This message was self-deleted by its author

[haele]

50. They also require more skill and strength to effectively use.

Most people don't realize that a killing shot typically requires a minimum of a 50 lb pull if you've got a high-tech compound bow. I've actually been hit in the back by a "blunt" from someone using a target recurve with a 30lb pull from around forty feet away; just raised a little welt and bruising, and pissed me off mightily in the process. If I had been inclined, the bowman might have ended up on the wrong side of my six-foot 1" thick staff with the brass footing - and a concussion.

Likewise, bows and a quiver of arrows are more difficult to conceal in public, and bows, bowstrings and arrows are easily broken. It's also an ungainly process to fire one unless you're constantly practicing; easy to "mis-fire" if you are rattled or on the move, takes much longer to set, draw, aim and release, and there's no real "rapid fire" capability. It's very easy to charge and overcome a bowman; that's why the bowmen tended to be in the back of fighting units where they were protected from the enemy forces.

A crossbow is more efficient, but some of the issues above still apply. Despite the purported effectiveness of Legoalas, Hawkeye or the Green Arrow, using a bow and arrow are just not optimal weapons for mass murders, crimes of passion, or suicide. Great for stalking and hunting animals or single targets - one shot killing machines if you're very skilled.. but other than that....

You really need a firearm to do mortal damage.

There's a reason why armies went to gunpowder as soon as the technology was up to the task instead of sticking with longbows or crossbows.

Haele