quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

quote:

You were the guy that said you though the minimum allowed for deer should be a .243, right? Then you wade in on the archery hunters and it seems you think they are less efficient at killing deer than archery equipment, right? It just follows that you would like to see them banned as well doesn't it?

No, Skippy, what it means, is that not everyone has the experience level to know when and when not to take a shot, whether with a bow or a gun. Last time I checked, TP&W DOES NOT require a proficiency test to purchase a hunting license.

Also, Colorado and other states do have a minimum caliber requirement for hunting deer and other Big Game.

As far as archery is concerned, if the individual can accept a 5 to 10% loss rate, then more power to them, I just don't agree with it, but that does not mean in any way that I want to see archery hunting outlawed/banned. I would much rather see the use of the drugs that are allowed in Mississippi, legalized in other states.

Regardless of your protestations and baseless accusations, from my experience, I just do not believe that the .224's should be legal for hunting white tail in Texas. I do not ever see that happening, but it is not going to bother me one second if it did become law.

You ran your mouth about all the axis and white tails you killed with a .223, just one question for you or ANY of the other .223 supporters. How many of you would pick a .223 to go after a real trophy white tail, 170 B&C or bigger, and how many ranches would let you try that chit?

As for this little tid bit of horse chit:

quote:

Some people just do not have a lot of problems killing animals no matter what you put in their hands, some do. Maybe you are in the later group, don't know that, but am leaning that way.

As I said, I have killed a deer with a Hornet. If I remember correctly you said you had not done that. I do not have any problem killing anything with whatever I am using. However, I have been killing stuff for about 45 years now and during that time I have learned that not everyone has sense enough to understand that they do not possess the knowledge or abilities to use what in many peoples eyes are marginal equipment.

It is a sad fact of life as far as humans are concerned, a shooter with only one years experience will honestly believe that they are just as capable and competent as someone that has been hunting for years, and that just does not work in many cases.

quote:

Originally posted by eddybo:
I am looking forward to seeing the outcry when they realize I shoot deer with subsonic 208 A-maxs.

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:

quote:

Originally posted by eddybo:
I am looking forward to seeing the outcry when they realize I shoot deer with subsonic 208 A-maxs.

roger

quote:

CHC, Have to step is as you DNS about Archery unless you are only talking about distances over 40 yards. A 4 bladed Muzzy will drive right through the lungs of any Ungulate that would stop a 223 dead in its tracks. Maybe you ought to call up Bear Archery and see if they still have the hunting videos of Fred Bear killing everything in N.A. with a recurve, fiberglass arrows and the old bear razorheads when you probably were not even here yet. Never hurts to have a learning experience. Archers who are HUNTERS, ignore the crap about 75 yard shots and don't use the fing crossbows have IMHE are far better record of ethical kills than wanna be snipers lobbing bullets cross canyon or those who think an AR is the solution for their inability to spot, stalk and shoot ONCE well.Bows are not deadly ? Ask the French at Agincourt (look it up or read Henry V)

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Every deer you shoot is a unique experience. Why does one drop dead on the spot with apparently less damage than another that runs that appears to have much more damage? Crazyhorse, for example, has not seen an exit wound past 70 yards I think he said. I've only seen two that failed to exit and those two were smaller animals at closer range. Not only that, they were shot through the vitals and bones not hit unless smaller rib bones. I have not experienced it that the bigger the antler the harder to drop. Those antlers don't provide a coat of Kelvar. So yes, I'd shoot a trophy deer with a .224. I don't eat antlers, so I might even pass on a trophy if I didn't think it would be a good eating animal. I am convinced a .224 (before expansion) will pass through the vitals and I don't see how a .244 would do much better---that difference is about the thickness of a flat toothpick. Take out heart,lung or liver or combination and you are going to have a dead animal pretty close to that spot. Whether the shooter is 7 or 70 is not a factor.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
Smokin---Joe I am aware that the .243 is driving a 100 grain bullet almost the same velocity a .223 drives a 55 grain bullet. That should come into play on larger animals as you stated. To drive nails, a claw hammer works and a sledge needed for railroad spikes.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
While in actuality, we may not be all that far apart in some aspects of this topic, on one aspect we are far apart.

While I have seen lots of deer killed with the .222 and .223, I find it odd, that the supporters of the use of these cartridges for deer, adamantly defend their choice, UNTIL, it comes to taking a shot at an actual trophy animal.

I simply find it really strange that folks will sing the praises of the .222/.223 and how great they are for killing white tail, up to the point where the animal in question is a real trophy, and then, it is to hell with the little gun, give me a cannon.

This attitude is not unique to you, I see it from practically everyone I have ever meet/hunted with or had this same basic conversation with.

It is the concept that anything is okay to shoot does with, but if it is something that has a brag factor to it, a bigger gun needs to be brought into the game

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:

I understand what you are saying eddy, I just find it strange how adamant people can be, singing the praises of the .222/.223, until it comes to shooting at an actual trophy sized animal.

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
I've had my pickup a few years and I know what it does. It runs on lower octane gasoline, doesn't clatter and doesn't miss. It will run on higher octane--but no better and gets less gas mileage. Many people do have the misconception that higher octane is better mileage. False. Higher octane gasoline contains additives to prevent clatter and these additives don't burn, thus they don't produce BTU"S so gas mileage decreases. So if I'm going out of state do I suddenly switch to higher octane? If someone not familiar with my pickup told me all the virtues of spending more money for premium, would I buy premium? I put premium bullets in the same category. MOST saying premium bullets are needed have never done it. I'd have NO problem buying premium bullets if I were gaining something. But if it aint broke why fix it? That's in my backyard or out of state.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
[quote]There is one great thing about going to a buddies lease and limiting yourself to always shooting only does. They always invite you back.[quote]

Lots of truth in that statement.

One of the reasons I have the opinion I do, is that just because you or me may have the experience/knowledge/ability to know when to shoot and where to place the shot, that does not mean any or all the once or twice a year hunters have those same attributes.

Simple ballistics, on a CNS hit, bullet diameter/weight/speed is fairly irrelevant.

On a body shot, whether thru the shoulders or a behind the shoulder, heart/lung shot, a heavier/larger diameter bullet is going to produce more shock/trauma on the target than a smaller diameter/lighter weight bullet.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
While in actuality, we may not be all that far apart in some aspects of this topic, on one aspect we are far apart.

While I have seen lots of deer killed with the .222 and .223, I find it odd, that the supporters of the use of these cartridges for deer, adamantly defend their choice, UNTIL, it comes to taking a shot at an actual trophy animal.

I simply find it really strange that folks will sing the praises of the .222/.223 and how great they are for killing white tail, up to the point where the animal in question is a real trophy, and then, it is to hell with the little gun, give me a cannon.

This attitude is not unique to you, I see it from practically everyone I have ever meet/hunted with or had this same basic conversation with.

It is the concept that anything is okay to shoot does with, but if it is something that has a brag factor to it, a bigger gun needs to be brought into the game

quote:

I do not have any more confidence the once a year hunters can get it done with a 300 magnum boomer than with a 223. In fact most of them would probably place their shots better with a 223. I have seen sure a bunch of "bullet failures" that turned out to be gut shots. And a few high shoulder shots that turned out to be in the "rear shoulders"

quote:

Originally posted by tiggertate:
I shot a doe last weekend with my 22-250 AI at about 95 yards. I was coyote hunting and had loads of 38.0 gr 4064 and a 40 gr Ballistic Tip. Not really what I would have prefered for deer; I was concerned that it might be too hard on the bullet and I wished I had brought my 223, frankly.

But once again the little 40 gr BT showed its mettle. The shot was a downward ranging, almost broadside shot. The bullet went through the scapula, broke a rib and mushed everthing inside the rib cage. The doe just fell over. One thrash on the ground (less than a second's worth) and she was still.

Even though I know it intellectually and from prior experience, I'm always slightly surprised when I witness how effective the fast 22 centerfire rounds are on thin skinned game.

quote:

Originally posted by scottfromdallas:
Hard to believe we have 5 pages from a member posting a nice story and nice picture of his 7 year old daughter's first deer.

quote:

Hard to believe we have 5 pages from a member posting a nice story and nice picture of his 7 year old daughter's first deer.