quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
"But having done it does make it so. That's the part you don't seem to be able to comprehend."

I comprehend that you have done it, and that makes it so for you, and it with other's experience makes it so that the 223 is adequate, and capable. That's not what we are arguing about. I also comprehend that the 223 is marginal and not a good choice.


[QUOTE] Originally posted by Kabluewy: Having little experience with a 223 does not invalidate my opinion on its use for deer.

"Yes, it does."

That's your opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy: I already know that I can take deer with a 223.

"OK, so are you going argue with yourself now?"

I'm still arguing with you. Acknowledging that I think I can take deer with a 223, is the part of agreement. It's no big deal to take deer with a 223 IMO. I just don't think it's a good choice.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy: Nor am I going to take your opinion as truth.

"Let's see, who are we going to believe here?"

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
One doesn't have to use a 223 on deer to form a valid opinion on it's effectivness.

As stated, IMO the extent if its effectivness is within the realm of adequate and capable, and nothing in the realm of ideal or good choice. This is based on the physics of the cartridge, and observing what happened in the field.

KB

Adequate and capable does make it a good choice. Just one more thing you'll never understand.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
This is based on the physics of the cartridge, and observing what happened in the field.

KB

Based on your obvious command of the issue, you must concur that having a virgin watch a few p0rn0s can clearly render this person's opinions on the subject on par with those that have actually participated in the act repeatedly.

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
Adequate and capable does make it a good choice. Just one more thing you'll never understand.

You are doing a good job of getting to the bottom of this. I understand that.

IMO adequate and capable is not good enough to make it a good choice, unless one is willing to settle for that and know that's what he is accepting. It's not enough for me. One could argue that a 22LR or a .17 Zinger is adequate and capable, and of course he would be right in the right circumstances.

KB

You want the bottom line?

The bottom line is you have no experience so your opinion is completely worthless.

If you don't want to use a .223 to hunt deer with, that's fine, don't. But to try convience others it's a bad choice when you have never tried it makes you look like an idiot.

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
You want the bottom line?

The bottom line is you have no experience so your opinion is completely worthless.

Thank you for your opinion. If that's true why have you spent so much time arguing with me, trying to support something, that is merely your opinion, as though it is a fact, through the use of insults and distortions?

KB

Support what?

Experience trumps hersay, I've told you that before. Of course it's just one more thing you'll never understand.

Experience includes observation, and has to include objectivity and logic or it becomes worthless in forming an opinion.

Accepting what you say, in your experience, would be accepting hearsay as fact, and incorporating it into my own opinion. It's ok to do that of course, but the distinction is important. I have chosen to accept your statement of specific experience, but I have also chosen to form a different opinion as to what it means, based on my own experience and logic.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:
Based on your obvious command of the issue, you must concur that having a virgin watch a few p0rn0s can clearly render this person's opinions on the subject on par with those that have actually participated in the act repeatedly.

I'm wondering, do you think a guy with a big dick, can understand what the act is like for a guy with a little dick, as well as the L D guy can imagine what it's like for the B D guy?

I think for those of us who favor the bigger calibers for the jobs, we can appreciate what it must feel like for our less endowed friends, whether by choice, or by nature.

Give it all you got, but still three inches ain't eight inches, just like a 223 ain't a deer rifle. Certainly, three inches will get the job done, and so will a 223.

The point is - like the old saying goes - size matters.

Satisfaction is such a personal thing. I can easily figure out what it is like for a guy with a 3" dick, simply by putting it part way in. Just like I can figure out what shooting a 223 is like by downloading.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Experience includes observation, and has to include objectivity and logic or it becomes worthless in forming an opinion.

Accepting what you say, in your experience, would be accepting hearsay as fact, and incorporating it into my own opinion. It's ok to do that of course, but the distinction is important. I have chosen to accept your statement of specific experience, but I have also chosen to form a different opinion as to what it means, based on my own experience and logic.

KB

You have an opinion, ok that's fine. But, here is the thing with opinions, they don't all carry the same weight. As a matter of fact, some are worthless. Your's case and point here because you have absolutely no experience with the subject at hand.

Now, let's put the shoe on the other foot so maybe you can see it without being emotionally involved. On this site we have a lot of hunters that go on safari's and shoot cape buffalo. There is a lot of discussion on this subject here on AR. I've got a few opinions about what rifle to use, maybe what chambering and bullet weight it would take to bring one of these great animals down. I've read many discussions on the subject and have been compelled to enter and give my opinions. But here is the deal. I have no personal experience hunting these animals and my opinion carries absolutely no weight so I look at it as the perfect opportunity to just STFU and read what other more experienced people have to say about it.

Same thing here. You have carried on for 11 pages now and don't have a clue about what you're talking about. You say you've seen it, big deal, it doesn't make you experienced.

TC1, you have given a very good example with the cape buffalo. I too have read what others have to say about hunting them, and understand that my opinion on the subject would be very close to meaningless because I have never hunted them. Consequently, I have never joined in the discussion on that topic, and never expressed an opinion. Certainly I have an opinion on the matter, but it is almost entirely based on what I have read.

If I had expressed an opinion five years ago, it would be different in some ways now.

However, cape buffalo I've never hunted. Deer I have hunted for almost 40 years. I think based on memory, the only years I didn't get at least one deer was when I was in the military.

KB

It doesn't matter that you've hunted, you've never hunted deer with a .223 so your opinion on the subject holds no weight or credibilty. No different than the Cape buffalo scenario.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Experience includes observation, and has to include objectivity and logic or it becomes worthless in forming an opinion.
.
.
.
I have chosen to accept your statement of specific experience, but I have also chosen to form a different opinion as to what it means, based on my own experience and logic.

KB

I don't think you've successfully convinced yourself of your own opinion. In most every post you seem to desperately try to twist your vicariously formed opinions into solid facts. Just because you have a strong opinion doesn't mean it carries any weight. The weight comes from experience and not TV. It seems you can't get over that.

I think you'll change your mind.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:
Kaboom

You are again!!!!!!!

Thanks for your concern, but I'm having fun, and it's just a discussion - right?

Certainly I'm man enough to admit when I was wrong, or made a mistake. . When or if that time comes, I will be happy to say so.

I can't with certainty say that about others. They will have to speak for themselves.

KB

You're wrong and you've made a mistake!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

quote:

Originally posted by TEANCUM:
Kaboom

You are again!!!!!!!

Thanks for your concern, but I'm having fun, and it's just a discussion - right?

Certainly I'm man enough to admit when I was wrong, or made a mistake. . When or if that time comes, I will be happy to say so.

I can't with certainty say that about others. They will have to speak for themselves.

KB

You're wrong and you've made a mistake!!!!!

Naah, I don't think so, and besides I reserve the right to change my mind about admitting anything to you.

The thing about expressing my opinion that seems to be different compared to some of the others here is that mine may appear to be reserved, because that's the way I intend it to be. Others seem to express their opinion emphatically, as though that somehow makes it more valid. And tend to critisize me for being reserved. It's just that I know the difference in blowing smoke, and fact and opinion.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
It doesn't matter that you've hunted, you've never hunted deer with a .223 so your opinion on the subject holds no weight or credibilty. No different than the Cape buffalo scenario.

And you sir, try to flatter yourself by putting yourself in the league of the expert hunter, cape buffalo or deer, by claissifying your experience with a 223 as quailfying experiience. In comparison, it would be the same as some idiot claiming his experience in killing cape buffalo with a 30-06 qualifies both his experience and the cartridge as valid, adequate and capable.

Look at it from my view, which is that I have been hunting deer as long as I estimate your age, maybe longer. Heck, I was probably hunting deer when you were busy being born. To me that makes you a whippersnapper. And a mouthy one too.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by gunmaker:

quote:

Originally posted by MickinColo:

quote:

My point being that there is no best choice and that's an absolute fact.

Can you expound on that point please. You set no minimums, and disregard any maximums.

I guess I'm confident enough in my own abilities and limitations to effectively harvest deer with my .223, 22-250, 22-250 ACK IMP, 25-06, 280Rem, 300 WIN MAG, 30-338 and nothing has dropped as fast as those shot with my 223. Nothing has ran off either. After reading my local big game laws it looks like I can use my 204 Ruger as well. I'll have to do some research on that one.

Kind of like driving in the snow. If you're not comfortable doing it, DON'T. Just don't tell me it's some silly fact that it can't or shouldn't be done.

Reasonable answer, thank you.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:


And you sir, try to flatter yourself by putting yourself in the league of the expert hunter, cape buffalo or deer, by claissifying your experience with a 223 as quailfying experiience. In comparison, it would be the same as some idiot claiming his experience in killing cape buffalo with a 30-06 qualifies both his experience and the cartridge as valid, adequate and capable.



KB

Are you really this stupid? seriously, are you?

KB
It's one thing to state your opinion and your reasons for having it and quite another to expect others to validate it based on such limited, if any real experience in the matter.

I don't expect anyone to validate my opinion. I'm comfortable with it based on my experience. Would I take my 223 on an expensive guided hunt far away? Probably not. On this type of hunt, I would also take more risk in shooting both in distance and animal position than I would around home with my 223. I wouldn't hunt in grizzly country with it either. I also wouldn't shoot at a deer @ 350 yards with it either like I would with my 25-06 or 30-338. These parameters don't make the 223 any less effective when I work within it's envelope.

Mr. Gunmaker,
It may come as a surprise to you, but I think I agree with your last posting.

One distinction is that I don't need for my opinion to be validated, or expect it to be. I do expect to be able to express it without having some whippersnapper calling me an idiot. I know my experience and opinion is valid, and that's enough. Others can judge it to their liking, just as I will judge theirs, and may or may not say so, depending on ---.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
Are you really this stupid? seriously, are you?

Stupid or not, although I have no experience in the matter, and don't intend to gain any, I can say with a high degree of certianty that choosing a 30-06 for cape buffalo is a bad choice. Likewise, choosing a 223 for deer is similarly bad, but different mostly because the consequenses could be vastly different. Shooting a buffalo with a 30-06 could by one's last mistake, but those using a 223 for deer are free to make the same mistake over and over again.

KB

I don't think I called you an idiot. I actually took the time to show you that you're an idiot.

WTF does shooting a buffalo with a .30-06 have to do with any of this?

Wait a minuite, is this the point in the argument were you go mental again? I hope so it was really funny last time.

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
I don't think I called you an idiot. I actually took the time to show you that you're an idiot.

You wasted your time.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
I don't think I called you an idiot. I actually took the time to show you that you're an idiot.

You wasted your time.

We already knew.

WTF does shooting a buffalo with a .30-06 have to do with any of this?

Wait a minuite, is this the point in the argument were you go mental again? I hope so it was really funny last time.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
One distinction is that I don't need for my opinion to be validated, ...................I know my experience and opinion is valid, and that's enough.
KB

There you go again trying to convince yourself you actually have experience with this subject. If it was you and not your buddy that pulled the trigger on those 2 deer you keep telling bloody stories about,the moral of your story may be quite different based on actual experience. You may have made the decision that you weren't comfortable with the shot or, made a better shot. Blaming the cartridge for poor decisions behind the trigger is just too convenient.

Gunmaker,
I see your point. I'll have to think about it a while before agreeing though. But good point.

Another way of looking at it is that it's also convenient to blame circumstances, variables, human error, etc. to divert and bury the issue, which is specificilly about the adequacy of the cartridge. Variables will always be present, so in this issue, the valid way to look at it is to assume all variables are equal, thus ignored, in talking about the adequacy of the 223, compared to real deer cartridges.

That being the case, it wouldn't have mattered whether I pulled the trigger, or my buddy did. My set of variables would have been different than his, but exist nevertheless.

If I had pulled the trigger, and the deer was hit in exactly the same place as those two examples I mentioned, I firmly believe the buck and doe would not have gotten away, because the 223 would not have been in the formula. Instead, my trigger would have been attached to a more than merely adequate deer rifle, such as a 6.5x55, 308, 8x57, etc., and the bullets would not have exploded.

Can what I say be proven - obviously not - but I firmly believe it to be true based on years of deer hunting experience, and seeing the actual effect on those deer mentioned. I know exactly where the bullets hit, and I know what happened. The results could have happened to anyone pulling the trigger, and I believe the end result would have been different simply if a larger, non-explosive bullet was used.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
Wait a minuite, is this the point in the argument were you go mental again? I hope so it was really funny last time.

It's been mental all along. Where T F have you been? Not paying attention again?

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
Wait a minuite, is this the point in the argument were you go mental again? I hope so it was really funny last time.

It's been mental all along. Where T F have you been? Not paying attention again?

KB

Just can't resist.....

So where does the 45/70 with hard cast lead bullets fit into this debate....

quote:

Originally posted by AzGuy:
Just can't resist.....

So where does the 45/70 with hard cast lead bullets fit into this debate....

The 45/70 doesn’t fit in this argument. We’re trying to get as small a bullet as possible. That’s the reason some people are looking at the 20 calibers. We’ll move on to the 17 caliber after we establish the 20 caliber as a deer-hunting round.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
talking about the adequacy of the 223, compared to real deer cartridges.

KB

There you go again saying the 223 isn't a real deer cartridge based on your extensive experience with it.

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
I believe the end result would have been different simply if a larger, non-explosive bullet was used.
KB

Now some truth comes out. Varmint bullets on a 125# +critter. Sounds like you hunt with a highly intelligent crowd.

Don't start showing your a$$ again by stating that all 223 bullets are explosive.

I'm starting to wonder if you've ever shot a deer.

Whaaat - are you going to start bashing me now?

What's the point of that? Do you think that will help prove your point? What point?

The crowd I hunt with are rather normal bunch, just that some, regardless of and despite their intelligence, choose to shoot at a deer sometimes with a 223. You apparantly didn't question your buddies intelligence when they did it.

Who's saying all 223 bullets are explosive? I dunno, maybe there are some solids out there. Since I don't shoot that caliber of bullet I'm not thoroughly familiar with them. I just know that most are designed to explode, and many that are designed otherwise explode anyway, and most folks using them don't know and don't care about the difference.

What makes you wonder if I have ever shot a deer or not? I said I have. Is that not good enough for you? Or are you going to digress into calling me a lier, and perhaps other personal insults? Why would you want to do that over a discussion about a 223? Are you that emotional about it?

I'm beginning to wonder about you. Just let me know if I am hurting your feelings, because it's not that important to me. I don't need to go there, if that what it takes to win an argument.

KB

How on earth do you get an internet connection from under the bridge to nowhere?

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
Since I don't shoot that caliber of bullet I'm not thoroughly familiar with them.
KB

exactly~ this should have been your first and last post on this thread 11 pages ago.
Every post you've made on this thread has added absolutely nothing. Yet you can't stop throwing gas on the fire.

classic internet troll

I can't figure out why you seem to think that I have to actually shoot deer with a 223, and need to be thoroughly familiar with all the varities of bullets. FYI, I have shot several 223s including ARs and bolt actions,at targets, and really enjoyed them and their very mild recoil and accuracy. IMO it's a fun cartridge. Therefore, I have little doubt that it will kill deer, and likewise I believe that I and others can take deer easily with a 223. But just like so many have said, self-control and bullet selection, and the judgment to pass up shots, is a big factor when one makes the choice of using the 223. I simply see no need to use a 223 in the first place, thus removing a weak-link variable in the formula right off the top.

There are so many examples, far too many to list, where I don't need to have intimate knowledge of and actual experience with to know what the deal is. To me clearly witnessing the inadequacy of the 223 on real field situations, with real and experienced deer hunters, and being a real and experienced hunter myself is enough. Even so, there are other facts, and observations, and info that I base my opinion and conclusions upon.

It's the same as figuring out that a particular 458 WM, with a given velocity, bullet weight, weight of rifle, etc, is going to produce such-and-such foot pounds of recoil. Sure, I can shoot it to confirm that it's gonna kick to the calculated degree, and I could watch another guy shoot it, and be equally confident it's gonna kick just like the mathmatics show it will. Although I have confirmed the kick of a 458 on my own shoulder, I absolutely don't have to do all three or even two of those things to confirm the prediction I can obtain from simple mathmatics and studying the design of the package as a whole.

That's a no-brainer, just like the 223 is a no-brainer. It is what it is, no matter which way you look at it, and no matter the fluff, and BS. Surely the Barnes TSX takes it up a notch, but not much, and certainly not enough to bring it out of the varmint cartridge catagory.

Maybe this is too complicated for you. I surely wouldn't have thought so, since you obviously have skills. Therefore it must be a mental block of some kind, emotional or something I can't explain. It's a mystery.

KB

quote:

I just know that most are designed to explode, and many that are designed otherwise explode anyway, and most folks using them don't know and don't care about the difference.


KB

There you go again. After reading the above posts it appears to me that you're getting your a$$ kicked every time you post.

But I can understand that because most of what you post is wrong and reveals a lack of knowledge and EXPERIENCE but is a diarrhea of opinion. An opinion without EXPERIENCE and now a new word .............knowledge.

A quick look at any bullet maker's web site would have pointed out the folly of your above quote. Especially the part about "many that are designed otherwise explode anyway" That's an interesting revelation about your knowledge and I would think that Mr. Barnes would not agree with you as well as many other bullet makers. Next time do a quick check on the facts of your statement before posting and you won't get your head handed to you for each post you make.

But do tell how it is that these .224 caliber bullets "otherwise explode"??? Is it due to their high velocity?? Many of the 223 loads are around the 3000-3300 velocity range.... wait a second isn't that about the same velocity as your beloved 6.5?? Is there something sinister about the 223 round that leads to all this bullet exploding?? Perhaps it's because some of those 223 round come from a black rifle and we all know how evil black can be???

Your posts reveal a tremendous lack of knowledge about a caliber that you've decided to take on and I think if we were to conduct a poll right now to see if there is any material facts that you've display in your attempts to exploit the "explosive nature of .224 bullets ...........you'd lose big time.

Remaining your friend, I wish you the best in your hunting efforts this fall.

I want to make something clear. I have given up trying to convince the advocates of the use of the 223 on deer to see things my way.

My responses are to me a form of public service, to show those who are maybe undecided, or maybe thinking the 223 is a good idea for deer, that there is an alternate view.

This is because I firmly believe the use of the 223 on deer is a bad - bad choice. I believe it is damaging to somethng many of us hold dear, which is the right and priviledge and sport of deer hunting, and hunting in general.

I believe that teaching youngsters getting into hunting that the use of the 223 for deer, without careful consideration of the marginal adequacy of the cartridge is irresponsible and ignorant, and damaging.

I have tried to be respectful of the opinions of others. But mutual respect seems elusive. I will not change my mind about this, and you can attack me personally if you want. I just want you to know that to me this ain't about the 223, it's about a bigger issue.

When I lived up North, I saw what a subsistance culture is about today. The talk is about tradition and heritage, as implying a continuity of history, but I wasn't there for that. I only saw today, which was disgusting. The use of small cartridges is widespread. They count only those animals recovered. Only a small part of the losses float up ashore, bloated and stinking, and eventually are washed away, like they didn't exist in the first place. I think that is what many of those who use the 223 on deer do. It can't be good, except for the buzzards and coyotes.

After reading what I wrote above, and thinking about it, instead of revising/editing, I add the following adendum:

Well, Ok, the good thing is being out there, hunting, and enjoying the heritage and sport, regardless of the cartridge choice. I just want folks to recognize that choosing the 223 carries a burden of recognition of the limitations of the cartridge, and by choosing it they are upping the anti regarding other skills and ethics, such as bullet placement and making the first shot count, and passing up some shots, much like bow hunters do regularly. In that light and regard, it could actually be a good thing.

But, I'm not reading that in the comments of many of the advocates of the 223 for deer, who seem to be simply lacking that distinction. That's why I'm arguing this issue.

KB

KB
I think you should use a 223 this year for deer and then come back to this discussion with something besides just the anecdotal evidence you've brought to the table this far. Otherwise your poster child crusade opposing the use of the 223 on deer just gives yourself all the credibility of the virgin watching the videos reaching the conclusion that he repeatedly forces on others "You shouldn't do that, it looks too messy"