Thanks for sharing your opinion; I'm sure...
Are you playing your facetious card this early in the argument?
You disappoint me.
Tell me how
you justify taking shots on valuable game at those ridiculous distances. Game�I hasten to add�that we all
pay to conserve, and that we all have a vested interest in.
-=tpr=-
When I quoted you I was pointing out the irony contained within your post. You said you weren't convinced you were right, and then went on to make an assertion with a level of certainty which suggested disingenuousness.
Personally, I've never taken a shot at an animal that would be considered by most standards these days "long range". My longest is 300 yards.
Fact is, as has been pointed out earlier by others, I've seen guys who ought to have held off the trigger altogether at ranges under 100 yards because they didn't know what they were doing. Conversely, most of the true "long range hunters" I've interacted with practice a whole lot more than I do and therefore know their limitations better than I do.
Could I make a 500 yard hit? Yeah, probably, given the right conditions. Would I take that shot? No. Does that mean that I am making a moral or ethical judgment of those who would simply because they would? Nope. I know plenty who shouldn't and plenty who would be within their rights, so more information is necessary to make such a judgment.
If your original assertion concerning your lack of certainty were true that would seem to be the logical conclusion you'd have come to also, and so your genuineness is called into question.
