[skeet]

Seems to me that Rattus ignores all the similarities between the crossbow and the conventional bow just because it doesn't suit him. Not dissing him...but the facts speak for themselves. He is into the NBEF and their definition doesn't include the crossbow...so it has to be some other kind of implement. It surely isn't any kind of firearm. He also ignores the corporate sponsorship issue by just saying it isn't pertinent, I guess. Maybe he doesn't understand sponsorship ideas..although I am sure he does as he writes and argues well. Except for ignoring the truth about bows and how they all shoot as you so aptly described.

Rattus, I am sure you realize, when you read most of the hunting/fishing/archery/gun magazines, that the advertisers in the magazines get pretty good write ups on their products. That is hardcore sponsorship and advertising. The sponsorship of organizations such as the NBEF is softcore...but it pushes the company's agenda just the same. Come on man. It is apparent you aren't stupid...even if you don't accept the truth in some matters. And I still agree with you that there is really NO difference between muzzleloaders. Heck for all intents and purposes the Sharps muzzleloaders were inlines..so were Colt Revolving rifles. Seems to me that the traditional muzzleloader users feel they are competing(that word again) with inline shooters and they must feel they or the arms they carry are inferior. I can tell ya one thng..if ol Jim Bridger had a chance to use one of the newer style inlines way back in the 1830 or 40 era..He woulda jumped on it like a duck on a junebug!