Does PA give you permission to pee in the woods?🤷‍♂️
Next big debate.

 

Only if it's a certain length. Unfortunately I have to wait and pee back at the house. 🫣

 

We have to sit to pee, we aren’t aloud to stand yet

 

I think Rich did a real nice job on laying that out.. it was a good video. It is difficult to explain law as many look at a law, decision, the system, lawyers from what is right or wrong from their point of view. The system is an application of rules on how to make a determination and then applying the law itself. It often has nothing to do with the merit of the rule. As an attorney it is difficult for him to give an "opinion", that covers all situations and jurisdictions. He did a nice job of pointing out you need to do your own due diligence and be responsible for your decisions.

I would not hammer PA, as I would assume most states are trying to come to terms with technology.
It is the judgment on how a state or officer enforces the laws that can make a difference. Example: If you are jacklighting and shoot after legal shooting times vs putting down a wounded animal recovered late, you are breaking the same law. I follow the rules, but know what I would do with with a wounded game animal.

A bigger question for me is how so many guys can buy $500 scopes for their $2000 crossbows....💲💲💲🤔

 

Kinda like the rangefinder law it may not be enforced unless... someone is using it illegally. If you come walking out of the woods an hour after legal time and run into an officer it may be a problem. 😂

I was never aware rangefinders weren't legal till 2016. Never really thought about it so I was breaking the law for years. You're also supposed to notify the game commission if searching for a deer after legal shooting hours. I've never given any thought to that either and wasn't aware of it till last year. 🤦‍♂️

 

Nice video and makes it pretty clear if the Zulus is legal in Pa or not.

 

I think this is one of those things that you're not going to get hassled for it unless they've busted you for night hunting, in which case they're going to add on as many charges as possible.
I've gotten my answer from the game commission.

 

A thermal scope would be great for tracking wounded game, but I decided to pick up a rescue dog for that instead. He was about 4 months old at the time (see below).

Duke cuddles up to me better than a thermal scope, and he thinks I can walk on water (even on my bad days). I have no interest in hunting with a thermal scope, but using one while tracking would be great!

 

I’m not a lover of dogs , but he is very handsome . That picture has me warming up to them a little bit .

 

Great job on explaining.

 

My law classes all stated that you are innocent until proven guilty and to be proven guilty it has to be proven that you have broken a law. No law in effect doesn't mean it is illegal because you can't be found guilty unless there is a written law to break.

 

Your probably right, but only after you spend 80k with a lawyer.

 

I saw that and he did a good job of explaining it. I already got my answer directly from the commission, so I won’t be buying one.

 

Very good summary and presentation by Rich! TYVM for the time and effort to do that.

The Zulus and ALL electronic contrivances are not legal with the exception of a device that has an integral rangefinder. It doesn’t say that a device/scope of any type that uses that range data to affect electronic ballistics is legal or one with geo positioning, video or picture capable, lens bases or digital are included. If not stated do all of the common scopes we know fall into that grouping? It would be the SIG BDX, OracleX, Zero, BukOps, Certis and a few lesser common electronic optic that are used on crossbows?

Rich?

 

The Zulus and ALL electronic contrivances are not legal with the exception of a device that has an integral rangefinder.

That is not true. A internal rangefinder does not make an electronic device legal in Pa. A internal rangefinder is allowed in certain devices if the device itself is legal.

 

I think PA is like a controlling manipulative, parent or a micromanaging boss who’s mindset is if I don’t tell you, you can do it then you can’t do it instead of teaching you what’s right and wrong.

 

The only way to truly find out if something is 100% legal in 2025, is to let Trump do it.


🤷‍♂️✌DF

 

Imo opinion, Burris wouldn't be allowed.
If it has a battery in the scope , integrated or not.
Illegal.
Fish n Game wont call it grey area.
Would you win in court, after spending 100k in legal fees and expert witnesses.
Maybe. Up to the individual.

 

Imo opinion, Burris wouldn't be allowed.
If it has a battery in the scope , integrated or not.
Illegal.

Illuminated reticles and internal rangefinders are given exceptions. Both require batteries.

 

When was the last time a game warden inspected your crossbow? For me never. Only weapon & ammo I've ever had checked is my shotgun during waterfoul. Actually every game warden I've been in contact with all had the same thing in common. They didn't want anything to do with my weapon. Last deer lease we usually saw the warden every year. Figured we were a easy stop for his quota. He wanted us to call and tell him we were night hog hunting as not to waste his time. Now if you are having the GW called on you for a poaching violation, especially night hunting that might be different. Unless you have diarrhea running of the mouth and HAVE to ask them about your current equipment on a check & this might be like some kind of death wish calling attention to yourself. Don't poke the bear.

 

@TX_RDXguy, do you plan on hunting PA sometime soon? I'm just trying to sort thru my head why someone from Texas is so concerned with what a PA resident can or can't use.

This thread has turned into 2 guys arguing over their own beliefs. One lives in the state and has a horse in the race, the other? 🤷‍♂️

Here's an idea, use what you want and are ethically comfortable with. If for some reason you get caught and they aren't legal that's on you. I have decided that legal or not I will never own a Zulus scope. Regardless of how great of a scope they are I feel like they are being jammed down my throat and it has left a bad taste in my mouth.

I posted this video because I asked Rich to research the law from a lawyer and a prosecutor's perspective since he has been in both positions. He put in hours of research and had discussions with local wardens to come up with his assessment. PA hunters can do with the info what they want or ignore it for all I care.

This will be the last post I make regarding the Zulus unless someone spouts off about it on a thread I make about the Burris or Certis if that ever comes out. As far as I'm concerned this thread can be shut down.

 

@TX_RDXguy, do you plan on hunting PA sometime soon? I'm just trying to sort thru my head why someone from Texas is so concerned with what a PA resident can or can't use.

This thread has turned into 2 guys arguing over their own beliefs. One lives in the state and has a horse in the race, the other? 🤷‍♂️

Here's an idea, use what you want and are ethically comfortable with. If for some reason you get caught and they aren't legal that's on you. I have decided that legal or not I will never own a Zulus scope. Regardless of how great of a scope they are I feel like they are being jammed down my throat and it has left a bad taste in my mouth.

I posted this video because I asked Rich to research the law from a lawyer and a prosecutor's perspective since he has been in both positions. He put in hours of research and had discussions with local wardens to come up with his assessment. PA hunters can do with the info what they want or ignore it for all I care.

This will be the last post I make regarding the Zulus unless someone spouts off about it on a thread I make about the Burris or Certis if that ever comes out. As far as I'm concerned this thread can be shut down.

Its to bad about not wanting the Zulus. For me its been a game changer. Especially for video and for hogging nights in Florida.
But i understand, to each there own.

 

Yeah. I am out of this one to. What I am relaying is not my beliefs but the actual law and what our Bureau of Law Enforcement has said about electronic optics. As I said before, if someone wants to use one in Pa, that is your decision. I would support revising our language as it relates to electronic devices to become more up to date with technology. In my opinion, our laws should state what devices are illegal and not the other way around as they are now.

Good luck to all this fall, regardless of what sighting system you use.

 

Yeah. I am out of this one to. What I am relaying is not my beliefs but the actual law and what our Bureau of Law Enforcement has said about electronic optics. As I said before, if someone wants to use one in Pa, that is your decision. I would support revising our language as it relates to electronic devices to become more up to date with technology. In my opinion, our laws should state what devices illegal and not the other way around as they are now.

Good luck to all this fall, regardless of what sighting system you use.

Another bit of advice, when I was bear hunting up in New Brunswick Canada back in the ATN days, I actually called the lady who runs the warden department in fredericktown.
I specifically asked her about the ATN 4K digital scope and she says it was perfectly legal as long as there was no IR light on it or in it.
My advice is words mean nothing, I actually had her put it into an email form so that if I got stopped by a different warden I had some kind of ammunition with me as to being legal.

 

Funny thing about the law. Its not black and white. Two lawyers have differing opinions and a third lawyer decides who is right. Then a fourth lawyer overruled the third lawyer and they all made money from their clients and the taxpayers.

 

Good video

 

I’d agree. Good video! Thanks to bunjie for taking the time to put it together.👍

 

Would it meet PA permissions if the IR function was disabled by a delete cap? There would then be no beam emitted. With the IR deleted, the scope functions the same way as the Oracle X but with a digital screen instead of glass providing the magnification. Both use existing ambient light, both provide a (permtted) rangefinding function, both provide an electronic aiming point. It seems that the Oracle X is a permitted device (no actual devices are specifically named as being permitted) and if so, why should an IR deleted Zulus be treated any differently? PA game commission may be seeing the IR capability , but not realize that that function can be disabled and deleted.


" (6) Electronic rangefinders, including hand-held devices and those contained within a scope or archery sight. This authorization may not be construed to permit a device that emits a light beam, infrared beam, ultraviolet light beam, radio beam, thermal beam, ultrasonic beam, particle beam or other beam that is visible outside of the device or on the target. "

 

Would it meet PA permissions if the IR function was disabled by a delete cap? There would then be no beam emitted. With the IR deleted, the scope functions the same way as the Oracle X but with a digital screen instead of glass providing the magnification. Both use existing ambient light, both provide a (permtted) rangefinding function, both provide an electronic aiming point. It seems that the Oracle X is a permitted device (no actual devices are specifically named as being permitted) and if so, why should an R deleted Zulus be treated any differently? PA game commission may be seeing the IR capability , but not realize that that function can be disabled and deleted.


" (6) Electronic rangefinders, including hand-held devices and those contained within a scope or archery sight. This authorization may not be construed to permit a device that emits a light beam, infrared beam, ultraviolet light beam, radio beam, thermal beam, ultrasonic beam, particle beam or other beam that is visible outside of the device or on the target. "

The law provides a very specific list of exclusions to the general prohibition against the use of electronic devices. Is a Zulus with a delete cap on that specific list?

 

The digital screen disqualifies the Zulus from what I understand.

 

@TX_RDXguy, do you plan on hunting PA sometime soon? I'm just trying to sort thru my head why someone from Texas is so concerned with what a PA resident can or can't use.

This thread has turned into 2 guys arguing over their own beliefs. One lives in the state and has a horse in the race, the other? 🤷‍♂️

Here's an idea, use what you want and are ethically comfortable with. If for some reason you get caught and they aren't legal that's on you. I have decided that legal or not I will never own a Zulus scope. Regardless of how great of a scope they are I feel like they are being jammed down my throat and it has left a bad taste in my mouth.

I posted this video because I asked Rich to research the law from a lawyer and a prosecutor's perspective since he has been in both positions. He put in hours of research and had discussions with local wardens to come up with his assessment. PA hunters can do with the info what they want or ignore it for all I care.

This will be the last post I make regarding the Zulus unless someone spouts off about it on a thread I make about the Burris or Certis if that ever comes out. As far as I'm concerned this thread can be shut down.

No, no plans currently to hunt PA. My interest in the conversation falls to the general discussion surrounding these new electro optics and state regs. I’m a longtime user and fan of the technologies that can improve efficiency and add new experience capabilities, in particular, the value of video.

 

But yet everyone I've seen that has called the offices to find out their legality, has all been given the same answer, that as long as it doesn't emit a visible beam of light, it's fine. We're not talking thermal. And we've expressly said that they are digital optics, not glass and have gotten the same consistent answer. I fall back to the rangefinder. It wasn't "legal" until 2016 or so. But how many guys were using them in the field before then? How many guys were ticketed for using it? Sure, you violate they laws, I'm sure they'll find every possible infraction they can charge you with.
I've gotten the answers I've needed to make my mind in which optics I plan to use. I have my choice between them. This isn't just a Zulus issue, there's a number of similar optics out there that are similar. Bukops cycloptic x, omega, pard, etc.
What makes it any different than using an adapter to mount your phone to the eye piece and using your phone as the viewfinder in the scope? Would that be legal? You're not physically looking through the scope, and the camera can do the same thing as the electronic scopes.
Point is, we're all big boys and girls and if you have a question about it, call your game commission office and ask them and make up you're own mind from there.

 

But yet everyone I've seen that has called the offices to find out their legality, has all been given the same answer, that as long as it doesn't emit a visible beam of light, it's fine.

Not everyone.

 

I know exactly how it functions. And it is in fact a method of “turning it off.”

The point, that you seem to be missing, is that temporarily disabling a feature (whether by turning a on/off switch or by use of a deleted cap) doesn’t move the device to one of the listed exceptions.



Surely you see the difference between turning an existing feature off and on, versus adding an external device to a scope, don’t you?



The Zulus uses a digital sensor to display an image on a screen. Is it your contention that an Oracle X operates the same (is functionally no different)?
.

The delete cap entirely removes the IR capability, not simply disable it. The entire IR device is removed from the scope to install the delete cap.

Functionally there is zero difference between removing an external device from a scope and removing the IR assembly from a Zulus. So no, I don't see a difference, as there isn't one.

All internal ranging scopes use a digital sensor to determine range and establish a suitable aiming point.
While the Zulus uses a digital screen to both display ranging and viewing and the Oracle uses a digital ranging reticle with optical viewing, FUNCTIONALLY they are no different. Both provide ranging capability and aiming points assisted by a ballistic profile specific to the crossbow being used. As do all internally ranging scopes.

The glaring difference is the Zulus provides an electronic image in the scope. That is where it runs afoul of our laws and regs when it comes to electronic devices.

The glaring difference is the Zulus provides an electronic image in the scope. That is where it runs afoul of our laws and regs when it comes to electronic devices.

Given that other electronic devices are permitted, how does the fact that the Zulus uses an electronic digital image give it any significant advantage over excellent optical glass scopes? If there is no significant advantage, then there should be no reason that it should not be permitted when IR deleted.

 

The delete cap entirely removes the IR capability, not simply disable it. The entire IR device is removed from the scope to install the delete cap.

Functionally there is zero difference between removing an external device from a scope and removing the IR assembly from a Zulus. So no, I don't see a difference, as there isn't one.

All internal ranging scopes use a digital sensor to determine range and establish a suitable aiming point.
While the Zulus uses a digital screen to both display ranging and viewing and the Oracle uses a digital ranging reticle with optical viewing, FUNCTIONALLY they are no different. Both provide ranging capability and aiming points assisted by a ballistic profile specific to the crossbow being used. As do all internally ranging scopes.



Given that other electronic devices are permitted, how does the fact that the Zulus uses an electronic digital image give it any significant advantage over excellent optical glass scopes? If there is no significant advantage, then there should be no reason that it should not be permitted when IR deleted.

You’re still not getting it. Even with the delete cap, the Zulus uses a sensor to create a digital image. It’s still an “electronic device” under PA law. As an electronic device, it is illegal to use if it doesn’t fall into one of the listed exceptions in section 141.18. And it clearly doesn’t fall under one of the exceptions, as no exception allows for a scope that creates a digital image.

Your point about “significant advantage” is irrelevant, as that’s not a listed criteria for inclusion under one of the listed exceptions.

It’s really quite surprising that you’re still arguing this. . .

 

Man I really tried not to comment on this again lol. Bunjies video explains it all. Watch it if you haven't. He didn't make the video just because...he researched it heavily and talked to Game Commision officials.

 

Well Jim. There's only one way to settle this once and for all. We must find someone who has gone to law school and has practiced law for years.🤔 It would help if the person lived in PA and was familiar with the inner workings of the PA legal system.🧐 It also wouldn't hurt if the guy was a hunter, and familiar with this type of equipment!

Good luck finding someone with that resume brother! Maybe ask Rich if he knows anyone that fits this description?

😆 ✌ DF