I've always thought that most people confuse "dead" with "laying there not moving".
The only way to cause instant "death" is to destroy the brain. Even if the animals heart and lungs stop instantly and it is paralyzed, it's not "dead" instantly.
I thought about trying to get into a layman's discussion of the physiological effects of double lung trauma with two holes in the chest but I'm hoping maybe a doctor will come around and give us the info instead....
In any case, I'm not sure what "better way" there would be than a double lung shot for almost all hunters.
The lungs are a large target. Not only are they a large target but other important targets exist in nearly 180 degree arc from the lungs... liver, spine, nerve junctions, heart, neck, arteries....
They do not move quickly or suddenly apart from the entire animal.
They are absolutely necessary for survival and directly and immediately affect the function of both the heart and brain.
A double lung shot causes massive and immediate hemorrhage and a clear and obvious blood trail.
Targeting the lungs creates a high probability of hitting other major blood vessels and/or the heart.
I do not believe there is a better target or method of harvest than lung shots. I have seen all the arguments and pondered them sufficiently and I have killed and participated in the recover of over 100 deer that have been killed with bow and arrow, 12 and 20ga shotguns, muzzle-loaders with various projectiles and a couple different rifle cartridges.
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.