To illustrate the absurdity of the argument that spears and /or atlatls (and other bladed weapons) are too difficult to master / are not effective except in the hands of an expert, see if you can spot the flawed logic in the following:
I was watching YouTube the other day and I saw a video where a guy shot a deer with a rifle. The guy was using a 338 Lapua and a scope with a built in rangefinder and a special reticle that allowed him to accurately shoot to 800 yards plus.
Now, he didn't shoot the deer that far away; he reported the distance was 475 yards. At the shot the deer fell down, then immediately got up and ran about 50 yards with blood spraying out onto the snow. When they walked up to the deer you could see the deer's heart hanging out of the hole in its chest. There was so much blood on the snow that it looked like a slaughterhouse.
It got me thinking: what would non-hunters think about the video? Maybe hunting equipment has become too efficient, too powerful and too accurate. Heck, that little deer didn't even know that there was a hunter in the area... what is so sporting about that? The deer didn't stand a chance.
Why would anyone want to hunt with such a powerful firearm? A real hunter would never shoot an animal from 475 yards. People shouldn't be allowed to hunt using those things.
Maybe we shouldn't "ban" them outright, but maybe we need to regulate the size of bullets and restrict scope reticles so they only allow people to accurately shoot to 300 yards. There is no need to shoot farther than that. And laser rangefinders are completely non-sporting; they allow people to kill animals too far away.
