophy entails only 75% the effort of a compound trophy or that all ohio xbow hunters are lazy

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 07:58 PM
How about your infamous 98% comments?

Retrogrouch is right - your view is slanted.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 08:15 PM
How about your infamous 98% comments?

Retrogrouch is right - your view is slanted.

you can't prove that was a lie and based on my far greater experience than you=or any of the antis on this board concerning the comparison of crossbow hunting skills vs crossbow hunting skills I still stand by that. YOu attempted to claim I was saying that mastering a crossbow took 98% of the effort of a compound which was a lie-I said mastering all the skills to be a successful compound archer involved about 2% more effort than a crossbow hunter because most of that knowledge involves stuff other than shooting accurately enough to hit a deer in the kill zone 30 yards and in

Retrogrouch says xbows aren't archery-he is normally respectful but hardly objective

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 08:16 PM
should be crossbow vs compound-the edit button is acting up

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 08:18 PM
you can't prove that was a lie and based on my far greater experience than you=or any of the antis on this board concerning the comparison of crossbow hunting skills vs crossbow hunting skills I still stand by that.


You can't prove its a lie = LIE

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 08:20 PM
You can't prove its a lie = LIE

more quibbling=prove that my comparison is wrong

I FORGOT YOU CANNOT, you have never hunted with a crossbow. YOU HAVE never won tournaments with crossbows, compounds and recurves

I have-and to quote one of your favorite sayings-YOU LOSE on this issue

if you have not hunted deer with both a compound and a crossbow you have no relevance on that issue

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 08:25 PM
if you have not hunted deer with both a compound and a crossbow you have no relevance on that issue

Unless crossbows get their own season in NY, I guess I'll never have relevance.

Crossbows during bowseason = copout.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 08:28 PM
Unless crossbows get their own season in NY, I guess I'll never have relevance.

Crossbows during bowseason = copout.


copout-explain-again why are you worrying what others do?

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 08:30 PM
if you have not hunted deer with both a compound and a crossbow you have no relevance on that issue

yeah and if you don't smoke crack you cant tell us that drugs are bad either.

get 'em jim.:thumbs_up

thesource
December 15th, 2005, 08:51 PM
Do a search - I'm tired of answering the same questions over and over.

COPOUT.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 08:54 PM
Do a search - I'm tired of answering the same questions over and over.

COPOUT.


COPOUT-trying to defend anti crossbow positions based on greed by claiming a crossbow isn't a bow

retro-grouch
December 15th, 2005, 09:02 PM
you will have a hard time finding ANYTHING I have ever said that approaches a claim that a crossbow is not part of archery or that a crossbow trophy entails only 75% the effort of a compound trophy or that all ohio xbow hunters are lazy

Jim..its not the fact that one or the other is lieing. It is the fact that you are hellbent to prove one is lieing, and even if they are, what will you gain?

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 09:04 PM
Jim..its not the fact that one or the other is lieing. It is the fact that you are hellbent to prove one is lieing, and even if they are, what will you gain?

what do I gain by proving they are liars-I want to destroy their ability to influence the rights of others. By proving they are liars they lose credibility and influence. That is my goal

retro-grouch
December 15th, 2005, 09:11 PM
Jim...Again I will reitterate that the school of thinking that a crossbow is legitimate archery equipment is no more truthful or less truthful than the school of thinking that says it is not.

Your argument may be legit. But your presentation and how you make it alienates some folks.

I don't think that rifles are real turkey gun, and I don't think that an inline is a primitive weapon, and I don't think the Cincinatti Bengals are a legitimate playoff team. Those are my thoughs and views, but I ain't a liar.

J. Wesbrock
December 15th, 2005, 09:15 PM
Jim,

According to you...


A lie is saying something you know is not true is true

And since you're accusing people of lieing, can we expect you will provide proof (not assumption, suspicions and speculation) that the people expressing these so-called lies do not believe what they are saying?

Probably not.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 09:17 PM
Jim...Again I will reitterate that the school of thinking that a crossbow is legitimate archery equipment is no more truthful or less truthful than the school of thinking that says it is not.

Your argument may be legit. But your presentation and how you make it alienates some folks.

I don't think that rifles are real turkey gun, and I don't think that an inline is a primitive weapon, and I don't think the Cincinatti Bengals are a legitimate playoff team. Those are my thoughs and views, but I ain't a liar.


why do you believe that these anti crossbow groups fill their sites with obvious lies and disinformation?

why do they call crossbows closer to guns or actually guns when its obvious a crossbow and a compound bow are almost the same thing in every area that really counts

why do those groups demonize crossbow hunters when there is no evidence that all of their members are responsible diligent or train hard?

its because they don't have really good arguments that the public will buy. telling joe sixpack that a compound hunter deserves an entitlement a crossbow hunter shouldn't be able to get just doesn't cut it. saying a crossbow hunter ought to be relegated to a one week season while a compound hunter gets 3-4 months is greedy and selfish

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 09:19 PM
Jim,

According to you...



And since you're accusing people of lieing, can we expect you will provide proof (not assumption, suspicions and speculation) that the people expressing these so-called lies do not believe what they are saying?

Probably not.


saying something that is so clearly wrong that only someone willfully blind would say it is a lie as well

calling a crossbow a firearm is a lie and no one can possibly believe that is true-hence anyone who utters that is a liar

It would be akin to an american police officer saying its legal for civilians to own cocaine.

retro-grouch
December 15th, 2005, 09:20 PM
why do you believe that these anti crossbow groups fill their sites with obvious lies and disinformation?

why do they call crossbows closer to guns or actually guns when its obvious a crossbow and a compound bow are almost the same thing in every area that really counts

why do those groups demonize crossbow hunters when there is no evidence that all of their members are responsible diligent or train hard?

its because they don't have really good arguments that the public will buy. telling joe sixpack that a compound hunter deserves an entitlement a crossbow hunter shouldn't be able to get just doesn't cut it. saying a crossbow hunter ought to be relegated to a one week season while a compound hunter gets 3-4 months is greedy and selfish

Jim..I am trying to politely say that you can't get it through you thick head, that just because someone does not see things the same as you , that they are automatically wrong:)

J. Wesbrock
December 15th, 2005, 09:22 PM
So the answer to my question would be no, you can't offer any proof? I didn't think so, but thought I'd ask anyway. :rolleyes:

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 09:25 PM
Jim..I am trying to politely say that you can't get it through you thick head, that just because someone does not see things the same as you , that they are automatically wrong:)

no but they are wrong when they post obvious lies-you are being evasive and less than genuine when you just dance around the claims I have proven were lies

I also find it funny watching a guy who has no experience crossbow hunting (source) arguing about the difference between compound hunting and crossbow hunting

the problem grouch with many people in archery is a belief that all opinions have equal merit-they don't. people who have no experience in a subject acting as if their opinion matters as much as someone who does is comical.

source has no crossbow hunting experience-he is entitled to claim that he doesn't like it, he can claim it is "cheating" but for him to argue about the difference in skills with it and compound hunting is a joke

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 09:26 PM
So the answer to my question would be no, you can't offer any proof? I didn't think so, but thought I'd ask anyway. :rolleyes:


you are not being honest jason-do you honestly believe that anyone honestly thinks a crossbow is a firearm?

J. Wesbrock
December 15th, 2005, 09:38 PM
What I do or don't think isn't the issue. For that matter, neither is your personal opinion. It's not about what you "think", it's about what you can (or in this case can't) prove. ;)

You created this litmus test for labeling something a lie. I'm just trying to see whether you'll apply it to others the same as you use it to defend yourself.

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 09:49 PM
do you honestly believe that anyone honestly thinks a crossbow is a firearm?

Of course you don't, but Jim will point it out anyway, cause that is how he will crush you crossbow bigots.

He will take the obvious and ram it down your lying throat.

if you are not with guys like jim and I, then you are wrong. face it. you can have your own opinion, it is just a big fat lie though. So take your false claims elsewhere, liars.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 09:50 PM
What I do or don't think isn't the issue. For that matter, neither is your personal opinion. It's not about what you "think", it's about what you can (or in this case can't) prove. ;)

You created this litmus test for labeling something a lie. I'm just trying to see whether you'll apply it to others the same as you use it to defend yourself.


I don't need to defend myself-its the people who post lies about other hunters who are in the hole as far as I am concerned

do you think you are better than a crossbow hunter Jason? do you think you have a greater right to a long season than someone using a crossbow?

J. Wesbrock
December 15th, 2005, 10:11 PM
I don't need to defend myself

Really? Let's recap our earlier exchange then...



Quote:
last I checked his deer was the biggest crossbow deer in the history of OHio.


But what you actually said was...



Quote:
the biggest crossbow buck in history..


To which you defended yourself by claiming...



Quote:
A lie is saying something you know is not true is true, I believe that Brad's buck is the biggest.


And I repeat...

You created this litmus test for labeling something a lie. I'm just trying to see whether you'll apply it to others the same as you use it to defend yourself. :nono:

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 10:14 PM
Really? Let's recap our earlier exchange then...




To which you defended yourself by claiming...





And I repeat...

You created this litmus test for labeling something a lie. I'm just trying to see whether you'll apply it to others the same as you use it to defend yourself. :nono:


very lame Jason. Do you have anything substantive to add? what is the biggest crossbow buck taken>? I honestly don't know. DO you without googling it? I thought it was Brads

I notice you never answer any questions I p ut to you. are you afraid to?

J. Wesbrock
December 15th, 2005, 10:23 PM
Still trying to change the subject, huh Jim? :nono:

Do a Google search to find the largest whitetail taken with a crossbow. I'll give you two hints: 2001 & Illinois. It was quite a nice deer.

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 10:24 PM
why do you believe that these anti crossbow groups fill their sites with obvious lies and disinformation?

there you go jim, use those leading question to get him to answer the way you want.:thumbs_up

you are good at this.wahoo:thumbs_up :


do you think you have a greater right to a long season than someone using a crossbow?

yeah do you? we are going to be just as greedy as you lying bowhunters. because it is not about what we need it is about what we can get. you know what they say, it is not about the majority, it is about the vocal minority. And jim and I are pretty vocal. we will take your seasons and you will be left whinning like little children.

yppah niatpac
December 15th, 2005, 10:30 PM
Do a Google search to find the largest whitetail taken with a crossbow. I'll give you two hints: 2001 & Illinois. It was quite a nice deer.

Jason, please review jims rules. he has clearly stated that if you don't have experience with it then your opinion on it is irrelevant.

Therefore if it was not you that took that Ill. deer in 2001, your opinion is worthless.

Oh yeah, another liar bites the dust.

you are on a roll there jim, break out the big guns:thumbs_up

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 10:39 PM
Still trying to change the subject, huh Jim? :nono:

Do a Google search to find the largest whitetail taken with a crossbow. I'll give you two hints: 2001 & Illinois. It was quite a nice deer.

not relevant

J. Wesbrock
December 15th, 2005, 10:43 PM
Jim,

Did you not just ask me this question?


what is the biggest crossbow buck taken

Relevant indeed. :wink:

retro-grouch
December 15th, 2005, 10:50 PM
no but they are wrong when they post obvious lies-you are being evasive and less than genuine when you just dance around the claims I have proven were lies

I also find it funny watching a guy who has no experience crossbow hunting (source) arguing about the difference between compound hunting and crossbow hunting

the problem grouch with many people in archery is a belief that all opinions have equal merit-they don't. people who have no experience in a subject acting as if their opinion matters as much as someone who does is comical.

source has no crossbow hunting experience-he is entitled to claim that he doesn't like it, he can claim it is "cheating" but for him to argue about the difference in skills with it and compound hunting is a joke

Jim...I haven't seen your or Source prove anything except how silly a person can look in trying to make a point.

You regularly compare the crossbows effectiveness to a compound. Yet I don't recall seeing you discussung any parallells between classic/primitive archery equipment and a crossbow. Any thoughts on similarities and dis-similarities?


By the why. How can I be evasive when I am not even debating the issue that you view as legitimate?

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 10:56 PM
Jim...I haven't seen your or Source prove anything except how silly a person can look in trying to make a point.

You regularly compare the crossbows effectiveness to a compound. Yet I don't recall seeing you discussung any parallells between classic/primitive archery equipment and a crossbow. Any thoughts on similarities and dis-similarities?


By the why. How can I be evasive when I am not even debating the issue that you view as legitimate?

that would be relevant if there were bow seasons in some states that were limited to traditional bows. every season I am aware of allows high letoff compounds and mechanical releases. My point has always been that if you allow compounds there is no sound reason to not allow crossbows.

personally, I don't think there were any sound reasons to ever exclude crossbows from even the original archery seasons but those who whine about xbows while using modern compounds are hypocrites

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 10:57 PM
:ROFLMAO:

always fun seeing Source "make a point"


In all fairness source did qualify it by saying it wasn't from a pro or anti crossbow source.

retro-grouch
December 15th, 2005, 11:05 PM
that would be relevant if there were bow seasons in some states that were limited to traditional bows. every season I am aware of allows high letoff compounds and mechanical releases. My point has always been that if you allow compounds there is no sound reason to not allow crossbows.

personally, I don't think there were any sound reasons to ever exclude crossbows from even the original archery seasons but those who whine about xbows while using modern compounds are hypocrites

Ok. so you don't want to compare your crossbow to what I recognize as archery equipment. Thats fine.

By the way. Idaho has areas where the hunting is limited to primitive/traditional archery equipment.

No need for me to ask any more questions. I already know the answer. You have a good Holiday. Merry Christmas my freind.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 11:16 PM
Ok. so you don't want to compare your crossbow to what I recognize as archery equipment. Thats fine.

By the way. Idaho has areas where the hunting is limited to primitive/traditional archery equipment.

No need for me to ask any more questions. I already know the answer. You have a good Holiday. Merry Christmas my freind.


You too-I was not aware of that Idaho area-If you don't consider compounds archery equipment I would say you are wrong but at least that is more consistent.

I honestly think its rather illogical to say they aren't archery equipment

HOWEVER if you say you only believe trad equipment is proper hunting equipment that is more logical and if you limit that restriction to your own hunting than I respect that

talis727
December 15th, 2005, 11:17 PM
every season I am aware of allows high letoff compounds and mechanical releases.

JimC holding weight is not everything. Don't forget, you have to pull it back to begin with. also not everyone uses a release.

Jim C
December 15th, 2005, 11:29 PM
JimC holding weight is not everything. Don't forget, you have to pull it back to begin with. also not everyone uses a release.

true but the fact that you can use a release is what matters. As long as I have a safety on it and a weight between 75 and 200 I could hunt with a SCPA model xbow with no sights etc. it would be dishonest to say that is a typical hunting crossbow.

40 pounds is min weight compound or longbow in ohio-80% letoff means you are holding 8 pounds

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 12:06 AM
40 pounds is min weight compound or longbow in ohio-80% letoff means you are holding 8 pounds

The bottom line is that at some point you have to pull at least 40 pounds while in the presence of a game animal. the crossbow you dont have to do this it is already cocked.

in turn, it could be said that having to draw a bow is more difficult than not having to draw a bow.

The pro crossbow agenda, clearly lies about this fact.

Also, stating ohio's minimum weight requirement and then applying an 80% let off reduction, is misleading. Not all bows only draw 40 pounds and not all bows have 80% letoff; as a matter of fact, some bow have no let off at all.

Just another common misleading statement used by the pro crossbow agenda

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 12:17 AM
The bottom line is that at some point you have to pull at least 40 pounds while in the presence of a game animal. the crossbow you dont have to do this it is already cocked.

in turn, it could be said that having to draw a bow is more difficult than not having to draw a bow.

The pro crossbow agenda, clearly lies about this fact.

Also, stating ohio's minimum weight requirement and then applying an 80% let off reduction, is misleading. Not all bows only draw 40 pounds and not all bows have 80% letoff; as a matter of fact, some bow have no let off at all.

Just another common misleading statement used by the pro crossbow agenda


not true-what do you define the PRESENCE OF GAME? I can hold a 40 pound 80% compound-even a 60 pound (prior to s urgery) 65% letoff compound bow at full draw longer than I could hold a crossbow in my stand aimed and steady. Presence of game-I have held a compound bow 3 minutes on a deer -didn't shoot it, it got spooked by an equestrian but I drew at 100 yards-its was 45 yards out but too much brush when it ran off. YOu have to raise your crossbow in the "presence of game too and that will get you busted if you are careless as sure as drawing that compound bow

the anti side lies but acting as if the crossbow is on a rest and already aimed
they lie that its easy to hold a crossbow offhand for long periods of time

MOST OF ALL they lie that this makes any difference-none of these organizations can prove crossbow hunters have an advantage in the one area that actually COUNTS-predicted harvest rate or actual harvest rate per capita

Oxford
December 16th, 2005, 12:27 AM
JimC? Are you OK?

I mean... I've been moderating this site for 3 years and have never seen a more impassioned and well...obsessive rant in beating a point into the ground as you present here.

Man, you need to find a way to relax...but what is frightening...is...this is probably it.

ox

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 12:32 AM
First Jim I never said anything about holding the bow I said drawing the bow. Are you leading me to believe that you just draw you bow even when there is not game around?

Also, once again your arguement assumes that everyone is using an 80% let off bow. This is misleading, please stop.

You would, or would not, argee that a bow requires more movement to lift up and draw; than is required to lift up a crossbow?



I have heard pro crossbow advocates claim that crossbows have no advantages over a conventional bow, this is another lie.

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 12:51 AM
JimC? Are you OK?

I mean... I've been moderating this site for 3 years and have never seen a more impassioned and well...obsessive rant in beating a point into the ground as you present here.

Man, you need to find a way to relax...but what is frightening...is...this is probably it.

ox


huh Ox?

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 12:52 AM
First Jim I never said anything about holding the bow I said drawing the bow. Are you leading me to believe that you just draw you bow even when there is not game around?

Also, once again your arguement assumes that everyone is using an 80% let off bow. This is misleading, please stop.

You would, or would not, argee that a bow requires more movement to lift up and draw; than is required to lift up a crossbow?



I have heard pro crossbow advocates claim that crossbows have no advantages over a conventional bow, this is another lie.

each bow-even the trad bows have advantages- but when you add them up the compound and the crossbow pretty well come out even compared against each other

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 12:57 AM
Once again that is not what I have said.

I said that the pro crossbow agenda calims that crossbows have no advantages over bows.

Do you admit that crossbows have advantages over bows, or do you perpetuate the lie?

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:00 AM
Once again that is not what I have said.

I said that the pro crossbow agenda calims that crossbows have no advantages over bows.

Do you admit that crossbows have advantages over bows, or do you perpetuate the lie?


sure they do-just as compounds have advantages over crossbows but when you add them all up they even out. that is why you can't find any evidence that xbows are taking deer at a higher rate than compounds.

its like talking about bolt action hunting rifles vs Semi autos. semi autos can be shot faster. bolt guns are more reliable and slightly more accurate. you want to focus on xbows "advantages" while ignoring that when all is said and done, you can't prove they are more advantaged than compounds

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 01:08 AM
Jim I never said that I was trying to prove anything.

I was just pointing out lies that are told by the Pro Crossbow Agenda.

I thought that pointing out lies was the purpose of this thread.



that is why you can't find any evidence that xbows are taking deer at a higher rate than compounds.

I would say that not enough detailed information exist.

Do you believe that you have enough information to PROVE that crossbows do not have an adavantage?

Are suggesting that you do?

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:15 AM
Jim I never said that I was trying to prove anything.

I was just pointing out lies that are told by the Pro Crossbow Agenda.

I thought that pointing out lies was the purpose of this thread.




I would say that not enough detailed information exist.

Do you believe that you have enough information to PROVE that crossbows do not have an adavantage?

Are suggesting that you do?

I am saying it matters not-there is no evidence suggesting crossbows are any more harmful to the herd than compounds so there is no objective reason to ban xbows from the season that allows compounds.

I have shot compounds since 1981, hunted with them off and on since then. I have shot recurves since 1969, hunted with them off and on since 1974 or so. crossbows since 1972, hunted with them since 1976 or so off and on.

I haven't seen any observable advantage of either of those two mechanical bows-in some situations a longbow is more effective than either-

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 01:27 AM
Once agian I am not trying to draw conclusions. That would be off topic.

My attempt is to show that the Pro Crossbow Agenda also lies so that thier group will recieve the outcome they desire.

So far I have shown that they lie in the fact that they say that crossbow have no advantages over bows, which they do.

Now I state that the Pro Crossbow Agenda claims that; harvest records PROVE that the crossbow is no more effective than a bow.

I claim that NO data exist that would provide someone with enough information to make any claims as to a weapons effectiveness.

Thanks for sharing your personal experiences, but that does little to dismiss the lie that has been told from the Pro Crossbow Agenda. In fact, my result have been somewhat different than yours. I find the crossbow easier than both the compound and the trad bow. But even so my personal experience also does not serve to prove or disprove a lie, it is only one person's experience, hardly enough to stake a claim to anyone but that unique individual.

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 01:31 AM
Jim after re-reading your statement, I believe that you do mislead.

You state that I cannot come up with any evidence that the crossbow is more effective, thereby misleading people to believe that it is not.

Unless you have evidence to prove that the crossbow is not more effective then you should state that no evidence exist from either side to determine a weapons effectiveness.

Otherwise, you are providing misleading information, or lying.

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:35 AM
Once agian I am not trying to draw conclusions. That would be off topic.

My attempt is to show that the Pro Crossbow Agenda also lies so that thier group will recieve the outcome they desire.

So far I have shown that they lie in the fact that they say that crossbow have no advantages over bows, which they do.

Now I state that the Pro Crossbow Agenda claims that; harvest records PROVE that the crossbow is no more effective than a bow.

I claim that NO data exist that would provide someone with enough information to make any claims as to a weapons effectiveness.

Thanks for sharing your personal experiences, but that does little to dismiss the lie that has been told from the Pro Crossbow Agenda. In fact, my result have been somewhat different than yours. I find the crossbow easier than both the compound and the trad bow. But even so my personal experience also does not serve to prove or disprove a lie, it is only one person's experience, hardly enough to stake a claim to anyone but that unique individual.


you confuse advantages with advantage. I hate using the table tennis analogy because so few people have tournament level experience but it is very equipment dependent like archery (as opposed to tennis where a racquet really doesn't affect your style of play)

there are two kinds of bats that have won world championships since I have been playing-flat inverted sponge and pips out

a flat sheet generates alot more spin-hence an advantage over the Pips out
on the other hand, you opponents spin is easier to control with the pips out-advantage PO. PO is easier for beginners because its easier to control but the inverted is more versatile since you can perform the widest range of shots with it

I play one on each side-I hit with the pips, return heavy spin with it and loop and serve with the spinnier stuff. each has advantages but one is not better than the other

it would be a lie to say Mark V or Sriver (inverted) has no advantages over Spectol or Challenger attack (Pips) however it would be accurate to say that inverted rubber doesn't have an advantage over pips when it comes to the bottom line-winning and that is what matters

this is the same with xbows and compounds.

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 02:15 AM
not true-what do you define the PRESENCE OF GAME? I can hold a 40 pound 80% compound-even a 60 pound (prior to s urgery) 65% letoff compound bow at full draw longer than I could hold a crossbow in my stand aimed and steady. Presence of game-I have held a compound bow 3 minutes on a deer -didn't shoot it, it got spooked by an equestrian but I drew at 100 yards-its was 45 yards out but too much brush when it ran off. YOu have to raise your crossbow in the "presence of game too and that will get you busted if you are careless as sure as drawing that compound bow

Wow jim I just realized what you wrote.

I am sorry but I now find it difficult to consider anything, archery hunting related, from you to be valid.

this is so absurd that I am not sure if I should even take it seriously.

Please tell me that you just said that because you were trying to make a point.


but I drew at 100 yards

I have never known anyone while bowhunting that would draw thier bow when the animal was "100 YARDS " away. Thats absurd.

Let me put it this way, No Jim, in the bowhunting arena, I do not consider 100 yards to be "in the presence of game".

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 02:25 AM
how much actual xbow shooting and hunting experience do you have?

enough to point out obvious lies and misrepresentations.



No offense, but it has been my experience that those who clamour about xbow "advantages" are those who have no actual experience.

No offense taken, consider yourself now to know someone that discuss' the advantages of crossbows and has actual crossbow experience.

By the way, was I really clamouring? I felt as though as was just presenting facts.

No offense, but it has been my experience that if someone has fallen to deep into an "agenda", they don't really try to realize what someone really is saying; instead they like to read thier agenda into that persons statement.

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 02:53 AM
Talis,

You did not answer the question..

HOW MUCH ACTUAL EXPERIENCE DO YOU HAVE USING AN XBOW?

HOW MUCH HUNTING HAVE YOU DONE WITH ONE?

it's an easy question...

and I know the answer...NONE

Why, since you have zero actual experience, do you feel your opinion has any relevance?

I am trying to understand this..

Now, you talk about advantages...how do you feel about the advantages of a compound bow compared to a stickbow?

Numerous advantages...

and please, if you could, explain why you care how someone wants to bowhunt..what possible difference does it make to you if one carries a Hoyt one day..an Horton the next..

I want to know..

Doug there is no reason to make personal attacks against me. I told you I have crossbow shooting and hunting experience. I see no reason that you should claim I do not. In fact it is a bold face lie to say that I have no shooting or hunting experience. Are you one of those people that is 45 years old and claims to have 35 years of experience. Well, if that is the case, how much of that experience is coming from a pre-teen and how much is with old outdated equipment?

Regardless, this thread is not about experience, it is about lies.

So quit the insults and personal attacks and get :focus:

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 03:08 AM
you confuse advantages with advantage. I hate using the table tennis analogy because so few people have tournament level experience but it is very equipment dependent like archery

No jim it was not me that confused advantages with advantage, it was you. I made the statement that crossbow have advantages and the pro crossbow agenda claims they do not exist.

But if you want me to say it, if someone uses one of the crossbows advantages, to thier advantage, then it was an advantage.

I will agree with you on one point, I hate you using the table tennis analogy too. Trust me, the ball is not the only thing spinning after trying to decipher that mess, my head is spinning too.


(as opposed to tennis where a racquet really doesn't affect your style of play)

This is how misreprentations get started. I am sure that any real tennis player would realize how absurd your statement is.


Stick to the topic please.

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 03:17 AM
Doug I am sorry that you find your equipment difficult to use. I do not feel the same about mine. I learn to adapt to the differences in my equipment.

What you need to do Doug is read what this topic is about and post something of relevance. If you think that I have lied or made a misrepresentation, please quote it.

But please stop with the personal attacks and your relentless attempts to retrieve information from me that is irrelevant to the topic.

:focus:

doctariAFC
December 16th, 2005, 08:20 AM
The advantages of crossbows, compound bows and stick bows. In the debate here, I am seeing this word bantered about without regard for any definition of the word when applied to a deer hunt.

In roder for any implement to present an advantage over another does not depend upon any of the points that have been brought forth thus far. Advantage is closely dependent upon context. In the context of hunting, advantages are achieved through using the correct implement in the correct situation.

Some situations for you:
1 - Hunter is still hunting red brush, moving into a hemlock stand, from the ground. A monster buck suddenly jumps up from where he is bedding 15 yards in front of you, stopping to check you out, presenting a broadside shot. Which bow gives you the advantage?

Compound Bow
Crossbow
Recurve/ Stickbow

Answer - Recurve/ stickbow.

2 - You are hunting an oak trees from a treestand, 20 feet up. Slashings present themselves about 10 yards from your tree. A large buck stolls in, but not at the right place. You can get to draw, but the animal just doesn't want to come in. He finally makes the move you want, you have the chance on that buck of a lifetime. Which bow gives you the advantage

Compound bow with pendulum site
crossbow with scope
recurve, no sights

Answer - Compound bow with pendulum site

3 - You have take a position in an ice blind, not too far from a large blow down. Monster buck comes in from40 yards out, quartering towards you in a clear lane. WHich gives the avdantage?

Compound bow with laser finder
Crossbow with scope
Recurve no sight

Answer: Crossbow with site.

Situations dictate the implement to use.

willie
December 16th, 2005, 08:48 AM
Lies? You want LIES...


Its true ...

So much that he started a crossbow association consisting mostly of Canadians and Non-residents so they could scam a vote that nullified Kentucky Bowhunters.

He'll do more than his share for xbows in IN, I'm sure ....and I do mean more than his share.

Free Range
December 16th, 2005, 09:46 AM
why do they call crossbows closer to guns or actually guns when its obvious a crossbow and a compound bow are almost the same thing in every area that really counts

Only in your mind, and those like you, to me and others like me, they are vastly different then the compound.


why do those groups demonize crossbow hunters when there is no evidence that all of their members are responsible diligent or train hard?

There is plenty of evidence, everyone that has a animal listed in the P&Y book must sign a release stating they followed fair chase rules in harvesting that animal. Your side has plenty of quotes proclaiming they think having to abide by a stricter standard is too much for them and they would rather break the law if they think the law is to hard for them to follow.


saying a crossbow hunter ought to be relegated to a one week season while a compound hunter gets 3-4 months is greedy and selfish

So telling a gun hunter they should be regulated to a one week season must be greedy and selfish too. More of your hypocrisy Jim?


calling a crossbow a firearm is a lie and no one can possibly believe that is true-hence anyone who utters that is a liar

Now you are lying, no one said they are a firearm, I have seen they called more firearm like, but not called a firearm. At least not by the P&Y club or the PBS or any other organization.

I
don't need to defend myself-its the people who post lies about other hunters who are in the hole as far as I am concerned

So if “YOU” call something a lie it is up to those people you are calling liars to prove they are not lying? HMMM curious, I would think a lawyer would know the burden of proof lies on the accuser.

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 10:21 AM
Wow jim I just realized what you wrote.

I am sorry but I now find it difficult to consider anything, archery hunting related, from you to be valid.

this is so absurd that I am not sure if I should even take it seriously.

Please tell me that you just said that because you were trying to make a point.



I have never known anyone while bowhunting that would draw thier bow when the animal was "100 YARDS " away. Thats absurd.

Let me put it this way, No Jim, in the bowhunting arena, I do not consider 100 yards to be "in the presence of game".

I can see by this you don't have any understanding of where I Hunt or crossbows for that matter. The deer was coming in on a fairly good trot towards a scent bomb on a heavily traveled trail

now why don't you tell us all the tests you have conducted where you did what I did -put lasers on compound and crossbows and had novice to world class archers hold the two bows aimed at a target with a timer

since I doubt you have and I have done this please don't talk about "taking seriously" since I have test results and you don't

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 10:25 AM
No jim it was not me that confused advantages with advantage, it was you. I made the statement that crossbow have advantages and the pro crossbow agenda claims they do not exist.

But if you want me to say it, if someone uses one of the crossbows advantages, to thier advantage, then it was an advantage.

I will agree with you on one point, I hate you using the table tennis analogy too. Trust me, the ball is not the only thing spinning after trying to decipher that mess, my head is spinning too.



This is how misreprentations get started. I am sure that any real tennis player would realize how absurd your statement is.


Stick to the topic please.

I had a 2071 rating in table tennis (NOT TENNIS) -now its down to 1797 which is still well above the 1400 average rating for US tournament players. You are proving that DOug K is right-you really don't understand crossbows. You all spend so much time trying to prove that compounds are inferior to crossbows so you can justify selfishness and exclusion yet neither tournament nor game department experience can prove your claims as to one bow being advantaged over another.

Free Range
December 16th, 2005, 10:29 AM
As a Southern Zone Bowhunter, you don't have the intrusion of muzzleloaders, crossbows or other firearms during the archery-only season. Why, because of NYB

why is this a lie-because crossbows are being called firearms.

Not so fast, the way I read this, they are not calling them firearms, but I can see how someone so in love with the x-bow as you might see it that way. Maybe they should have put a comma after crossbows. What is that word you like to use, oh yeah quibble.


Shot from a rest? it can be but NOT ALWAYS-hence a LIE
twice the effective range of a bow-complete lie
closer to a firearm-such a statement would prevent Marlow from being allowed to testify as an expert in any court I have practiced before since it is clearly a lie

More quibbling Jim? I don’t read this as meaning they are always shot from a rest.
And if they were going by the Marlow report how can you assume they are lying? They are stating the findings of a study, which by the way you have not proved a lie yet.


Closer to a firearm is an opinion, hardly a lie.


By Deer Dave
Great Posts Jim!!!

Now if we can call opinions lies then this is a whooper, LOL


By Doug
Now, if I use that same anti xbow logic on the National Archery in Schools Program-this program must also be bad-and should be condemned

I never see that...

it just shows the lies and the hypocrisy of the anti xbow crowd

So far this is the biggest lie, outright lie no matter how you look at it. No one here, in any national organization, or in any private conversation I have ever held with any bowhunter has said or implied we don’t want more bowhunters, period. This is insulting and I have a hard time understanding how you, doctariAFC could let this post remain on the forum. This clearly steps over the line even for Doug.

And Doug you started this post off with talking about money being paid by x-bow mfg’s. This article is no way related to any claims about x-bow mfg’s paying money to push thru their agenda. The money being used in this article was not paid to any state game commission, it was used to get kids involved in archery, it was not used to lobby for a season, or to lobby for inclusion of something that clearly is not wanted in most states.


By doctari
he crossbow which is always cocked, shoulder held and sometimes shot from a rest

While I agree with you in this, not everybody is a learned writer, and just to point out the lunacy of Jims thinking, you just lied. Because x-bows are not always shoulder mounted, I once witnessed a person grab one up with one hand hold it at arms length and “fire” it.



Doc is clearly correct. His discussion on the grammatical facts is completely accurate and it is obvious that the purpose of that comment was to tell the reader that xbows are ALWAYS shot from a rest. The statement is thus a LIE.

Or maybe they meant you can always shoot from a rest if you want too, why don’t you just call the person that wrote the statement and ask them exactly what they meant? Again what is that word, quibble?


"The archery hunting season in Ohio has become the "Arrow Gun Season" with gun hunting gang tactics. The Ohio experience shows that allowing crossbows into our archery hunting seasons will destroy the great bowhunting opportunities that New Yorkers have enjoyed for many years and turn our archery seasons into a free-for-all!"

Again you are using someone’s opinion and calling it a lie. If this person’s experience tells them these things are true, who are you to call him a liar?

Free Range
December 16th, 2005, 10:33 AM
FR,

I think we have learned Talis has no actual experience with xbows..

was wondering what yours is?

how often have you shot one...hunted with one..shot one at a 3D?

Here we go again, Doug how often have you violated game laws, oops maybe that wasn’t a good example, ahh how often have you killed someone, do you think it is wrong to murder? If you do then what experience can you draw on to support your position?

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 10:35 AM
You are a bit late to this last issue FR-we have already discussed the always and rest nonsense and Doc pretty well put that puppy in the kennel-the obvious point of that group was to say xbows are always shot from a rest and that is the obvious construction and intent of the sentence in question -at best you can claim intent rather than actual application.

same with the muzzleloaders, crossbows and other firearms. obvious and plain meaning was lumping crossbows as a type of firearms-clear intent-calling a crossbow a type of firearms. THE HONEST way to have said it was Crossbows, muzzleloaders and firearms

sorry FR you are just plain wrong on this one. We could also go to the lies that your own organization USED to post on their site (I guess until I called them on that on just about every national archery board going) like saying 300 FPS crossbows shoot at "ALMOST TWICE THE SPEED" as most compounds or that novices with crossbows (hunting crossbows) somehow can beat TOP COMPETITIVE COMPOUND ARCHERS even though professional full time crossbow world champions using sophisticated target crossbows can't beat very good but not top compound archers at big professional money shoots.

we all remember your attempts to claim that top compound archers could be some local guy at the range-not the top 200 at Vegas

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 10:37 AM
Here we go again, Doug how often have you violated game laws, oops maybe that wasn’t a good example, ahh how often have you killed someone, do you think it is wrong to murder? If you do then what experience can you draw on to support your position?


this is an absurd argument. Talis says xbows should be banned from archery hunting because they are overall "advantaged" compared to compounds. This requires he understand the two bows and he clearly doesn't. Murder has nothing to do with it. Murder is wrong not because of the mechanism but the act. This again shows how lame the anti xbow arguments are

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 11:07 AM
that is slander..

myself asking what your relevance actual hands on experience is with xbows is not..


Talis argues crossbows are "wrong" in the archery season because of alleged, supposed and wishful claims of an advantage so great that they cannot be fairly paired with compound bows in the same season. since there is no objective evidence proving that-indeed, the objective evidence of target scores and 3D tournaments prove otherwise, Talis must argue based on feeling and DOUGK is correct and right in demanding to know if TALIS has the experience to make such a comparison. Clearly he does NOT.

Murder is wrong-period-it requires no experience with the crime to know that. Crossbows being "wrong" would be equivalent to someone who has no knowledge of automobiles, NASCAR or engine sizes saying one kind of engine should be banned from NASCAR without knowing how it performs compared to another similar engine

doctariAFC
December 16th, 2005, 11:28 AM
While I agree with you in this, not everybody is a learned writer, and just to point out the lunacy of Jims thinking, you just lied. Because x-bows are not always shoulder mounted, I once witnessed a person grab one up with one hand hold it at arms length and “fire” it.

You are correct. Not everyone is a learned writer. I'll take that to the next level, and say not everyone is literate. According to a literacy study, fully 5% of Americans are functionally illiterate with the English language. Sad, really. Underscores the effects of dumbing down America. Many articles published in major newspapers today are written at a grade level between 6th and 8th. Compare this to 100 years ago, the grade level was HS, rather than elementary or middle school.

However, clearly the way this statement is written, the implied definition is that a crossbow is always cocked, always shoulder held and always fired from a rest. The intent is to mislead their membership into believing that a crossbow hunter is, in effect, hunting "your woods, shooting at your deer, during your season" with a gun, not a bow. This assertion is further evidenced by the slick statement of "... muzzleloaders, crossbows and other firearms." Even if the words muzzleloader and crossbows are reversed, the adjective "other" implies that the previous two nouns are also firearms, which a crossbow clearly is not. No combustible propellants, therefore, not a firearm. Yet, the intention behind these statements is clear; rile up the emotions of the bowhunters with misleading statements clearly designed to evoke hostility and animosity towards another group of hunters who would opt for an implement other than recurves/ compounds. Adding the firearms comparison in the context of archery seasons also projects a negative context which I shall illustrate in another post.

Getting this information correct is not that difficult a task, and one does not need to be a learned writer to accomplish this. Basic English skills suffice. Oh well, this is what we have today and I do not foresee any imporvements in the general English language/ communications skills in the near-term, even with "No Child Left Behind."

Revival
December 16th, 2005, 12:08 PM
Lots of running around the barn without saying anything... There are so many diverse discussions going on it is imposible to stay up. Here are a few:


Only in your mind, and those like you, to me and others like me, they are vastly different then the compound.They are diferences to celebrate, just like a compound is to the Trad. Coumpounds made bowhunting more accessable to average people and crossbows simply continue that purpose. We need to do all that we can to involve more people in hunting. The crossbow is one such tool, but the risk to hunting is not the crossbow, it is the lack of financial resources to maintain and increase opportunities (land, youth programs, education and promotion). The financial base of hunting is hunters. The more the merrier.


There is plenty of evidence, everyone that has a animal listed in the P&Y book must sign a release stating they followed fair chase rules in harvesting that animal. Your side has plenty of quotes proclaiming they think having to abide by a stricter standard is too much for them and they would rather break the law if they think the law is to hard for them to follow.What? No one said they would rather break the law than obide by it. I signed the same Fair Chase statement for my booner, while the harvest was 100% legal, people with bad character will continue to lie and misrepresent themselves. Signing a fair chase statement would mean nothing to someone who used a .22 on the deer and then shot an arrow in it through the bed of their truck.


So telling a gun hunter they should be regulated to a one week season must be greedy and selfish too. More of your hypocrisy Jim?I love this because it exibits the "drop back and punt" type of statement that shows you have no real arguing point. The state doesn't tell "gun hunters" anything. They tell "hunters" (all hunters) what equipment they can use and when for game management purposes and to provide as much opportunity as a resource can support. The crossbow is a great tool that matches up with the rest of archery perfectly and provides opportunity for more hunters to join our ranks.


Now you are lying, no one said they are a firearm, I have seen they called more firearm like, but not called a firearm. At least not by the P&Y club or the PBS or any other organization.
I wish you ALL would stop with the lying thing. Many untruths have been told, but a lie is not a lie if you don't know it is a lie. Follow me? These anti's somehow believe something that has no basis in fact. They aren't lying, they are simply mislead and want to pound their chest about their belief. One of my kids still believes in Santa (she's 4), he isn't real but is she a liar because she says he's coming? If she could show me some fact that he was real, wore a red suit and could squeeze down a chimney than either I would have to change my mind or decide to live in denial. Denial is exactly what the antis have chosen.


So if “YOU” call something a lie it is up to those people you are calling liars to prove they are not lying? HMMM curious, I would think a lawyer would know the burden of proof lies on the accuser.

You just have to ask yourself, who is where accusing whom? We do not have a need to prove anything to you. I hear he likes milk and cookies as do I.

J. Wesbrock
December 16th, 2005, 12:26 PM
Brad,


What? No one said they would rather break the law than obide by it.

I believe he was referring to this previous post by centerx:


Was it legal or not I do not know or personally do I care. Some rules are meant to be broke and If I cold enjoy my hunt a lillte more and stay a little safer in the process then I will.

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2091151&postcount=24



Originally Posted by Free Range
So if “YOU” call something a lie it is up to those people you are calling liars to prove they are not lying? HMMM curious, I would think a lawyer would know the burden of proof lies on the accuser.


You just have to ask yourself, who is where accusing whom?

This entire thread was started by Jim to accuse others of lying. And by his and your definition of a lie--a lie is not a lie if you don't know it is a lie--he has yet to do much more than voice his personal suspicions and quibble when called to the carpet. Since he can't prove the people he's accusing of lying don't believe what they wrote, his entire argument is moot, fancy and colorful ping pong analogies notwithstanding. :tsk:

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 12:33 PM
Brad,



I believe he was referring to this previous post by centerx:



http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2091151&postcount=24



This entire thread was started by Jim to accuse others of lying. And by his and your definition of a lie--a lie is not a lie if you don't know it is a lie--he has yet to do much more than voice his personal suspicions and quibble when called to the carpet. Since he can't prove the people he's accusing of lying don't believe what they wrote, his entire argument is moot, fancy and colorful ping pong analogies notwithstanding. :tsk:

I started this thread because an ANTI claimed that the NYB was an honest group trying to protect bowhunters. It is neither and I have proven that

willie
December 16th, 2005, 12:49 PM
I started this thread because an ANTI claimed that the NYB was an honest group trying to protect bowhunters. It is neither and I have proven that

Now they are either lying or dumber than a week old dog dropping.

Some choice, eh?

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 12:53 PM
Now they are either lying or dumber than a week old dog dropping.

Some choice, eh?


:p :p -I like especially several questions (From the same poster) basically arguing that saying a crossbow is a firearm isn't necessarily a lie because the organization saying that might actually believe that is true.

anyone who believes a crossbow is a firearm doesn't have the gray matter nor the knowledge necessary to own either type of weapon IMHO

doctariAFC
December 16th, 2005, 12:57 PM
As I stated in a prior post, I would like to illustrate how one can manipulate a person's emotional response simply by choosing how to group an activity with others in a negative context to project a negative to the activity in question. This refers to the misleading statement of "... muzzleloaders, crossbows and other firearms" sentence, which also leads into the always cocked, shoulder held and fired from a rest statement. To follow is an excert from the Buffalo News, column called "The Family Filmgoer", by Janet Horwitz, dated Dec 8, 2005.

Context: Ms Horwitz is reviewing a few movies for parents, with some warnings about film content so they can decide whether the movie is appropriate for their kids...

In one movie, Syriana, she is providing an overview of the "bad stuff", and the following sentence is used

"There are shootouts, a terror explosion, strong profanity, verbal threats, drinking and smoking."

Now,if you were reading this sentence, what emotions does this conjure up inside you? Are the emotions positive or negative??? Answer honestly... WOuld you want your child exposed to scenes with "shootouts, a terror explosion, strong profanity", etc?

Ok. Now that you have your mind around this concept, and I believe we can agree this is pretty strong, and the emotion generated is a negative one, I will type the ACTUAL sentence used in this column.

"There are shootouts, a terror explosion, a hunting scene with big game, strong profanity, verbal threats, drinking and smoking."

DO I make my point?

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:01 PM
As I stated in a prior post, I would like to illustrate how one can manipulate a person's emotional response simply by choosing how to group an activity with others in a negative context to project a negative to the activity in question. This refers to the misleading statement of "... muzzleloaders, crossbows and other firearms" sentence, which also leads into the always cocked, shoulder held and fired from a rest statement. To follow is an excert from the Buffalo News, column called "The Family Filmgoer", by Janet Horwitz, dated Dec 8, 2005.

Context: Ms Horwitz is reviewing a few movies for parents, with some warnings about film content so they can decide whether the movie is appropriate for their kids...

In one movie, Syriana, she is providing an overview of the "bad stuff", and the following sentence is used

"There are shootouts, a terror explosion, strong profanity, verbal threats, drinking and smoking."

Now,if you were reading this sentence, what emotions does this conjure up inside you? Are the emotions positive or negative??? Answer honestly... WOuld you want your child exposed to scenes with "shootouts, a terror explosion, strong profanity", etc?

Ok. Now that you have your mind around this concept, and I believe we can agree this is pretty strong, and the emotion generated is a negative one, I will type the ACTUAL sentence used in this column.

"There are shootouts, a terror explosion, a hunting scene with big game, strong profanity, verbal threats, drinking and smoking."

DO I make my point?


sounds like the second movie is even better :p

good point

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 01:05 PM
to DougK and Jim C

Please refrain from speading any more lies about me.

Dougk I have said several time that I have both crossbow shooting and crossbow hunting experience. Your continual denial of this fact is your problem. Do not claim that my experience does not exist, you do not even know me. I consider your comments slander and harrassing. I will make sure that the mods are aware of your harrassment.

Jim C because I hunt with a crossbow I do not understand why you feel I want to have crossbows banned. I have said that they offer advantages, but that does not give you the right to put words into my mouth. I will also make the mods aware of your slander.

Why dont both of you try to stick to the topic rather than ranting about experience or playing ping-pong.

doctariAFC
December 16th, 2005, 01:09 PM
sounds like the second movie is even better :p

good point

Thanks JimC. Here's another one for ya.

I will use this same writer (Ms Horwitz) as she is a wealth of examples, in this same column....

Choice of words can also project negative or positive interpretation in the minds of readers. Just like lumping crossbows with the terms "other firearms" or the adverb "always" preceeding a string of verbs implies that each verb "always" happens, subtle messages are portrayed by what a writer uses to describe something. I learned long ago that when you refer to the "tools of the trade" in outdoors articles, in particular hunting articles, the term "implement" projects a far less "threatening" image versus the term "weapon." Such holds true in Ms Horwitz's column. In her review of Syriana, she refers to a scene where gunfire is being exchanged as a "shootout"which is taken in a negative context by readers. In another review of the movie Aeon Flux, she uses the term "gunplay", which projects a less threatening, therefore, more positive spin on the SAME ACTIVITY!

This goes to manipulation of the emotions of the reader. I would suggest the NYB statements were carefully written to elicit the response they intended, rather thann being simply a lack of being a "learned writer."

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:12 PM
to DougK and Jim C

Please refrain from speading any more lies about me.

Dougk I have said several time that I have both crossbow shooting and crossbow hunting experience. Your continual denial of this fact is your problem. Do not claim that my experience does not exist, you do not even know me. I consider your comments slander and harrassing. I will make sure that the mods are aware of your harrassment.

Jim C because I hunt with a crossbow I do not understand why you feel I want to have crossbows banned. I have said that they offer advantages, but that does not give you the right to put words into my mouth. I will also make the mods aware of your slander.

Why dont both of you try to stick to the topic rather than ranting about experience or playing ping-pong.

the table tennis analogy is very apt-various forms of sheet rubber have advantages but overall, they even out. same with crossbows and compounds.

most of your previous posts on the crossbow forum were erased when the legislative area was obliterated. I recall you being part of the anti xbow contingent. When you started posted again it was clear you are arguing that xbows have an overall advantage which is a main part of the anti crossbow facade (pretextual argument) used to cover the true reason why they oppose crossbows in archery season. I can only go on my experience and what you have written. I note that getting the antis to actually answer direct questions has often been difficult on this forum but just so we don't have any confusion, let me ask you this simple question (and slander is not a technically accurate term because I honestly believed you are part of the anti camp)

DO YOU BELIEVE that crossbows should be allowed in the general archery seasons in the various states of this nation (ie treated the same for big game as compound bows)

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:16 PM
Thanks JimC. Here's another one for ya.

I will use this same writer (Ms Horwitz) as she is a wealth of examples, in this same column....

Choice of words can also project negative or positive interpretation in the minds of readers. Just like lumping crossbows with the terms "other firearms" or the adverb "always" preceeding a string of verbs implies that each verb "always" happens, subtle messages are portrayed by what a writer uses to describe something. I learned long ago that when you refer to the "tools of the trade" in outdoors articles, in particular hunting articles, the term "implement" projects a far less "threatening" image versus the term "weapon." Such holds true in Ms Horwitz's column. In her review of Syriana, she refers to a scene where gunfire is being exchanged as a "shootout"which is taken in a negative context by readers. In another review of the movie Aeon Flux, she uses the term "gunplay", which projects a less threatening, therefore, more positive spin on the SAME ACTIVITY!

This goes to manipulation of the emotions of the reader. I would suggest the NYB statements were carefully written to elicit the response they intended, rather thann being simply a lack of being a "learned writer."

I agree: believe it or not, civil trial attorneys are essentially professional writers. very few cases actually go to trial-I just settled the one imminent trial on my docket, the settlement (which I believe is fair to both sides) was facilitated by a long motion and memorandum of law I filed seeking dismissal of the case. I certainly know that you can say essentially the same thing 4 different ways and perhaps convey at least several different meanings

The NYB was clearly trying to make their minions, and others, think of guns and gunhunters with the mention of crossbows. What I don't understand is why the few xbow haters on this forum just don't admit the NYB is wrong and move on to other arguments-perhaps they don't have anything more convincing?

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 01:19 PM
MESSAGE TO DOC THE CROSSBOW MODERATOR.

Please review the post of DougK and Jim C. They are harrassing in nature. This should be considered unacceptable.

I already paid the price over a month ago when I posted a joke about JimC's IQ test. What was an obvious joke, got me kicked off AT for a month. I do not understand why they are not subjected to any punishment when thier infractions are worse. Thier attacks are one that are not proven nor are they sarcastic in nature, as not to be taken seriously. They are lies meant to discredit my views. This should be stopped immediately by removing these individuals from the site.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Now on to your post.



In roder for any implement to present an advantage over another does not depend upon any of the points that have been brought forth thus far. Advantage is closely dependent upon context. In the context of hunting, advantages are achieved through using the correct implement in the correct situation.

Some situations for you:
1 - Hunter is still hunting red brush, moving into a hemlock stand, from the ground. A monster buck suddenly jumps up from where he is bedding 15 yards in front of you, stopping to check you out, presenting a broadside shot. Which bow gives you the advantage?

Compound Bow
Crossbow
Recurve/ Stickbow

Answer - Recurve/ stickbow.

2 - You are hunting an oak trees from a treestand, 20 feet up. Slashings present themselves about 10 yards from your tree. A large buck stolls in, but not at the right place. You can get to draw, but the animal just doesn't want to come in. He finally makes the move you want, you have the chance on that buck of a lifetime. Which bow gives you the advantage

Compound bow with pendulum site
crossbow with scope
recurve, no sights

Answer - Compound bow with pendulum site

3 - You have take a position in an ice blind, not too far from a large blow down. Monster buck comes in from40 yards out, quartering towards you in a clear lane. WHich gives the avdantage?

Compound bow with laser finder
Crossbow with scope
Recurve no sight

Answer: Crossbow with site.

Situations dictate the implement to use.

You are assuming that the user is equally skilled with each weapon.

I could easily say that the crossbow could be used better, if the user was more skilled with the crossbow than either of the other two weapons, regardless of the situations. The same could be said if the user was more skilled with the recurve. So in my view, i feel that the users skill with a weapon is more important than the situation the hunter is in.

either way
:focus:

J. Wesbrock
December 16th, 2005, 01:23 PM
talis,

In the upper right hand corner of the post there is a small triangle symbol. Click on that to report a post. You could also PM the Admin or moderators.

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:26 PM
MESSAGE TO DOC THE CROSSBOW MODERATOR.

Please review the post of DougK and Jim C. They are harrassing in nature. This should be considered unacceptable.

I already paid the price over a month ago when I posted a joke about JimC's IQ test. What was an obvious joke, got me kicked off AT for a month. I do not understand why they are not subjected to any punishment when thier infractions are worse. Thier attacks are one that are not proven nor are they sarcastic in nature, as not to be taken seriously. They are lies meant to discredit my views. This should be stopped immediately by removing these individuals from the site.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Now on to your post.



You are assuming that the user is equally skilled with each weapon.

I could easily say that the crossbow could be used better, if the user was more skilled with the crossbow than either of the other two weapons, regardless of the situations. The same could be said if the user was more skilled with the recurve. So in my view, i feel that the users skill with a weapon is more important than the situation the hunter is in.

either way
:focus:

this is funny:

here is from Talis-the first negative in our exchange last night


Otherwise, you are providing misleading information, or lying

then from Talis

Wow jim I just realized what you wrote.

I am sorry but I now find it difficult to consider anything, archery hunting related, from you to be valid.

this is so absurd that I am not sure if I should even take it seriously.

then again from talis

This is how misreprentations get started. I am sure that any real tennis player would realize how absurd your statement is.

[I was talking about table tennis]

and here is the "slander" I posted

Talis says xbows should be banned from archery hunting because they are overall "advantaged" compared to compounds. This requires he understand the two bows and he clearly doesn't

judge for yourself

thesource
December 16th, 2005, 01:27 PM
I started this thread because an ANTI claimed that the NYB was an honest group trying to protect bowhunters. It is neither and I have proven that

If you are talking about me, then I've caught you in another exageration, untruth, falsehood, misrepresentation, lie.

Here's what I said:

is [/U]honest about.

They honestly feel they are protecting the interests of NY bowhunters.

I have to agree.

Not the same - your credibility has really taken a beating on athread you created to show how decietful the other side is.

BTW, you have done nothing to show NYB doesn't protect bowhunter's interests. That is what they are all about.

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:29 PM
If you are talking about me, then I've caught you in another exageration, untruth, falsehood, misrepresentation, lie.

Here's what I said:


Not the same - your credibility has really taken a beating on athread you created to show how decietful the other side is.

BTW, you have done nothing to show NYB doesn't protect bowhunter's interests. That is what they are all about.


lets get back to topic-are their statements honest or are they, as DOC has clearly established, MISLEADING PEOPLE

When someone lies to make a point I doubt their stated goals are truthful either

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 01:33 PM
most of your previous posts on the crossbow forum were erased when the legislative area was obliterated. I recall you being part of the anti xbow contingent. When you started posted again it was clear you are arguing that xbows have an overall advantage which is a main part of the anti crossbow facade (pretextual argument) used to cover the true reason why they oppose crossbows in archery season. I can only go on my experience and what you have written. I note that getting the antis to actually answer direct questions has often been difficult on this forum but just so we don't have any confusion, let me ask you this simple question (and slander is not a technically accurate term because I honestly believed you are part of the anti camp)

Jim this is not true, you just like to put words in to peoples mouths and you like to decied what thier views are.. Just because I feel that crossbows are advantaged does not mean that I am anti crossbow. In fact that is one of the reason I use one.

You are right on one account, it is not slander. When done in print, it is known a libel.

I believe that you should know better. You should be banned.

J. Wesbrock
December 16th, 2005, 01:34 PM
When someone lies to make a point I doubt their stated goals are truthful either.

But according to you, "A lie is saying something you know is not true is true". So then, where's you proof they lied? :noidea:

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:36 PM
But according to you, "A lie is saying something you know is not true is true". So then, where's you proof they lied? :noidea:


I know they know its not true. Are you going to tell me that in this day and age a group that calls itself the New York Bowhunters honestly believes that a crossbow is a firearm

I refer you to Willie's wisdom if that is the case

can you answer my simple question? You avoided it all last night

DO YOU BELIEVE that NYB honestly thinks crossbows are firearms?

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 01:37 PM
Talis says xbows should be banned from archery hunting because they are overall "advantaged" compared to compounds. This requires he understand the two bows and he clearly doesn't

Jim C you just don't know when to quit. I have had enough of your nonsense. What knowledge do you have of my experience that qualifies you to make such as statement?

:ban: JIM C

twogun
December 16th, 2005, 01:37 PM
In the NYBI piece I referenced in another thread, the introductory paragraph mentioned a 60 yard range twice for crossbows and suggested that compounds had a comparably shorter range. They also mention buying and shooting a crossbow. This set the context for performance. The piece then went into a comparison that focused on physical characteristics and appearance and totally ignored performance. They then concluded that crossbows more closely resembled firearms.

Their goal is obviously to manipualte the readers into believing that crossbows and guns are similar in performance. It was no accident and was carefully put together.

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:39 PM
Jim this is not true, you just like to put words in to peoples mouths and you like to decied what thier views are.. Just because I feel that crossbows are advantaged does not mean that I am anti crossbow. In fact that is one of the reason I use one.

You are right on one account, it is not slander. When done in print, it is known a libel.

I believe that you should know better. You should be banned.


You want me banned because I said I believed you were anti crossbow after all the stuff I documented about you. Should I share with the moderators the PM's you sent me back when you were banned?

I merely said you don't want xbows in archery season-that is a fair interpretation of your position based on what you have said on this thread up to my comment

you claimed I was lying before I said that
you claimed my points were absurd

I think we all know who was out of line

J. Wesbrock
December 16th, 2005, 01:44 PM
Jim,


I know they know its not true.

But where's your proof? You're quibbling again. :nono:

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:47 PM
Jim,



But where's your proof? You're quibbling again. :nono:


OK If they say the earth is flat, the sun revolves around us and Armstrong didn't land on the moon you would claim that isn't a lie either

I refer you to willie's wisdom again and ask if you can answer the question that you have studiously avoided

J. Wesbrock
December 16th, 2005, 01:55 PM
According to you, "A lie is saying something you know is not true is true". So then, where's you proof they lied?

You're still quibbling. :nono:

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 01:57 PM
I merely said you don't want xbows in archery season-that is a fair interpretation of your position based on what you have said on this thread up to my comment

you claimed I was lying before I said that
you claimed my points were absurd

I think we all know who was out of line

When you make up my view based on incorret interpretations, you can no longer consider your actions, "fair".

Please reference where I claimed you were lying. If I did, you were most likely lying.

However, there is always a chance that your misinterpreted the information again.

Stop trying to unjustly injure my reputation.

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 01:58 PM
According to you, "A lie is saying something you know is not true is true". So then, where's you proof they lied?

You're still quibbling. :nono:

I am going to put you on ignore-you can't answer the honest question I put to you and your entire argument is to ask the same question I already answered. It is unbelievable for someone to say a crossbow is a firearm and that is the proof they are lying -this is an organization I am talking about, not some guy living in a cave some place.

you are beind evasive by not answer the simple question

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 02:01 PM
alright talis

So its your position that crossbows belong in the general archery season? I asked you that and you didn't answer it. That alone raises suspicions

so I ask you again

yes or no

J. Wesbrock
December 16th, 2005, 02:11 PM
Jim,


you are beind evasive by not answer the simple question

Because it's irrelevant to you not being able to prove your accusations. And furthermore, you haven't proven any of your other accusations of them supposedly lying either.

Your question is nothing more than you trying to change the topic instead of dealing with the fact that you painted yourself into a corner...again. I prefer to stay on topic. You apparently prefer to quibble. :nono:

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 02:12 PM
When someone lies to make a point I doubt their stated goals are truthful either

interesting. Do you exclude yourself from this statement?
---------------------------------------------------------



alright talis

So its your position that crossbows belong in the general archery season? I asked you that and you didn't answer it. That alone raises suspicions

so I ask you again

yes or no

Please get back to topic Jim. Answering your questions has no relevence to this thread. Leading people to believe that they should be suspicious of me because I choose not to answer your irrelevant questions is dishonest.

This thread is about lies not about harrassing me.

:focus:

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 02:14 PM
Jim,



Because it's irrelevant to you not being able to prove your accusations. And furthermore, you haven't proven any of your other accusations of them supposedly lying either.

Your question is nothing more than you trying to change the topic instead of dealing with the fact that you painted yourself into a corner...again. I prefer to stay on topic. You apparently prefer to quibble. :nono:

Yawn-your failure to answer my simple question is in itself an answer

there are some statements that are clearly lies when they are made contrary to all known and available evidence-especially when the statements come from an organization. An individual taxpayer might honestly have no idea what a 1040 form is but an organization of CPA's claiming they have no idea what one is would be clearly a lie

nothing more nothing less

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 02:17 PM
Another lie that is told by the Pro Crossbow Agenda is that 40 yards is the crossbows maximum effective range.

This is not true, or a lie if you will.

In fact is, the crossbow is both accurate enough and still has plenty of KE to kill effectively, past 40 yards.

thesource
December 16th, 2005, 02:18 PM
Enough all ready, guys.

Any point that Jim was trying to make has been fully and completely discredited by now.

He's been blown out of the water.

Let's move on.

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 02:29 PM
:
Enough all ready, guys.

Any point that Jim was trying to make has been fully and completely discredited by now.

He's been blown out of the water.

Let's move on.


LOL-that is proof my point was made and is valid

thanks Buddy:thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Jim C
December 16th, 2005, 02:31 PM
Another lie that is told by the Pro Crossbow Agenda is that 40 yards is the crossbows maximum effective range.

This is not true, or a lie if you will.

In fact is, the crossbow is both accurate enough and still has plenty of KE to kill effectively, past 40 yards.


you confuse sensible limitations with maximum effective range.

A 30-06 rifle can kill a deer at 1500 meters

no hunting expert would ever advocate a shot at a deer at 1500 meters

nice try but you missed on that claim

Free Range
December 16th, 2005, 02:59 PM
By DougK
that is slander..

myself asking what your relevance actual hands on experience is with xbows is not..

DougK I owe you an apology, I was thinking of the post by Centerx, and for some reason I thought you wrote that. Please accept my apology on this, it was a mistake I should not have made.


By Jim
This requires he understand the two bows and he clearly doesn't. Murder has nothing to do with it.

And one doesn’t have to have an understanding of murder to know it’s wrong? How about illegal drug use? How about adultery? One does not have to have used something to have a basic understanding of how it works. I have never flown a plane but I have a basic understanding of how it works.


I wish you ALL would stop with the lying thing. Many untruths have been told, but a lie is not a lie if you don't know it is a lie. Follow me? These anti's somehow believe something that has no basis in fact. They aren't lying, they are simply mislead and want to pound their chest about their belief. One of my kids still believes in Santa (she's 4), he isn't real but is she a liar because she says he's coming? If she could show me some fact that he was real, wore a red suit and could squeeze down a chimney than either I would have to change my mind or decide to live in denial. Denial is exactly what the antis have chosen.

THANK YOU, my point exactly, except you imply this only deals with the pro-bow hunter crowd.


You just have to ask yourself, who is where accusing whom? We do not have a need to prove anything to you. I hear he likes milk and cookies as do I.

???? you lost me, Jim is the one calling everyone liars, then claiming we have to provide him with proof we are not lying, I think you need to follow along a little better.

talis727
December 16th, 2005, 03:01 PM
nice try but you missed on that claim

Wrong again jim. Once again you read to much into what I have written.

I only said that the PCA(Pro Crossbow Advocates) claim that the crossbows maximum effective range is 40 yards.

Which is false, or a lie, if you will.

If they had said maximum sensible range, then you could use your arguement.

However, even that could easily be debated, bowhunters(and crossbow hunters), in the western USA, hunting large game such a elk, consider 40 yards to be well within thier effective range. Shots of 50 and 60 yards are not uncommon, no matter what the bow.

Free Range
December 16th, 2005, 03:03 PM
Hey Jim that Twinbow thing you posted on another thread, looks more and more like a gun every day, thanks for making our point.

Oxford
December 16th, 2005, 03:14 PM
After discussions with the owners of this site, we have agreed that the debate regarding the legitimacy of crossbows has gone far enough and this continued topic is only creating ill-will and casting a negative tone over this section of the site.

So I am closing this thread and will ask moderators to close any future threads on this topic. You are welcome to continue your discussion in Private Messages but not on the board.

Thank you,
Ox
AT Admin.

doctariAFC
December 16th, 2005, 03:47 PM
After discussions with the owners of this site, we have agreed that the debate regarding the legitimacy of crossbows has gone far enough and this continued topic is only creating ill-will and casting a negative tone over this section of the site.

So I am closing this thread and will ask moderators to close any future threads on this topic. You are welcome to continue your discussion in Private Messages but not on the board.

Thank you,
Ox
AT Admin.

Sounds good, Ox. Thanks

doctariAFC