I don't have a problem with it. If you can tote it, shoot it. After all, whose business is it if I hunt a whitetail with my .243, 7mm Mag. or .458 Win Mag? That being said, it is in bad taste to mock the animal in death (i.e. Coke can in the hole!!!!).

I don't see anything wrong with it at all, and quite frankly the people who got upset need to find something better to do with their time. I've shot deer with .30-06 and ballistic tips that did much more damage. Didn't see the soda can, maybe a little tasteless, but I've done worse. The simple fact is you're SHOOTING the animal. What gun you do it with, as long as it isn't to small, makes no difference. .243-.700NE- it's still going to die, and the extra meat wasted can be thrown in a 12 ounce glass. Who freakin cares.

Neverflinch,

BRAVO SIR!!!

$bob$

I think using a cal. that is considered small for the game being hunted is far worse than having "more than enough gun". There is only one stage of dead!!

Ludicrous. Whats next, infra red guided missles? This is reducing deer hunting to something less than varminting. No class whatsoever.

Maybe someone should make a 50 BMG hunting vidieo game so these adolescents can get their rocks off without pasting such stupidity on the webb. But the video game might be to much of a challenge for them..

Poor taste is being polite. On a scale of 1 to 10 I give this "hunter" a rating of recycle bin..

Here is another link that might be of interest to some of you gentlemen

Apparently, one can only shoot animals that are standing still, broadside.

Well, the only thing I can say to that is this. Is hunting a deer with a scoped rifle that can easily reach out to 300 yards really that much more of a challenge than shooting them with a .50? In either case, if you're even half a shot, it's not much of a challenge anyway. The challenge is finding them, having a .50 doesn't give you any more advantage than someone with a .270. The end result will be the same, dead animal.

I don't really think its the juvenile idea of shooting a doe with a 50 calibre machine gun bullet so much as it is the flip attitude and the stupidity of showing off about it. "Wow, boy howdy, look what I did". What exactly did he do? Was it something to be proud of? Perhaps you folks that learnt your morals and ethics in video parlours and by watching "virtual reality" shows can tell me where I am wrong headed about this.

Saeed, If I were confronted by a disgruntled Cape buffalo or some toothy, fangy creature that resented my presence, I would wish for a 50BMG. Fully automatic at that. But we are talking about a 100lb whitetail doe at 80 yards. I'm surprised he didn't say a LAZERED 80 yards. This is kinda like me using a 30-06 to ambush some of the chipmunks that raid my bird feeders and posting the pictures on the net.

Wow... Now it's a moral and/or ethical issue to show a picture of a deer shot with a BMG?

You could get a job with CNN... <grin>

Men have been showing pictures of game they've killed for thousands of years. (see cave walls) and probably will continue for thousands more. We love it and only a very few of a "sensitive nature" seem to ever be offended.

I kill wild animals with guns. I gut them and skin them and cut them up. I always make a very big issue of doing an analysis of how the bullet performed, often using photos and spend hours discussing it all with friends. I eat those animals too.

Now I find out that it's all immoral or unethical?

This is an amazing post for a big hame hunting forum.


$bob$

I think its been a moral/ethical thing since the get go. We haven't been discussing the degree of dead the deer was have we?
I've shot antelope with .300wm's; friends of mine have shot them with .375's. While the comparitive damage was quite small on the exit side, we always made a point for the grip and grin photos to shoot from the entrance shot side of the animal and even tucked its tongue back in to give the animal a bit more dignity. But then, I guess we're girly men. You hairy chested, macho, knuckle dragging, mouth breathers wouldn't understand.

beemanbeme, in many years and locations of hunting, I have found that there are many different levels of what is called moral and ethical hunting.

For me personally, a quick kill is about as moral and ethical as it gets. There are places where letting a wounded animal bleed out is the norm, and while I don't do this, preferring to bleed out the dead animal, in those locations my method could be viewed as immoral and unethical.

I don't view my methods as making me a man, and I doubt others feel thier chosen methods make them a man. JMHO on that, BTW.

Reading some of the comments from the Mich group kinda leaves you shaking your head. I wonder if any of them "kill" the earthworms before baiting up a hook? If they feel they must, I will let them. May not do it myself, but that does not make me, or them, better, or men.

Just different.

You have people so called blasting deer through 100s of yards of forest with 30-06 300 mags ect. I guess because I can kill all the deer I want with my 300 savage. The 2 I shot this year with my 416 taylor were way over board.

Why did I shoot them with my taylor because I could. Why didn't I use my 22 hornet because I did that all ready. The results were the same dead deer. The talyor sure did put a lot bigger hole in them then the Hornet or savage. I guess I was wrong in doing that heck Some one else might start using there big bores on deer.(I guess You should look under the big more heading to see who is all ready doing that.)

I guess I just don't understand what the fuss is about the guy had a tag he shot it legally. I just don't care what he shot it with

Tasunkawitko asked for comments and opinion about the photos and the taking of the deer. He didn't ask for us to choose up sides, whittle our fingers are each other and holler neener, neener, neener if our opinions didn't agree. I'm pretty sure you know where I stand so I'm outa here.

Is it immoral to shoot deer with a .22? I wouldn't want to shoot a deer with a .22 anything but they do it in Texas all the time. Gentlemen, dead is dead and can't be argued with. As for a .50 BMG, I doubt that deer suffered. Now if you won't shoot until you get that perfect angle fine. Just understand you may be waiting a long time. I learned long ago to take your shot if you want the animal and can get a killing shot in and to use enough gun to do the job. It is one thing if you are hunting deer on the family farm and can come back any day. It is another thing if you have traveled half way around the globe and laid out $$$$. And as far as what PETA might say - screw 'em!

Am I the only one who can't see the pop can? It seems a little silly to put a can in the hole, but there are worse indignities.

"Start a BMG deer hunting fad and soon youll have people blasting these things through 100 yds of forest and taking pot shots from 1/2 a mile away and saying "duh, I just wanted to see what would happen". If the only thing that mattered were that the deer died in the end, then why dont we just make it fair game to start running them down with trucks."

First of all showing a picture of a deer shot with a .50 isn't going to start a fad. Most people who own .50's will never shoot a deer with one. But if someone choose's to do so it is their right. The fact that they have a gun capable of making a half mile shot doesn't mean they are going to do it. I have a .300RUM, it retains enough energy to kill a deer at 800 yards. Does that mean I will ever attempt that shot? Of course not. But I really don't see what the big deal is if the guy chose to shoot his deer with a .50? It was at 80 yards, the damage wasn't that bad. Like I said I have shot deer with .30-06 that looked worse. So if the guy wanted to shoot his deer with a .50 and made a RESPONSIBLE shot, I say more power to him. While were on the topic if shooting one with a .50 isn't ethical in your mind, then where do you draw the line? .338, .375, .416? As I said before the animal died and probably suffered LESS than with one shot with a .243. The issue here should be reponsible shot making, which can only be determined BY THE SHOOTER. Not by someone who says since they have never done it, it shouldn't be done.
As far as running over deer with trucks, I think we can both agree that is a silly argument. It is not legal nor ethical.

"Sorry, thats not hunting. Its unbridaled slaughter and wreaks of a disreguard for nature."

And making a 250 yard shot with a .300 isn't? Where is the line drawn? Who is responsible for making that decision? The guy made a clean kill and did far less damage to the animal than would have been done with a 165gr. ballistic tip traveling at 3500ft/sec. that would explode on impact. Is that not ethical?