The Action Compound Bow

A few months ago we were having dinner at one of our favorite local hamburger joints. It was someplace we had been to pretty frequently over the past few years, so you get to know the waitresses and staff – and we happened to have a gal we’d chatted with off and on over the while. I think I was wearing a shirt with a hunting theme or maybe it was the conversation, so she casually mentioned to us that she was very anti-hunting.

I took my usual approach to this familiar scene with my well-researched opinions on conservation being led by hunters, the rampant deer population of Texas, CWD, lack of wolves to balance out the populations, the fact that I hunt with primitive, blackpowder weapons, and my Native American-inspired approach to utilizing the whole animal, etc.

She caved a little after our short talk and then added in that she did have a cousin who was a hunter – but that it was ok because he was a bowhunter and that was more sportsmanlike.

Er . . . wha?

No disrespect to bowhunters at all. It’s a very difficult sport – nay discipline – to go out into the woods and harvest game with a primitive weapon. I just find it ironic that the average anti-hunting hippie can think that hunting exclusively with a bow somehow justifies hunting.

First of all, the arrow shot from a bow kills via hemorrhage. That means “bleeding to death” folks. When a rifle bullet hits a target or game animal, a huge amount of force is transferred to the target. In many instances, this force alone is enough to kill an animal. The good news on the ethical hunting front is that it means the animal is more likely to die quickly and humanely – even if the hunter isn’t the world’s greatest shot.

It’s really hard to get a clean kill with a bow. This is why many bowhunters practice and hunt at very close ranges – often times within 50 yards or so. Many bowhunters spend a lifetime perfecting their craft. It’s not the kind of weapon you can just go pick-up down at Cabela’s and then expect to go out into the woods harvesting game all Robin Hood-style.

Which brings me to the gist of all of this – why do so many action movies love the compound bow?

Deliverance certainly had its bows (not compound, however), but Rambo really was the start of it all.

Who can forget the great scene when John Rambo, divested of most of his high-tech gear from his ill-fated para-drop into NVA-held territory, whips out his folding compound-bow set – complete with explosive-tipped arrowheads? Eat your heart out Duke-boys and your lame, backwoods dynamite-stick-on-an-arrow trick.

After somewhat of a hiatus, things have come back full guns – or should I say full bow? (I make no apologies for puns) Two recent films – Elektra and The Punisher – both feature the compound bow in full-on action style. Even the deplorable Blade Trinity featured some kind of odd, compound bow/laser hybrid device.

Elektra was especially silly in this regard. In the scene featuring the bow she was going to assassinate her mark via a compound bow from a few hundred yards’ distance – across a nice, placid lake. She was shooting the target through a window (not open – so there’s glass) and then aiming at the victim’s head.

If the arrow did manage to make it the few hundred yards to hit the window and go through the glass without yawing off at some crazy angle, then it would be a hell of a shot to actually cause a fatality at that point. I must also add-in that the bow and arrow featured a scope. Sniper Bows – sheesh.

In The Punisher, Frank Castle – thankfully not played by Dolph Lundgren in this one – uses a bow as a sentry-removal weapon to enter the lair of the antagonist. I will grant that this is probably a more realistic use of a compound bow in an action sequence, but I still think it’s a little far-fetched that someone would decide that a bow and arrow was the right weapon to bring the fight to the enemy. Especially an enemy armed with assault rifles and sub-machine guns.

Haven’t these folks seen Wild Geese? Hardy Krueger showed us that a crossbow was the right tool for the whole sentry removal job.

Recent history always has had its share of proponents of the bow and arrow. Ben Franklin, when faced with a shortage of ideas on how to best arm the colonists against the British aggressors, famously suggested that the Continental army train soldiers with bow and arrows.

It may not have been the best approach against a battle-hardened army, but I certainly would have given them 10 points for coolness.

Now I do have a bow, love to shoot it, and have taken it on several unsuccessful hog hunting trips. Unsuccessful in that the little piggies decided not to show up, not that I went and wounded some poor animal with a well-placed shot to the rump. I am no Ted Nugent, but I can usually hit what I am aiming at most of the time.

Now if I was going to use a primitive weapon to infiltrate the lair of some villain or other nefarious character, I certainly wouldn’t use a bow.

No, I’d fall back on my well-practiced and battle proven Brick-In-The-Sock.

Patent pending.