Not that I’ve ever heard this comment before but…I live in Washington State and I’m confused about the fish and game regulations. I do understand the State’s muzzle loading rules that make some feeble attempt at retaining a modicum of the traditional sport by banning 401 primers. I do understand the banning of “sights containing glass” or “any electronic device mounted to the weapon”. Whenever I watch Jim Shockey’s Hunting Adventures and he casually refers to his stainless steel, Leupold sighted, closed breech, 401 ignited rifle as a “muzzle loader”, I cringe. Yes, the projectile and main powder charge are loaded from the from the smoky end; however, that term applied to his firearm seems more a distinction without a difference. God love Jim! He has a wonderful show and is a great champion of the hunting sport but “muzzle loader”??? I’m just not sure. It is my state’s regulation of the archery hunting pursuits that has me wondering today. (I won’t even attempt explaining the myriad salt and fresh water fishing rule in this article! I have heard that mass of ink and paper described as “... needing a Philadelphia lawyer to decipher...”) Washington State allows the use of the compound bow. Say what you will about its faults and benefits, it is a money maker for the archery industry and our state receives much money every year from hunting licenses. You can carry afield a high tech, carbon riser, carbon limbed, synthetic stringed bow with the ultimate in light gathering technology sights using a mechanical release aid and carbon composite arrows with synthetic vanes in place of real feathers…but you can’t use a lighted nock??? You can’t install a tiny LED light on your sights either (another “electric device”). In my case, the jury is still out on the mechanical broadhead. There is just something reassuring for me knowing those nicely honed edges are always at the ready regardless of whatever ugly truth comes my way (i.e. those tiny sticks that seem to jump into an arrow’s trajectory about 15 feet from that eight point deer). I want my blades ready for action as soon as they arrive regardless of whatever else Mother Nature has done to foul it up…but that’s just me. Most of the rest of the world (including some places in Africa) allow the use of mechanical expanding blade hunting tips on big game. We already have minimum draw weight, arrow weight and cutting diameter regulations. I would much prefer the best chance of our archery nimrod making a good hit on any of our species rather than hoping he actually knew what he was doing. The main advantage I see in the mechanical tip is their propensity to fly to the same point of impact as the field point of the same weight. I believe that in this age of instant gratification many just pay for their hunting rigs with a Visa card, shoot some field points at a bag, buy some pointy thingies to screw on the end of their arrows and assume they are fit for duty. Regardless of whatever else the rest of the world does, I will cling to my two edged, tough, rigid broadheads. We owe it to our fuzzy brethren to dispatch them as humanly as possible and I believe that if a little more technology provides that extra measure of grace for the unenlightened, I say, “So be it.” What do you think? Should mechanically expanding hunting broadheads be accepted as “suitable for big game” nationwide?