• If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here

Unethical?

R

Rich Coyle

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
5,404
Location
Grants Pass, Oregon
Today I read someone claim infrared and ranging scopes are unethical. Why are they? Consider….

How did hunting and trapping begin? Look at the beginning of gathering animals for food. Did men dig holes and cover them with sticks and then cover those with leaves so unsuspecting animals would fall in and could be killed with rocks or pointed sticks? Did they set snares to catch the animals by the foot or around their necks? Did they hide in a tree so the hunter could ambush his prey and use a pointed stick to kill an unsuspecting animal? Maybe all of the above.

Was it unethical when a guy attached a sharp rock to his spear? How 'bout when someone invented the throwing stick? He substantially increased range over an arm thrown spear. Was that even ethical? This makes a guy wonder if switching from arm thrown rocks to using a sling to greatly increase range was unethical to those who didn't like slings or throwing sticks. Then along comes a guy with a bow and arrows! When did he attach fletching? Everybody knew that was totally unethical. Not to be outdone, someone "improved" the bow by attaching it to a stock and shot even smaller arrows to even greater distances. That must have been unethical.

As time moved forward someone decided to harness fireworks in a tube and use it to propel a projectile. How unethical could someone get? Some bright guy came up with rifling. Not only was it unethical, it was cheating! What was even worse someone attached sights to his firestick. Unethical to the max!

One last question: Is it more humane to actually hit where you aim with the aid of a ranging scope?
 
Here's another look at it. Is it unethical to shoot 7,8,900yds at a deer or elk, or is it better to stalk to within a closer range to make a better shot? With the scopes, rifle cal, ballistic tables, etc, is it ethical or not, to attempt a shot on an animal even at a known long range? There are a lot of variables between you and your target. It seems that its a more ethical thing to stalk the animal and make a known shot at a closer distance. I know people who have taken up long range shooting, they are better than average shooters. They are ''dying'' to shoot some thing or shoot at some thing at 900+ yds. I know there are many who can make this shot, IF all variables are figured, and all dots are connected.
 
ARKLITE881South said:
Here's another look at it. Is it unethical to shoot 7,8,900yds at a deer or elk, or is it better to stalk to within a closer range to make a better shot? With the scopes, rifle cal, ballistic tables, etc, is it ethical or not, to attempt a shot on an animal even at a known long range? There are a lot of variables between you and your target. It seems that its a more ethical thing to stalk the animal and make a known shot at a closer distance. I know people who have taken up long range shooting, they are better than average shooters. They are ''dying'' to shoot some thing or shoot at some thing at 900+ yds. I know there are many who can make this shot, IF all variables are figured, and all dots are connected.
Click to expand...
I agree with you for you. Others should be allowed to choose for themselves.
 
I believe the lines should be drawn based more on biology. Texas hogs as an example should realistically have no limits on methods of take (leave poison aside for the minute). On the other hand a struggling herd may need to close completely, but at the same time predators should be allowed liberal bag limits, longer seasons, bigger limits until the herd can bounce back. When talking coyotes, I'd allow armed drones in much of the west. Game animals with take limited by tag aren't going to be adversely affected by semi-auto's, and in my opinion is about somebody feeling superior to someone else.
 
Rich Coyle said:
I don't draw a line. The state does. If it's legal I'm okay with it.
Click to expand...

To a Point I agree. Not out to argue. But I know guys that take AR15's and such deer hunting. ITs never pretty when the deer is hit many time and still running just because they think... I got lots of rounds in this clip and just start yanking the trigger on a running deer till it falls. And most times it not dead. It's got to many broken legs to keep running.

I draw the line at places. And in this case its NOT the guns fault.. Its the guy shooting it. Its just hard to see and hear it happen. To me a guy that acts like that should be handed a single shot and told make it count.
 
Education rather than regulation. We have to have regulations because there are those that will take things too far because they have no value in the sport of the hunt. Without the regulations there would be those that would use explosives or mortars to kill game animals. Reasonable men impose limits on themselves that keep their conscience clean and their hunts enjoyable. The best regulations are personal.

Steve
 
Rich Coyle said:
In other words you want the state to harass those you don't agree with.
Click to expand...

No, I never said that anywhere in my post. ;) You missed the point of what I wrote completely. Where did I say the state should draw the line? I did say " I draw the line at places"

Let me put like this. The state lets the guys do what I do not agree with. So I choose not to hunt with them or take part in how they hunt. Thats where I draw the line. maybe I should have put that in the first post?
 
Hello,

This "what is unethical and what is not" debate has been going on for years and will continue going on for many more years....

Bottom line for ME is.....people should mind their own business and hunt how/what they want within the legal confines of the location being hunted. It is not MY right to impose my personal ethical vs unethical views onto another person NOR shall I be required to comply with another persons views.

The same people bitching about modern technology in scopes and such are the same people that place 100 game cameras on 10 acres so they don't have to put the field time in......

THEIS
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Recent Posts

Top