Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on April 18, 2006

Click here to view bill details.

Another back door attempt by the crossbow manufacturers to sell more of their products. Most "seniors" I shoot or hunt with would be offended by the suggestion that just because they have attained a certain age that they should be "allowed" to use a weapon as easy as the crossbow during the 77 day archery season. There alread exists a permitting process to allow physically challenged bowhunters of any age to use a crossbow during the archery season. PLEASE don't buy into the premise that because you are old, you must be frail and NEED this legislation!

If people can't get their way through the NRC, DNR or MUCC, they go back door legislatively. And of course during an election year not too may reps are going to turn a deaf ear for votes. Rather than politicians, I'd prefer to see our deer management left to professionals ... not professional politicians. With the equipment currently allowed during archery seasons, (80-90% let off compound bows) there is absolutely no reason for it. It's an insult to any senior citizen. One more inch in the crossbow manufacturer's mile on the road to all out crossbow inclusion in our archery season.

I just dot get it. What’s the big deal about using crossbows to hunt deer? Because they say it’s easier? Who are you to tell me how I harvest a deer? As long as I’m following all the laws, it’s my choice. Sounds like a bunch of "traditionalists" bunk to me.

This would give the senior hunters another choice in archery hunting. It would not make anyone use a crossbow IF they did not want to. Being of the "senior" age I can tell you that some days are diamonds and some days are stones. There are days when I can pull my 50# compound back and other days that I cant. That is not a "permanent disability" but a day to day one. Should I sit out the days that I cant pull back my bow,just because some folks think I should? The number of hunters are dwindling. It is high time to recruit more hunters AND RETAIN the ones we have. If that means allowing a senior another CHOICE in archery hunting gear - so be it.

In answer to - "With the equipment currently allowed during archery seasons, (80-90% let off compound bows) there is absolutely no reason for it. It's an insult to any senior citizen." It doesn't matter what the let off is a bowhunter still has to pull whatever poundage the bow is set at. If it is 60# a bowhunter still has to break it over to get to that relaxation stage. I'm a senior citizen and is certainly no insult to me if the state allows a senior to use a crossbow. Who gave you the right to speak for all "senior citizens"? I can sure tell you aren't one..

This seems to be an attempt by the crossbow lobby to sell more products. The amount of "senior citizens" out there that need the crossbow is dwarfed by the amount of people that will abuse it. Please use the weapon as a means to get disabled people in the woods and not a crutch for an able bodied person. I see one person has already labeled the "traditionalist" as the ones opposing the crossbow. If they can pull a 200 pound crossbow back why can't they pull a 50 pound bow? There is always gun season.

As a long time compound hunter(and getting older BTW)I was 100% against crossbows when our state was in the process of making them legal for everyone during archery season. I had believed all the anti-xbow drivel but had never actually shot one. I bought a cheap one just to try. To my amazement it wasn't as easy as I thought. All of the same archery skills are used and needed to take a deer. Long story short I now hunt with one. And so does my wife and kids. something they couldn't easily do with a compound. There are many web sites with the truth out there on xbows. There have been many reasons given by the anti side but not a one is logically sound. How does it benefit say Parker to sell a crossbow instead of a compound bow? There is no difference. This is just an example of one of the many false arguments used to exclude someone from participating in a form of recreation. I'm still waiting to hear how me shooting a deer with a crossbow affects your hunting experience. So far we have no takers. After getting the results form our states first years crossbow use there was no negative impact. Only positive results. More hunters, more licenses sold for the state. A win-win for all. Don't let a greedy few exclude people from bow season. Regardless of how they spin it, exclusion by any means is the way the anti-crossbow bunch operates.

There is no good reason to oppose crossbows. Archery and bowhunting are recreational sports and how someone chooses to participate should be up to them. Allowing crossbows would allow more people to participate in the season-and that is a good thing.

This is the kind of bill that validates all those “slippery slope” arguments. You know: "Once we do this it will lead to this . . .." Consideration aside about the ethics of hunting with a crossbow v longbow v compound bow, what makes this bill really offensive is that it seeks to endow special privilege on a group of people defined by their age alone. Jeepers, creepers! The state law really should treat everyone the same, to the extent that’s reasonably possible. If X-bow hunting is OK for a senior citizen (qualified only by the fact he or she has lived a certain number of years) then it ought to be OK for anyone. The first mistake made here was carving out special exceptions for people with certain disabilities. That happened a while ago. The problem is, once you start that junk where do you end it?

I cannot believe the ignorance some have regarding crossbows! Look at the data in Ohio, where crossbows have been legal since the late 70's. Who has more senior citizens participating in the archery season? My guess is the Buckeye State. Those who call crossbows junk, and "cheating" have no logical explanation as to why. They're just parroting the old, tired arguements, but have no sound basis for their other than GREED. The only thing I see wrong with this legislation is it does not allow ALL to use crossbows, as it should.

"Allowing crossbows would allow more people to participate in the season-and that is a good thing." For those who think crossbow use is going to increase the number of hunters, you might want to check the stats on the dozen or so states that allow it during their archery seasons ... EVERY single state that allows it has continued to lose hunters at the same rate or faster than those states that don't allow it. Better find another argument ... Re Ohio, better check your numbers on that as well - last I knew, Ohio had about 1/3 the number of "archery" (term used generously) hunters Michigan has and about 4% of the land in Ohio is public ... contrast that to MI where nearly 20 percent of the land is public. Have you hunted public land in MI lately? Adding crossbows is a GOOD thing?!?!?! Looks like more election year politics to me on the part of Rep Jones ... pandering to Seniors.

Don’t do it, how undignified, to assume someone that reaches a certain age must be so frail as to need a crutch. What’s next, mandatory driving test every year after one reaches 50??? Good grief Charlie Brown, big brother telling us when to old is too old.

This is a good idea, and its long overdue.. Glad to see someone looking out for the older generation...

Pandering to small special interest groups will most likely upset your large base. their word should be a major deciding factor in determining the warrants of such a change. I would let them decide on their rules. There are other options for these people. Seniors can still hunt.

The naysayers and doom forecasters said the same thing about the over 65 for crossbow use regulations in Wisconsin too. It has been very well recieved by the older generation hunters. Some of them old bowhunters that had not bowhunted in years. They found out that they could still bowhunt even though their physical limitations did not allow them to draw back a hunting weight bow day in and day out. The legalization of crossbows for the 65 and over crowd has been a big winner in Wisconsin. It will do the same for Michigan. Thanks for proposing this meaningful legislation.

As a rule we don’t permit discrimination based solely on age when it denies privilege, so why should we say it is OK in the granting of privilege?

Yes, look to Wisconsin…. Wisconsin sold 5,976 archery licenses to over-65 hunters in the year 2000. In 2002, legislation passed to allow hunters over 65 to use a crossbow. That year 5,266 over-65 licenses were sold. That year, however, was the big CWD scare and hunting license sales were down straight across the board. In 2003, over-65 bowhunters bought 7254 tags…. In 2004, they bought 8,848. A definite increase that can be attributed directly to the crossbow. Then look to Maryland… In Maryland there were 359 tags sold to over-65 bowhunters in 2002. The next year (2003) seniors were allowed to use the crossbow and 699 bow hunting licenses were sold. In 2004, 1084 archery tags were sold. In 2005 that number increased to 1379. That is almost a 400% increase over 2002. This is about retaining older hutners longer. Thanks to the crossbow, more hunters over the age of 65 are reentering the field as bowhunters, and I for one am glad to have them back in the bush, doing their share to control the numbers of elusive whitetail.

Because physical limitations become more apparent as the body ages. No one is saying they HAVE to use a crossbow, it is just an option for them.

if the seniors want to use a crossbow, so be it. to those of you that are going to be there someday, i suggest you put yourself in their shoes. how well will you be able to pull back that compound bow at that age ???

The riddle: >As a rule we don’t permit discrimination based solely on age when it denies privilege, so why should we say it is OK in the granting of privilege?< The (supposed) answer provided: >Because physical limitations become more apparent as the body ages. No one is saying they HAVE to use a crossbow, it is just an option for them.< Gong! Gong! Gong! Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! The law already provides a crossbow privilege for people beset by infirmities that encumbers drawing a long bow or compound bow. If some old gaffer is physically unable or has physical limitations that impede ability to draw a long bow or compoud bow, his/her physician can provide the requisite documentation to get a special permit now. Thus, legislation granting the privilege to senior citizens in general, simply based on their age is unnecessary. So the riddle remains unanswered. Next?

This is a back door attempt by the crossbow lobby to put the crossbow in the hands of anyone who wants to hunt the archery season without the dedication it takes to become proficient with archery equipment. How long before a law like this goes on the books before someone sues the state for age discrimination. My bet is it won't take long. If you want to hunt in the archery season then use a bow and arrow as it was meant to be. If you want to hunt with a crossbow then by all means please do as you already have a season for them Nov. 15th thru Nov. 30th.

Michigan/Indiana border, Canadian/Michigan border, Wisconsin/Mi, shoreline. It should be squeaky clean from all points of entry! Maybe Martha Stewart would help us:)

Thank you. Make buying a "cottage" here easy for out-of-state people, easy loans--maybe?

A lot of those "Olg Gafers" as you called them are not and would not consider themselves "handicapped". Many of those same people are too proud to do the paperwork. My grandpa can barely walk, but he won't get a handicap parking pass. With this law, they can choose it if they want, you don't insult them and there is no paperwork for the state to mess with which costs more money they don't have.

The riddle: >As a rule we don’t permit discrimination based solely on age when it denies privilege, so why should we say it is OK in the granting of privilege?< Your answer: >A lot of those "Old Gafers" as you called them are not and would not consider themselves "handicapped". Many of those same people are too proud to do the paperwork. My grandpa can barely walk, but he won't get a handicap parking pass. With this law, they can choose it if they want, you don't insult them and there is no paperwork for the state to mess with which costs more money they don't have.< Ding Dong Gong! Wrong again! Since you don’t seem to get it, I’ll give you a clue. One of the true American concepts is that we all should receive equal treatment under the law. That’s not just words but a living, fundamentally important idea and one worth standing up for even when it might be personally inconvenient. Perhaps your grandpa understands that concept and will not seek special privilege for himself. If that’s the case, I’ll tip my hat to his integrity and courage in living within the bounds of the American ethic. It would be nice if a lot more old geezers and young whippersnappers, alike, would learn to do the same. We do not -- without very compelling reason -- permit discrimination against groups of people in denying privilege solely on the basis of their age. Therefore, logically, sensibly, legitimately, equitably and in every other way imaginable, we should not discriminate in favor of a group of people by granting privilege solely on the basis of their age. As it happens, by the way, I am an old gaffer. Also an old geezer. Or, if you like, a senior citizen. The fact is that many seniors are hale and fit enough to enjoy a full spectrum of physical activities. Those who are not in adequate physical condition to participate fully often can get handicap privileges, with a doctor’s certification. They certainly can in the case of crossbow hunting. To heck with their false pride. To require that a handicap be certified is not “insulting.” It’s only a realistic check to ensure balance. This bill is nothing but pandering to a class of people by proposing to grant them a special privilege. It should be soundly rejected on that basis alone.

Let's see. Driver's lic, draft age, voting age, Social Security, Age to be President for that matter. Yes, we do discriminate by age where it is appropriate. And we need to, it is right in many situations. This Bill is one of those situations.

Pertinent fact: Crossbow use permits are available in Michigan for people -- including senior citizens -- who have infirmities that interfere with their ability to draw a long or compound bow. The riddle: >As a rule we don’t permit discrimination based solely on age when it denies privilege, so why should we say it is OK in the granting of privilege?< Your response: >Let's see. Driver's lic, draft age, voting age, Social Security, Age to be President for that matter. Yes, we do discriminate by age where it is appropriate. And we need to, it is right in many situations. This Bill is one of those situations.< You have correctly cited some instances in which one may claim certain privileges when he/she reaches a particular age (although I’m not sure getting drafted into the armed forces ever was a great “privilege” in the usual sense). Of course, you failed to note that Social Security retirement benefits are an “earned” privilege based on contributions the individual makes throughout his/her working lifetime -- no earnings and contributions, no benefit. Drivers’ licenses require testing, so age is not the only criterion there. One must meet certain physical, mental and character standards to be accepted into the armed forces, so age alone is not the determining factor. Not having studied the Founders’ rationale for writing the minimum presidential age of 35 into our Constitution, I can’t reasonably comment on it. As for voter registration criteria, the age of 18 generally is seen as an age at which one may have achieved a level of maturity that enables him or her to take on “adult” responsibilities. Maybe we also should require a civics exam, in which one’s grasp of fundamental American ideals like equal treatment for all under the law, are tested. All told, your conclusion rates more Gongs! It is wrong, wrong, wrong! New riddle (for the sake of clarification): Why should the very natural event of turning age 65 entitle anyone to be exempted from the law of the land? Correct answer (for those who actually are aware of and believe in the concept of equal treatment under the law for all citizens): It should not. This is not a complicated thing, by any means. It is the difference between what is right and what is wrong. Special, unearned privilege granted simply because one reaches age 65 runs counter to the “American Way.” Period. Crossbow privileges already are available to senior citizens who have physical conditions that impede their ability to use a long or compound bow. That should be plenty to satisfy any reasonable person. HB 5951 is another example of legislative pandering by holding forth the promise special privileges to a particular demographic group. It is legislative junk and should be treated that way.

Hunting seasons were created for specific purposes, including the protection of wildlife and hunter safety. This bill recognizes that granting a relatively few exemptions from those artificial limitations for the less physically-abled will not impact deer populations or pose a risk to safety. At the same time, it will allow some guys who may no longer be able to enjoy their sport a few more years in the field. It's hard to believe there is any serious opposition to this bill, but its hard to believe anyone bought into that silly fishing tackle nonsense, either.

Fine. If all is as you say, let everyone use them during archery season! I will have paid much into Social Security, but will probably not get and paid back even though I have"earned"it. As for voting if you want a civics test are you not discriminating against the uneducated? Save the state some money and the proud some honor and let those over 65 CHOOSE which they want to use. Is that too much to ask? Nobody is saying they have use it, or that you have to use it. Just give them the option.

Read the posts. The main comment from the anti's it's more people in so called archery season. Greed. No matter how you take your limit of deer you can only take so many. They just want to keep people out. Really guys how many seniors do you think will be out there climbing trees every day? And when it's your turn to be older? All sounds good now "I'll tough it out" and all that BS. It's recreation for Pete's sake. Let an old guy have his time in the woods with whatever he wants too. He's earned that right in my book. You should be ashamed to even call yourself a hunter.

So Mr. Gong boy you would rather have your dad ( assuming he's alive) not hunt rather than hunt with an xbow? Hmm......... now we'll check his honesty too. Another post by a young greedy guy. I'm not handicapped but there are days you just don't feel as strong as others. Why should I have to struggle and possibly wound an animal? Oh I know that might be some greed monger's deer I'm tagging. Fear of a senior in the woods? Sounds pretty darn paranoid to me.

If you really think all resistanmce to this bill is about not wanting to share the bow season with more hunters, then why not press for allowing crossbows for everybody, regardless of age? The fact is, this bill proposes to extend a special privilege to a certainm class of people defined by their age. That is fundamentally unAmerican and is what is wrong with this bill -- nothing more and nothing less.

>So Mr. Gong boy you would rather have your dad ( assuming he's alive) not hunt rather than hunt with an xbow? Hmm......... now we'll check his honesty too.< There is no cute and simple answer to junk comments like that. So here goes with the full thing. As a matter of fact, my dear old dad passed away in 1960, when I was a lad of 16 years old. But in the years we hunted together (too few, but enough for me to be imbued by his ethic, which was the traditional sportsman’s ethic and more broadly the ethic of real Americans, as well) I learned a few things. Most of all, I learned that in matters like this, special privileges are not to be extended lightly. He never asked for preferred treatment, even in the throes of infirmity delivered by the horrible cancer that took him. And he never expected it either. My father reveled in the exploits and success of his old hunting and fishing buddies to the day he died, even if he no longer was able to participate. He was a dignified, honest and upright man right to the bitter end, and the finest of role models. >Another post by a young greedy guy.< Not hardly. Be careful about making stupid assumptions. >I'm not handicapped but there are days you just don't feel as strong as others.< Poor you. Face up to the fact that you are human. Accept your situation with grace and dignity rather than whining that you should get preferential treatment just because of your age. What are you, a sorry sap or a real man (or woman)? >Why should I have to struggle and possibly wound an animal?< If you are iuncertain of your ability to dispatch the animal properly, then don’t shoot. Be honest. Be ethical. Stay home, or find ways other than killing something to enjoy the hunt. Accept your circumstances and learn to find joy in what you can do rather than wallow in self pity over what is more difficult for you now than it was way back when. Act like an upright person. Grow a backbone. Learn to take your lumps and adapt. If you really do have infirmities that prevent you from drawing a longbow or a compound bow, have your physician certify that fact and get a special crossbow permit for the “differently abled,” as the law now provides. >Oh I know that might be some greed monger's deer I'm tagging. Fear of a senior in the woods? Sounds pretty darn paranoid to me.< From your post, it’s easy to see who the greed monger really is. You demand special privilege based on on age, alone, to make it EASIER to tag your deer. That’s greed if ever there was greed. Period. I have no fear of "seniors" in the woods, being pretty much there myself. Some of my favorite woods companions over the years have been guys in their seventies and older. None of them were whiners, though. Gong! again.

back to greed, All opposed to crossbows are the ones who want there bow season from oct 1st to jan 1st/ three months of hunting using their modern technology of what they call the way it was always done throwing arrows at 300fps. The ones that get a month and a half to shoot the bigger bucks, who put there scent and presence in the woods before the senior citizens can get the chance during rifle season. Anyone who uses a compound bow like me and is an avid outdoorsman knows there is no comparison to the old way bow to the new compound. How about letting the senior citizen whos farmland you probally hunt or he or she owns have the right they have payed for a whole lot longer then us to hunt with crossbows and enjoy what I love to do because I am still able to pull a bow.

I also am a avid bowhunter and agree crossbows should be legal for all who are of hunting age. Crossbows were around as long as the bow was so both are of the old way. As far as a special season it should go right along with bow season. If everybody is so worried about crossbows they dont have to change over. I am not worried or would I switch over. It should be your choice of bows and the right to hunt. I also would like the ones opposed to the legalization to try giving up their right because of age catching up with them.

im 54 yrs old. i don't see where allowing anybody to use a crossbow in our state hurts any group. i myshelf would love to use one,i no longer can see pins on my bow very well,or hold steady.age should be no factor in its use.we should be able to use it during archery season not just rifle.many people that cant shoot a bow would be able to hunt.bringing more people in to injoy the outdoors or well lose it.

You hunt with a old recurve and wood shaft arrows, correct? Now if you are serious about dedication to primative hunting then get real and throw that expense compound bow out. Because many of the compound bows available today are not far off from the same technology as the crossbows use. You have lighted sights and scopes and major let off. Is that primative? This no crossbow thing is like our 'shotgun' zones. When you get down to the nitty-gritty, it makes now sense. (except to the 'brain deads' that think primative is a combound bow set at 70 lbs with a 85% let off and lighted scope).

bqfsm vhrbudtlw qjbi sfpvargyn twaglm qfgmdx ntbxi