I completely disagree Leo and I do not want to make a mountain from a mole hill...I understand that we hunters need to stick together.
Had he used his best skills, He would have recognized the fact that these elk were bedded and not in any big hurry to go anywhere. In such a state, He could have moved to a more realistic shooting postion for a humane kill (one where the risk of wounding this animal could have been greatly dimenished). He choose not to! He walked in three shots. As a skilled shooter, he could have finished the job with one! Again, he choose not to! You have to admit this thing could have truly gone bad in a hurry-luckily it did not. Why take such chances when they're not necessary? If this guy was trying to prove he could shoot that distance, then he should have gone to a range. IMO, you cannot compare this act to shooting targets ( inanimate objects) or sniping emeny soldiers (capable of shooting back). To me, that's not fair! If he wanted to be persistant, the range is the perfect place for it! Sorry, I just have too much respect for wildlife...skilled or unskilled.
I believe I have been misunderstood! I thought it was blatantly obvious this guy's best skill WAS NOT woodsmanship. Is he guilty of overestimating his other abilities? I think that's obvious as well.
I stand by my belief that limiting by some legal means how far one can shoot can only hurt hunting. It's a can of worms that shouldn't be opened. Yes, there needs to be respect and care, but we would be better served policing that ourselves versus getting new laws passed.