Just couldn't resist...

You certainly did Oly ! roger

Whatthe,

How bout startin' a topic about using the 20 cal for deer, or pigs for that matter?

Say a 40 gr. V-Max at 3,850 fps.

Maybe post a couple bloody pix with head shots and gaping neck wounds.

Think we could get some "flamin goin' on"

GWB

quote:

Originally posted by Geedubya:
Whatthe,

How bout startin' a topic about using the 20 cal for deer, or pigs for that matter?

Say a 40 gr. V-Max at 3,850 fps.

Maybe post a couple bloody pix with head shots and gaping neck wounds.

Think we could get some "flamin goin' on"

GWB

I couldn't help myself! I could just see some of the guys here looking at a new .223 topic and just saying "NO WAY". Hopefully this post will help show how repugnant the whole .223 debate really is. The funny part is, that along the line someone new to the boards is going to post the now infamous question "is the .223 suitable for deer"? question. I feel for the poor bastard as he/she will be bombarded with reply's that without a doubt come far to what they were expecting or hoping for...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WhatThe:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Geedubya:
The funny part is, that along the line someone new to the boards is going to post the now infamous question "is the .223 suitable for deer"? question. I feel for the poor bastard as he/she will be bombarded with reply's that without a doubt come far to what they were expecting or hoping for...
however!!. there will be a large number to put salve on his wounds. It'll balance out between sad and silly. roger

quote:

Maybe post a couple bloody pix with head shots and gaping neck wounds.

That’s what we need more of, tasteless gut pile pictures.

Nobody's dumb enough to post that question here expecting anything other than the same old experienceless opinionated trolling posing as a post from the same three or four members with nothing better to do than attemp to justify their own overinflated sense of self importance to nobody but themselves.

Besides you can ask the question on ANY other hunting or firearm forum on the web and actually have an intelligent discussion specifically on the question asked. Just don't expect that to happen here. So troll it up guys! Just bear in mind that your style of "help" will get you banned from any other forum but this one.

quote:

Originally posted by Krochus:
Nobody's dumb enough to post that question here expecting anything other than the same old experienceless opinionated trolling posing as a post from the same three or four members with nothing better to do than attemp to justify their own overinflated sense of self importance to nobody but themselves.

Besides you can ask the question on ANY other hunting or firearm forum on the web and actually have an intelligent discussion specifically on the question asked. Just don't expect that to happen here. So troll it up guys! Just bear in mind that your style of "help" will get you banned from any other forum but this one.

Easy now. I have found the same intensity regarding this issue elsewhere on other forums. I think it's a "universal" topic of debate that lives everywhere. And getting banned from any forum for heating up a debate, in my opinion shows a lack of tolerance and turns that forum into a "ladies tea side discussion". People should voice their opinion and if that is different from your view than you can (1) choose to engage. (2) simply ignore them. (3) Cry to the forum manager or (4) leave the forum. The .223 debate will go on forever with or without you or me, so perhaps just ignoring it and visiting other topics would be a good solution.

With that said, there are loads of hunters that have successfully taken deer with their .223. In that crowd I believe that there are ethical hunters that have developed boundaries that are the limits of their weapon and stay within those boundaries to ensure clean kills. While at the same time I also believe there are another group I call dingbats that have no boundaries and will take a 500 yard shot at anything moving with their .223 thinking it's plenty of gun. There's always that element that jack up the sport. I do not hunt with a .223 because I don't need any further challenge and I'll stand by my .308 as it has done me proud over many years. But for those that wish to hunt with their .223 have developed their own set of boundaries and have been successful, then I wish them "happy hunting". For those that are convinced their .223 has the stopping power of a .308, 30-06 etc., then perhaps these people need to be roughed up a bit in this forum. After-all, the .308 and 30-06 as with any cartridge has its limitations. So I guess you can say " A man has to know his limitations"...

quote:

I also believe there are another group I call dingbats that have no boundaries and will take a 500 yard shot at anything moving with their .223 thinking it's plenty of gun.

That's fine.

BUT You guy's problem is you don't wait for those people to show up (Haven't seen it yet on AR) to start flaming trolling. Lost on you too is the fact that those same people are just as big a menace using a 30-06 or 7mm mag. After all a clueless moron with a rifle is a clueless moron rifle a rifle, caliber is irrelevant

Like I said Keep trolling it up and in the process turning what SHOULD be the biggest best reloading forum on the internet to little more than glocktalk for handloaders

quote:

Originally posted by Krochus:

quote:

I also believe there are another group I call dingbats that have no boundaries and will take a 500 yard shot at anything moving with their .223 thinking it's plenty of gun.

That's fine.

BUT You guy's problem is you don't wait for those people to show up (Haven't seen it yet on AR) to start flaming trolling. Lost on you too is the fact that those same people are just as big a menace using a 30-06 or 7mm mag. After all a clueless moron with a rifle is a clueless moron rifle a rifle, caliber is irrelevant

Like I said Keep trolling it up and in the process turning what SHOULD be the biggest best reloading forum on the internet to little more than glocktalk for handloaders

There here, you just won't here them admit it. They know who they are while the others can only guess. No need to make any accusations against anyone nor stand on a box as the all mighty either. The question is; to post or not to post, to reply or ignore, to get pissed at someone you barley know or simply move to a different topic.......

So let me see if I got this straight?

You guys are flaming posters who may or may not exist over posts that haven't been made?


REALLY?

That's just plain retarded.

BTW It's they're and hear

quote:

Originally posted by Krochus:
So let me see if I got this straight?

You guys are flaming posters who may or may not exist over posts that haven't been made?


REALLY?

That's just plain retarded.

BTW It's they're and hear

O.K. you got me, but only by one! I stand corrected. I should have used they're instead of there. However, you are incorrect by inserting "hear" which of course is "to listen" as opposed to here as in "right here". No harm no foul I believe you meant well. In any event, you don't have the "spirit" of this post right. Perhaps it's the way it has been written or perhaps the way you see things. You are free to do as you wish and respond as you have and/or will. I'm finding difficulty in terms of understanding your reply "You guys are flaming posters who may or may not exist over posts that haven't been made?" I don't know where this came from, what it implies and frankly, have no idea how you came up with it. Perhaps it's just me? I do believe that this for whatever it is, is going nowhere real fast. I'm sure you would agree? So with that said, I wish you a happy new year and may all future posts be good one's for you.

quote:

However, you are incorrect by inserting "hear" which of course is "to listen" as opposed to here as in "right here".

quote:

There here, you just won't here them admit it.

that's two.

Krochus,
no offense meant,
but I once heard about an Arkansas 12th grade reading/comprehension test.
Students were supposed to read and tell what the following said

MRDUKS
MRNOT
SAR
CMWANGS

MRMICE
MRNOT
SAR
CMBDI'S

Seems the translation was

them are ducks
them are not
yes they are
see them wings

Them are mice
Them are not
Yes they are
See them beady eyes.

Any truth to that report.
Best
GWB

quote:

There here, you just won't here them admit it.

that's two. [/QUOTE]

You're right and I laughed my a$$ off! The archer was perfect! But I gotcha, you didn't capitalize "that's". So that's one..

My, my somebody really gets grumpy when folks don't agree with him. You can usually tell when he starts correcting your spelling. Ain't that the truf.

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
My, my somebody really gets grumpy when folks don't agree with him. You can usually tell when he starts correcting your spelling. Ain't that the truf.

It's now a grammar contest. He's winning 2 to 1. I should get spotted a point or two because I can type faster than most can think of what to say which always yields a higher level of mistakes. Even at that, I rarely use improper grammar and my spelling is A+. I won the spelling B in 8Th. grade ya know! But no matter how you look at it, it still beats debating the .223's abilities!...

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
My, my somebody really gets grumpy when folks don't agree with him. You can usually tell when he starts correcting your spelling. Ain't that the truf.

Hmmmm! Sounds like you're describing the modus operandi of another poster we have around these parts who frequent these threads.

Annoying as hell ain't it?

quote:

Originally posted by WhatThe:

With that said, there are loads of hunters that have successfully taken deer with their .223. In that crowd I believe that there are ethical hunters that have developed boundaries that are the limits of their weapon and stay within those boundaries to ensure clean kills. While at the same time I also believe there are another group I call dingbats that have no boundaries and will take a 500 yard shot at anything moving with their .223 thinking it's plenty of gun. There's always that element that jack up the sport. I do not hunt with a .223 because I don't need any further challenge and I'll stand by my .308 as it has done me proud over many years. But for those that wish to hunt with their .223 have developed their own set of boundaries and have been successful, then I wish them "happy hunting". For those that are convinced their .223 has the stopping power of a .308, 30-06 etc., then perhaps these people need to be roughed up a bit in this forum. After-all, the .308 and 30-06 as with any cartridge has its limitations. So I guess you can say " A man has to know his limitations"...

That's pretty fair.

It is a damn shame we can't have a discussion on it without everything from saber tooth deer to Santa Clause being thrown in the mix. I don't have any problem with someone not agreeing with it. If they would just say so and move on that would be fine, but we have folks here that the majority of thier post count is dedicated to this one subject alone and they've never even done it. They feel it's thier duty and right to troll every post that mentions a .223 and deer! I guess they feel like they can change the world through Internet forums

Oh well, it's funner to do it than talk about it anyway.

Terry

P.S. Sorry in advance for the spelling

quote:

That's pretty fair.

I agree, and since this thread has taken a serious turn I'll go ahead and share my view/experience on the matter.


When I use one of my .223's hunting I use them as a close in "brush gun" if you will. The last time I dropped the hammer on a whitetail using my retro AR was at a range of less than 30yds. I simply don't take one when the hunt might involve open country.

I use bullets with a proven track record for penetration and expansion, In the retro's case 55grn Sierra Gamekings (1-14" twist)

No matter what I carry I simply WILL NOT shoot a deer in the asshole (texas heart shot) nor will I shoot one heavily quartering away anywhere but in the back of the neck, again with any caliber.

It's my OPINION and experience that if folks will use a .223 loaded with suitable projectiles like they would a .357mag carbine or even an iron sighted 30-30 that they will never be disappointed by the cartridge's effectiveness on WHITETAIL deer.

Now if your deer are too big for you to be comfortable shooting them with a 357 levergun then your also shouldn't do so with a .223 either. But for the rest of the country that doesn't border Canada it might be a viable option for you.



I do know one thing after carrying a pencil barreled retro A1 through the woods a traditional bolt or levergun feels like an unwieldy heavy club by comparison.

quote:

Originally posted by Krochus:

quote:

That's pretty fair.

I agree, and since this thread has taken a serious turn I'll go ahead and share my view/experience on the matter.


When I use one of my .223's hunting I use them as a close in "brush gun" if you will. The last time I dropped the hammer on a whitetail using my retro AR was at a range of less than 30yds. I simply don't take one when the hunt might involve open country.

I use bullets with a proven track record for penetration and expansion, In the retro's case 55grn Sierra Gamekings (1-14" twist)

No matter what I carry I simply WILL NOT shoot a deer in the asshole (texas heart shot) nor will I shoot one heavily quartering away anywhere but in the back of the neck, again with any caliber.

It's my OPINION and experience that if folks will use a .223 loaded with suitable projectiles like they would a .357mag carbine or even an iron sighted 30-30 that they will never be disappointed by the cartridge's effectiveness on WHITETAIL deer.

Now if your deer are too big for you to be comfortable shooting them with a 357 levergun then your also shouldn't do so with a .223 either. But for the rest of the country that doesn't border Canada it might be a viable option for you.



I do know one thing after carrying a pencil barreled retro A1 through the woods a traditional bolt or levergun feels like an unwieldy heavy club by comparison.

Somewhere in here, there is a post of someone's daughter with her first deer. Follow-up posts also showed pictures of their sons and daughters with deer or other game. I didn't have the heart nor was it appropriate to make any comment that may have been construed as "negative" so I will opine here. I want to maintain that the following comments in no way reflect and negativity but rather an observation based on the photos posted. So with that behind me I will say that the deer I saw posted were perhaps some of the smallest deer I have ever seen and I will go further and strike "perhaps" and claim they are the smallest deer I have ever seen! I'm used to taking deer that dress out from 90 to 125 pounds. The deer posted couldn't have weight more than 45 to 60 pounds when shot! They look like mini White-tails but I don't think I've ever seen one so small sporting horns. The one the Girl has on the opening post looks like it was just born. I wouldn't be afraid to shoot any of those deer posted with a .223 even at the far edge of "moderate" ranges.

They sure do eat good though. (about 90# dressed)

I just saw the thread "22-243 and ilk"

For a moment I thought it was poor spelling......

quote:

Originally posted by WhatThe:

quote:

Originally posted by Krochus:

quote:

That's pretty fair.

I agree, and since this thread has taken a serious turn I'll go ahead and share my view/experience on the matter.


When I use one of my .223's hunting I use them as a close in "brush gun" if you will. The last time I dropped the hammer on a whitetail using my retro AR was at a range of less than 30yds. I simply don't take one when the hunt might involve open country.

I use bullets with a proven track record for penetration and expansion, In the retro's case 55grn Sierra Gamekings (1-14" twist)

No matter what I carry I simply WILL NOT shoot a deer in the asshole (texas heart shot) nor will I shoot one heavily quartering away anywhere but in the back of the neck, again with any caliber.

It's my OPINION and experience that if folks will use a .223 loaded with suitable projectiles like they would a .357mag carbine or even an iron sighted 30-30 that they will never be disappointed by the cartridge's effectiveness on WHITETAIL deer.

Now if your deer are too big for you to be comfortable shooting them with a 357 levergun then your also shouldn't do so with a .223 either. But for the rest of the country that doesn't border Canada it might be a viable option for you.



I do know one thing after carrying a pencil barreled retro A1 through the woods a traditional bolt or levergun feels like an unwieldy heavy club by comparison.

Somewhere in here, there is a post of someone's daughter with her first deer. Follow-up posts also showed pictures of their sons and daughters with deer or other game. I didn't have the heart nor was it appropriate to make any comment that may have been construed as "negative" so I will opine here. I want to maintain that the following comments in no way reflect and negativity but rather an observation based on the photos posted. So with that behind me I will say that the deer I saw posted were perhaps some of the smallest deer I have ever seen and I will go further and strike "perhaps" and claim they are the smallest deer I have ever seen! I'm used to taking deer that dress out from 90 to 125 pounds. The deer posted couldn't have weight more than 45 to 60 pounds when shot! They look like mini White-tails but I don't think I've ever seen one so small sporting horns. The one the Girl has on the opening post looks like it was just born. I wouldn't be afraid to shoot any of those deer posted with a .223 even at the far edge of "moderate" ranges.

The post you are refering to is probably the one about youth rifles. That was my daughters first deer and we weren't too choosey about the size. Yearling deer are small. If you've never seen a small deer you haven't spent much time in the woods. Ours get big too but they all start small. I figured when I posted that picture someone would probably try to use it somewhere to prove something. It didn't take long . BTW, that deer was shot with a .243Win so it really doesn't apply here anyway.

In my experience with the .223 a 125lb-150lb deer is no match for a well placed .224 63gr TSX.

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:

quote:

Originally posted by WhatThe:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Krochus:
[QUOTE]That's pretty fair.

The post you are refering to is probably the one about youth rifles. That was my daughters first deer and we weren't too choosey about the size. Yearling deer are small. If you've never seen a small deer you haven't spent much time in the woods. Ours get big too but they all start small. I figured when I posted that picture someone would probably try to use it somewhere to prove something. It didn't take long . BTW, that deer was shot with a .243Win so it really doesn't apply here anyway.

In my experience with the .223 a 125lb-150lb deer is no match for a well placed .224 63gr TSX.

Terry

Hello and thanks for not taking what I said as an insult, it's far from what I meant. And with that said you're a lucky man to have a beautiful daughter that takes to the woods with you and to top it off, bags her own deer! Around these parts we have large mountain black tail deer that get up there in size. Even the fawns are big at 1 month. In any event, I too agree that (within a reasonable range) a .223 is all you need. As far as "not being in the woods that much" you're right, I need to get out more!

Why dont you just ask the guy who has taken thousands of deer?

quote:

Originally posted by seafire/B17G:
Why dont you just ask the guy who has taken thousands of deer?

I don't believe there's anyone alive that has taken "thousands of deer". Imagine just taking a thousand. Let's say 100 per year, that would be 9 to 10 deer a month which is 2 to 3 per weekend. It would take 10 years to get a thousand. To top it off that would be roughly 80 thousand pounds of meat! Someone needs a big refer!

quote:

Originally posted by WhatThe:

quote:

Originally posted by seafire/B17G:
Why dont you just ask the guy who has taken thousands of deer?

I don't believe there's anyone alive that has taken "thousands of deer". Imagine just taking a thousand. Let's say 100 per year, that would be 9 to 10 deer a month which is 2 to 3 per weekend. It would take 10 years to get a thousand. To top it off that would be roughly 80 thousand pounds of meat! Someone needs a big refer!

Actually, seafire/B17G got the quote wrong. It was "many thousands of deer"

It was a Kodak moment for sure

Terry

quote:

Originally posted by WhatThe:

quote:

Originally posted by seafire/B17G:
Why dont you just ask the guy who has taken thousands of deer?

I don't believe there's anyone alive that has taken "thousands of deer". Imagine just taking a thousand. Let's say 100 per year, that would be 9 to 10 deer a month which is 2 to 3 per weekend. It would take 10 years to get a thousand. To top it off that would be roughly 80 thousand pounds of meat! Someone needs a big refer!

Given your join date I really don't think you comprehend the depths of intellectual depravity many posters have been more than willing to sink to with regards to this topic.

In short I don't think you comprehend just how big a can of worms this is round these parts.

quote:

Originally posted by Krochus:

quote:

Originally posted by WhatThe:

quote:

Originally posted by seafire/B17G:
Why dont you just ask the guy who has taken thousands of deer?

I don't believe there's anyone alive that has taken "thousands of deer". Imagine just taking a thousand. Let's say 100 per year, that would be 9 to 10 deer a month which is 2 to 3 per weekend. It would take 10 years to get a thousand. To top it off that would be roughly 80 thousand pounds of meat! Someone needs a big refer!

Given your join date I really don't think you comprehend the depths of intellectual depravity many posters have been more than willing to sink to with regards to this topic.

In short I don't think you comprehend just how big a can of worms this is round these parts.

Are you suggesting that someone may claim to have taken "thousands of deer"?

quote:

Originally posted by WhatThe:
Are you suggesting that someone may claim to have taken "thousands of deer"?

No, he claimed to have taken many thousands of deer.

Whatthe,
No offense, but you are somewhat of a newbie here.
Seafire and the fellow that has shot "thousands of deer" go way back.
You might do an advanced search.
Or even inquire of someone who is "much more a keeper of the flame" than I to explain it to you.
And, in doing so, you may be able to really employ your sobriquet.
Best
GWB

who killed 1000 deer?

quote:

Originally posted by Geedubya:
Whatthe,
No offense, but you are somewhat of a newbie here.
Seafire and the fellow that has shot "thousands of deer" go way back.
You might do an advanced search.
Or even inquire of someone who is "much more a keeper of the flame" than I to explain it to you.
And, in doing so, you may be able to really employ your sobriquet.
Best
GWB

No offense at all, please bare the same,

A "newbie"? At what? "Employ your sobriquet" Perhaps use my handle and/or nickname? Having a Masters in physics (1989 Campus City University Of Maryland 17:287) I am pleased to see such vocabulary even though my talents rest far from a multi-cultured linguist. However, I won't comment on the validity behind your placement as I do not wish to banter words with anyone. "much more a keeper of the flame" would be said " A keeper of the flame would allow a better explanation than I" to remain proper. In addition, "you to inquire of" should read "you inquire to" as an inquiry is non-subjective and must be referenced as such when attaching the subject to a "personal pronoun". In any event, I do understand your meaning and in short as it may, it appears you are suggesting respect be given to those that have maintained a longer attendance to these boards. With that and of course with all due respect, I do not recognize tenure as a grade of achievement nor do I have an interest in "time served", otherwise "subjectivity" cannot be recognized. I am a practical person with emphasis on reason and even probability. Although research gets the better of reality in a greater percentage, I must not turn my head on the fore-said. I spend much more time on these boards simply reading and have learned that to "directly challenge" someone's claims is non-progressive and only leads to ill will. With 27 years as an independent ballistics expert testing everything from the practical to outright ridicules I maintain a humble residence here but do enjoy jumping in on "fun" threads and those author's with experience as I too can learn from others that appear to have established field data regardless of practical science that may be to the contrary. Ballistics are an exact science only to the extent that outside influences are absent. Hence, any topic within reason is worthy of study and even debate. I come here to enjoy the experiences of others, play an impartial judge to myself and gain knowledge where I may be lacking. As a match shooter of some 20 years and a twice out annual hunter, I find hunting topics most interesting and apply many authors posts against my own experience in "terminal" ballistics. While the study of "personnel" effects is very interesting, to me it's old science and the application to game is new and challenging where I have much to learn. I will finish my short book by saying that there is no "Newbie" as we all have something new to say, learn etc., nor do I believe that anyone has taken "many of thousands of deer". It's not myself that is denying glory to the one that has claimed this feat, but rather simple mathematics. For anyone to be confused with facts or the practical reality of any subject, topic or otherwise is to deny yourself common intellectual gifts we all share.

quote:

I don't believe there's anyone alive that has taken "thousands of deer".

I do know several who have...they are contract hunters here in NJ and shoot many hundred every year in an effort to keep "the long legged rat of the east" in check where license hunting can't take place. They use slugs...because they want to minimize loss and the chance that "Bambi" stumbles out onto a highway to the shock and dismay of the large population of soccer moms. I am aware of only one professional that used a silenced small bore...he also converted to slugs.

Whatthe,

PM Sent

GWB

quote:

Originally posted by JonP:

quote:

I don't believe there's anyone alive that has taken "thousands of deer".

I do know several who have...they are contract hunters here in NJ and shoot many hundred every year in an effort to keep "the long legged rat of the east" in check where license hunting can't take place. They use slugs...because they want to minimize loss and the chance that "Bambi" stumbles out onto a highway to the shock and dismay of the large population of soccer moms. I am aware of only one professional that used a silenced small bore...he also converted to slugs.

To further one's knowledge of your post, you can look to:

DAVID S. deCALESTA, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forestry Sciences Laboratory.

And/or

GARY W. WITMER, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services, Wildlife Research Center, Natural Resource Sciences.

According to the: Maine Dept. Inland Fish & Wildlife as well as, NY., MA., DE., CT. Both VA's. and MD. Control has been by use of "controlled" hunts by the populace of resident licensed hunters.

Again, I do not wish to cause a stir but the data I have researched doesn't support the use of any one individual licensed for the specific purpose of controlling deer numbers. Now, with that said I am also subject to that in which I do not know. Hence should data exist to the contrary, I will certainly be happy to be pointed in the direction of that data by you or anyone else. I hope no one considers this a "I'm right you're wrong" issue but rather a debate of facts where everyone is a winner!

I did take the time to visit several websites in NJ., and found several interesting articles, one notably by Walt Powell located on "Whitetail Domains". Seems that private ranches bring in friends, neighbors etc., to help in the cull. However, I found no mention of "contract hunters" in any forum including an extensive search on the New Jersey Division Of Fish & Wildlife. I did send a e-mail requesting information regarding "contract hunters" so perhaps more specific information will come to bare.

In the meantime, I still consider the claim of "taken many thousands of deer" a metaphor.

quote:

Originally posted by Geedubya:
Whatthe,

PM Sent

GWB

????

Whatthe,
at the top of each page, when you are logged in, if there is a flashing flag, you have a private message. Click on it and it will take you to the personal messaging. Or you can click on the top left icon labeled go. It has a drop down window that will take you to the personal zone, then to private messaging.
GWB

quote:

Originally posted by Geedubya:
Whatthe,
at the top of each page, when you are logged in, if there is a flashing flag, you have a private message. Click on it and it will take you to the personal messaging. Or you can click on the top left icon labeled go. It has a drop down window that will take you to the personal zone, then to private messaging.
GWB

Got it, thanks a 1,000,000