The way I see it, you can pray while you smoke, but you shouldn't smoke while you pray.
So Lost Okie used a modern scope to kill a buffler. But just to add a little contest he decided to put the scope on a round-ball shootin' muzzle loader instead of the .325 WSM ordinarily carrying the same scope.
It doesn't matter where you are, it's where you're going that counts. If you're heading in the direction of becoming a better hunter that's a good thing.
but if you cannot see that well you owe it to the animal to use a sight that lets you shoot the best you can.
I disagree with this type of justification. You owe it to the animal not to shoot until you can get a good aim that's it, period. Scopes only make the task of aiming easier.
For example, Lost Okie shot the Buffler at 80 yards using a scope. Perhaps he couldn't have made the same shot under the same conditions with iron sights. So if L.O. had iron sights he owed it to the animal to hold off the shot.
Now, if L.O. had iron sights, maybe he could have belly-crawled another 30 yards so that he
could make a good shot. Maybe he could have waited for another animal to present a better shot. Or maybe he couldn't wait. Or maybe, just maybe, he's pleased as punch getting within 80 yards and using a scope. Only L.O. can examine his own conscience and ask himself, "could I have done better?"
There's some guys who wouldn't use anything less than a .325 WSM, scope, heated, elevated stand, etc. There's a few guys who've taken buffler with a flintlock. L.O. stands somewhere between the two extremes. He's got nothing to be ashamed of, unless he knows deep down that he really
could have done better.