>>689955>the respect argument is kind of bullshit^That
Which is why it just comes down to "ethical" versus "unethical." Most people just let their overconfidence goad them into taking an unethical shot.
I knew a legit Vet who barked on about "if you're going to go hunting, at least be a man and use a bow," until I tried to explain to him the high odds of hitting a wounding shot with an arrow and the time it took for the average animal to bleed out from a bow was agonizingly long compared to a gun which would penetrate cleanly at virtually all reasonable hunting distances. Even if the shot struck bone, the typical .223 or better would still pulverize a clean hole straight through the animal and generate a temporary wound cavity that was normally large enough to instantly incapacitate most animals just from the shock of trauma.
Safe to say he changed his mind after that and advocated the use of guns when hunting.
A lot of old timers around here yap on that the rate of wounding shots with bows is no different than rifles because the typical bow hunter has had much more practice with their bow than the typical rifle user has had with their weapon. While it is probable the average bow user has taken more shots, it's certain the average bow hunter needs more shots to get up to speed - even with a compound that removes a lot of the fine mechanics of the shot.
And killing a deer with a traditional bow? You'd better be ready to track, cause it's going to run about a mile before it dies. And unless you're some god of the hunt, you'd better be close. Way closer than most Deer will let you be - and if you're that close in a stand, you're taking a shot at a downward angle, which makes it that much harder to hit an ethical shot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xD4ilt-SOvQ#t=4m13sDisplays how easy it is to fuck up a trad shot - because the Deer will ALWAYS jolt when it hears the shot go off, which will be before the arrow lands, thus changing the point of impact
