Southwind, I respect that the riskier shot "never crossed" your mind, but the concern still exists.
The "lighted nock" and the crossbow during archery season debates have consistently emerged during the past few legislative sessions in Montana. The regulations are now pretty clear and have been established with much debate and consideration. We could debate forever about whether or not lighted nocks as an exception to the "no electronics" rule will lead to more exceptions and then a serious dilution of the challenge of archery hunting, which justifies a long separate hunting season in Montana.
But here in Montana it boils down to what may be perceived as merely a "want or desire" rather than a requirement to resolve an existing problem in archery hunting. The Montana Bowhunters Association membership seems divided on the issue, but overall is opposed to introducing lighted nocks to the archery season. Past debates in legislative committees have also resulted in the same conclusion.
A separate, but equally important, issue has to do with special interests pursuading a legislator to sponsor a bill on behalf of a minority of citizens and pushing it through an already jam-packed session.
Another concern is with forwarding hunting-related bills and passing state laws that really should be regulatory provisions vetted and decided upon by Fish, Wildlife, and Park agency professionals and the Commission that oversees those processes and decisions.
So, as you can see, these kind of issues that get elevated to the state legislative level become complex and, in my opinion, degrade the lawmakers' ability to address the really important hunting and wildlife related problems faced by this state. (ie: brucellosis mitigation, wild bison hunting & programs, wildlife habitat acquisition & enhancement, landowner concerns, access issues, funding, etc.)
