THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM SMALL CALIBER FORUM

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Rifles  Hop To Forums  Small Calibers    Shooting deer with 223 - ethical
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 

Moderators: Paul H
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Shooting deer with 223 - ethical
 Login/Join
 
One of Us
Picture of Kabluewy
posted
I'm curious if there is just a small but mouthy bunch who talk it up about the use of the 223 for deer, or if the majority of hunters are concerned at all about the use of the 223 for deer hunting?

Question:
Do you think shooting deer with a 223 is ethical under the circumstances below?

Choices:
Any legal means, time, distance or place?
OK, but not with varmint bullets?
OK, but not with varmint bullets or past distance energy drops <1000 ft lbs?
All the above, but not OK for children, as a starter rifle?
OK for others, but I choose not to?
Not ethical in the big picture view.

 


~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
 
Posts: 12818 | Registered: 16 February 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I don't feel like repeating myself today and there was no circumstance listed that allowed for an ethical use of a 223 on deer making for an obvious choice.


Captain Finlander
 
Posts: 480 | Registered: 03 September 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of wwjmbd
posted Hide Post
Not ethical imo.
 
Posts: 159 | Location: New Brunswick, Canada | Registered: 24 September 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
When I lived in WV, I knew several wood hicks that routinely took their deer with .223s and .222s. They didn't use the tricked-out, AR "platforms" but rather their rifles were 788s, 340s and the like. Open sights or low end scopes, price and powerwise. Their bullet of choice was a 55gr Rem Corelokt. I know because I reloaded for some of them.
If someone came into the store bragging about how far away he'd killed a deer, they'd just smile and assume the fellow didn't know too much about hunting. I doubt that any of these guys had ever shot a deer at even 100 yards.
Even though these men were good and reliable hunters, I was still reluctant to jump on the .224 bullet bandwagon for the simple reason that when someone comes in here and asks,"Can I kill a deer with a .223?", it opens up a can of worms. If you say "Oh, hell yes, Grandpaw Pettybone killed Wooly mamouths with his", every wannabe around is gonna grab his "platform" and head for the woods, spraying and praying.
I admit that with the changes in twist and the advances in bullets, I have changed my mind somewhat. I think that the .223 has moved up in lethalness to at least equal to the .243 but I still consider it a cartridge for the cool-headed, careful hunter that will respect it's limitations.
In the FWIW department, I think a fellow that buys his kid some cheap-assed, single shot .223 or .410 and "takes him hunting" ain't doing the kid any favors.


Aim for the exit hole
 
Posts: 4348 | Location: middle tenn | Registered: 09 December 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Kabluewy
posted Hide Post
Sorry guys. I realized that I didn't ask the questions right, since this is my first poll. Pleas excuse me, and vote again, since I wiped out your votes so far when I changed the questions, hopefully to make it more meaningful.

I took a chance, and decided that I had to do this early, or not at all.

KB


~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
 
Posts: 12818 | Registered: 16 February 2006Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of TC1
posted Hide Post
The question is setup like a liberal pollster "looking" for the results he wants.

Terry


--------------------------------------------

Well, other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?
 
Posts: 6315 | Location: Mississippi | Registered: 18 May 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Kabluewy
posted Hide Post
I am looking for results.

For folks like you, there's an all or none option, first and last vote respectively.

KB


~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
 
Posts: 12818 | Registered: 16 February 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
How about ethical under certain circumstances and shot angles?
 
Posts: 2435 | Location: North Texas | Registered: 29 July 2010Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
How about another poll with a simple yes or no question.

Is it ethical to to take any shot presented regardless of distance, angles, marksmanship or ability, because I am shooting a big magnum?


Howard
Moses Lake, Washington USA
hwhomes@outlook.com
 
Posts: 2341 | Location: Moses Lake WA | Registered: 17 October 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I like HOWARDS idea, but both still come down to the same things, shot placement and bullet construction. If a .223 makes you limit yourself to shots you know are good and you are capable of making it is a great choice. A good 223 through the ribs is murder on deer.
 
Posts: 849 | Location: MN | Registered: 11 March 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of scottfromdallas
posted Hide Post
Good Lord. How many 223 deer threads do we need? The horse is dead, please step away and leave him alone or I'm calling PETA horse



 
Posts: 1941 | Location: Texas | Registered: 19 July 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of vapodog
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by scottfromdallas:
Good Lord. How many 223 deer threads do we need? The horse is dead, please step away and leave him alone or I'm calling PETA horse

Darn right.....maybe we need a .222 thread.... animal horse


///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 28849 | Location: western Nebraska | Registered: 27 May 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
The question is setup like a liberal pollster "looking" for the results he wants.

I agree with Terry, this is a set up questionair.
 
Posts: 7378 | Registered: 10 April 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Funny thing is; animals are wounded due to improperly placed bullets not too small of diameter bullets.

Yes sometimes due to poor bullet design for the application at hand such as the use of light jacket varmint bullets for larger game. That is not really the point though is it; cause that can be true of almost any caliber.

I remember years ago..........say about 25, when the single shot pistols were getting so popular and one great end all cartridge for deer sized game was the 6mm-223 which was shot with a lighter then typical bullet for caliber but worked because of the lower velocity from the pistol barrel.

It's the same tired old refrain. Hit something with a "smaller" caliber and its, "should have used enough gun" wound something with a "larger" caliber and it's, "learn how to shoot".

What the naysayers are never honest enough to acknowledge is that gut shot is gut shot...........period end of story.


Howard
Moses Lake, Washington USA
hwhomes@outlook.com
 
Posts: 2341 | Location: Moses Lake WA | Registered: 17 October 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
This poll is good in that it questions the use of a tiny cartridge on deer. I view the use of .223 size rounds as a stunt.

Be humane and use an adequate round.

Thank you.

"A man should use all the gun on game that he can shoot well."
 
Posts: 111 | Registered: 20 August 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of scottfromdallas
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Howard:
Funny thing is; animals are wounded due to improperly placed bullets not too small of diameter bullets.

Yes sometimes due to poor bullet design for the application at hand such as the use of light jacket varmint bullets for larger game. That is not really the point though is it; cause that can be true of almost any caliber.

I remember years ago..........say about 25, when the single shot pistols were getting so popular and one great end all cartridge for deer sized game was the 6mm-223 which was shot with a lighter then typical bullet for caliber but worked because of the lower velocity from the pistol barrel.

It's the same tired old refrain. Hit something with a "smaller" caliber and its, "should have used enough gun" wound something with a "larger" caliber and it's, "learn how to shoot".

What the naysayers are never honest enough to acknowledge is that gut shot is gut shot...........period end of story.


End of story? Who is talking about gut shooting an animal? People are saying there are better rounds to hunt deer with than a 223 that has a higher chance of bullet failure and a 458 Winchester that you are afraid to shoot and flinch. There are a whole bunch of good rounds in between that I'm sure most people can shoot as well as 223 and have much better bullet performance.

If you 223 deer people were honest, you'd admit that if you can shoot a 270 as well as a 223, the 270 is a much better deer rifle....period end of story.



 
Posts: 1941 | Location: Texas | Registered: 19 July 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Kabluey--Thanks for such an informative insightful poll. Everyone is included, not cluttered with actual experience needed. Heck, with no experience if a person has a keyboard they can provide very helpful info. I struggled with how to answer it. For example first choice I could not even include my 30-06 for under any circumstances thus I have to eliminate it for hunting.( I heard that a .458 mag doesnt have those limitations--even though I detest recoil I guess I'll be hunting with one). Now that concrete rule of 1000 ft lbs--YES by all means. We all know a bullet through the vitals at anything less will do no damage. You know it will also exclude bowhunting--about time it is well known an arrow wont kill a deer. What is needed is a ft lb meter like a distance lazer. Be able to have a reading to make 100% sure it's 1000 pounds. Certainly a child placing the bullet wont be effective. We need another poll to determine the exact age a person has to be. With all these negatives how could it be ok? Leaves only one choice--IT is not ethical.
I have another nagging question that I wish you'd start a poll and get me an answer. There are engineering theories that bumblebees can't fly. I sure don't know?? A mere report that you have seen bumblebees fly does not count--concrete OPINIONS needed. I do know where there is a bumblebee hive and I'd like to get the honey. If I can ascertain they can't fly it will make it easy.
 
Posts: 3811 | Location: san angelo tx | Registered: 18 November 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Rub Line
posted Hide Post
fishing donttroll


-----------------------------------------------------


Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him. Proverbs 26-4


National Rifle Association Life Member

 
Posts: 1992 | Location: WI | Registered: 28 September 2007Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by howard:
...animals are wounded due to improperly placed bullets not too small of diameter bullets. ...
Then according to that Sage Wisdom, this should work just fine for those Recoil shy folks. Or anyone who doesn't want to spend a lot on a Rifle and Ammo.
 
Posts: 9920 | Location: Carolinas, USA | Registered: 22 April 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Scottfromdallas--I'd never ever argue that a .270 is not a better round for deer than a .223. Despite the fact that the results I've seen with .223 have been 100%. Then again I'd never argue that a .270 is a better round than a 30-06. (I did talk to Jack O'Connor on the phone--after he had retired and I still regret not getting his true opinion of those 2 rounds)
Yes I fully agree you can go family grocery shopping with an 18 wheeler--end of story.
 
Posts: 3811 | Location: san angelo tx | Registered: 18 November 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of WhatThe
posted Hide Post
 
Posts: 542 | Location: So. Cal | Registered: 31 December 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of scottfromdallas
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by carpetman1:
Scottfromdallas--I'd never ever argue that a .270 is not a better round for deer than a .223. Despite the fact that the results I've seen with .223 have been 100%. Then again I'd never argue that a .270 is a better round than a 30-06. (I did talk to Jack O'Connor on the phone--after he had retired and I still regret not getting his true opinion of those 2 rounds)
Yes I fully agree you can go family grocery shopping with an 18 wheeler--end of story.


So shooting a deer with a 270 is like going grocery shopping with an 18 wheeler? horse



 
Posts: 1941 | Location: Texas | Registered: 19 July 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of MickinColo
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by WhatThe:

That's funny! Great post WhatThe.
 
Posts: 2650 | Location: Lakewood, CO | Registered: 15 February 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Kabluewy
posted Hide Post
You're welcome carpetman. I tried to ask the essential and relevant questions, and leave out all the bull crap that guys like you are so excellent at barfing up, to muddy the issue, and make it so that it can never be sorted out.

I just want to know, plain and simple if others, like myself, think deer hunting with a 223 is a low form of make-believe hunting.

It's a question that's been skirted around for a long time, and usually successfully diluted by those who have long ago justified it and can't or won't change their mind.

Don't you just love it when some try to throw in the magnum debate, or the shot angle or placment debate, when it's not part of the poll? Kinda frustrating when it gets boiled down, eh? I hope so.

I still get amusment out of your creative attempt to make BS smell right. coffee

quote:
Originally posted by carpetman1:
Kabluey--Thanks for such an informative insightful poll. Everyone is included, not cluttered with actual experience needed. Heck, with no experience if a person has a keyboard they can provide very helpful info. I struggled with how to answer it. For example first choice I could not even include my 30-06 for under any circumstances thus I have to eliminate it for hunting.( I heard that a .458 mag doesnt have those limitations--even though I detest recoil I guess I'll be hunting with one). Now that concrete rule of 1000 ft lbs--YES by all means. We all know a bullet through the vitals at anything less will do no damage. You know it will also exclude bowhunting--about time it is well known an arrow wont kill a deer. What is needed is a ft lb meter like a distance lazer. Be able to have a reading to make 100% sure it's 1000 pounds. Certainly a child placing the bullet wont be effective. We need another poll to determine the exact age a person has to be. With all these negatives how could it be ok? Leaves only one choice--IT is not ethical.
I have another nagging question that I wish you'd start a poll and get me an answer. There are engineering theories that bumblebees can't fly. I sure don't know?? A mere report that you have seen bumblebees fly does not count--concrete OPINIONS needed. I do know where there is a bumblebee hive and I'd like to get the honey. If I can ascertain they can't fly it will make it easy.


~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
 
Posts: 12818 | Registered: 16 February 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Kabluewy
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by theback40:
quote:
The question is setup like a liberal pollster "looking" for the results he wants.

I agree with Terry, this is a set up questionair.


So, how did you vote? Is it ethical in your opinion or not? What setup?

KB


~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
 
Posts: 12818 | Registered: 16 February 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
scottfromdallas--If your .270 was implying that as a minimum--yes it's like grocery shopping with an 18wheeler--lots of smaller rounds than .270 plenty adequate.
 
Posts: 3811 | Location: san angelo tx | Registered: 18 November 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of RMiller
posted Hide Post
Matchkings are not hunting bullets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.OH! wrong thread sorry my bad.


--------------------
THANOS WAS RIGHT!
 
Posts: 9823 | Location: Montana | Registered: 25 June 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Kabluewy
posted Hide Post
Oh - there's one of two questions I forgot to include, match bullets and FMJ bullets. But I made an assumption - that even morons know it's unethical to use either for deer hunting.

I appologize for the omission. What was I thinking? Obviously, if it's ethical to shoot deer with a 223 varmint bullet at 300 yds, or encourage your grandchildren to pick up grandpaw's bad ethical habits, then ethics is a variable concept.

KB


~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
 
Posts: 12818 | Registered: 16 February 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Another deer dead because of a .223. Nobody has yet produced a animal that survived a .223 round.
 
Posts: 95 | Registered: 04 March 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Kabluewy
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by dsmit50:
Another deer dead because of a .223. Nobody has yet produced a animal that survived a .223 round.


Maybe so. At least you say so, but maybe the real issue is whether you get to eat it, or the worms and buzzards feast?

The question presented here is not of the probability of survival. Everyone knows that the 223 can kill deer. The question is whether you think it is ethical or not, with some variables thrown in.

Is the question too difficult for you?

KB


~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
 
Posts: 12818 | Registered: 16 February 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of scottfromdallas
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by carpetman1:
scottfromdallas--If your .270 was implying that as a minimum--yes it's like grocery shopping with an 18wheeler--lots of smaller rounds than .270 plenty adequate.


I never implied it was a minimum, just more appropriate than a 223. It's still not an 18 wheeler. I hunt with 257R so I must be hauling groceries in a 24 foot UHAUL. BOOM horse diggin



 
Posts: 1941 | Location: Texas | Registered: 19 July 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I will go out on a limb and say yes its ethical
with in reason, Stand hunting 100Ms or less
55 grain pill or bigger well constucted bullet.
You as the hunter have to decide when to pull the trigger. I started my son when he was seven
with a 222 remington 788 and 55 grain corelocts
with all one shot kills, I taught him to shoot
and that where it starts. We all have bad days and make bad shots thats why i hunt with a 30-06
not because a 223 cant kill a deer. As to not doing a child any justice by starting them out with a small caliber on deer remember you are the Adult I would not let him shoot far past 75 yds. and had no regrets. If a child aver develops a flinch or an adult for that matter he is just as likley if not more to make a bad shot with what ever supermag made. My 2 cents.
 
Posts: 58 | Registered: 27 November 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
If this poll determines a deer can't be killed with a .223 will all the deer that folks "claimed" to have killed with a .223 come back to life?
 
Posts: 3811 | Location: san angelo tx | Registered: 18 November 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of scottfromdallas
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by carpetman1:
If this poll determines a deer can't be killed with a .223 will all the deer that folks "claimed" to have killed with a .223 come back to life?


No one is saying it can't be done. People are saying there are better choices. I'm sure you would agree.
flame horse diggin



 
Posts: 1941 | Location: Texas | Registered: 19 July 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of TEANCUM
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Kabluewy:
quote:
Originally posted by dsmit50:
Another deer dead because of a .223. Nobody has yet produced a animal that survived a .223 round.


Maybe so. At least you say so, but maybe the real issue is whether you get to eat it, or the worms and buzzards feast?

The question presented here is not of the probability of survival. Everyone knows that the 223 can kill deer. The question is whether you think it is ethical or not, with some variables thrown in.

Is the question too difficult for you?

KB


Sounds more like you are calling dsmit50 a liar. Maybe that's what you call people whose EXPERIENCE is different than your opinions!!!!

Dang it..... that word EXPERIENCE keeps shooting holes in your arguments. So sorry about that.

moon
 
Posts: 1788 | Location: IDAHO | Registered: 12 February 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
para1977--We are on same page.
 
Posts: 3811 | Location: san angelo tx | Registered: 18 November 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
scottfromdallas--No one is saying it cant be done? Have you read kabluewy's tagline and looked up definition of oxymoron?
 
Posts: 3811 | Location: san angelo tx | Registered: 18 November 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Well if someone started a thread is it
(Is It Ethical To Shoot Wolves With a 223)
all would say yes. A wolf is as big as most deer
where I live and bigger than most Blacktails Ive seen, and contrary to many just as a Alive as any deer and just as ethical to kill with a 223. Amazing how fast humans throw ethics out the window from one species to the next, As if a wolf running around gut shot is any less disturbing than a deer.
 
Posts: 58 | Registered: 27 November 2007Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by PARA1977:
As if a wolf running around gut shot is any less disturbing than a deer.


Yes but a wolf ...er... deer gut shot with a 223 brings about conversations about unethical hunters while if gut shot with a super mag it brings about entirely different conversations. Even though the end result is the same. bewildered


Howard
Moses Lake, Washington USA
hwhomes@outlook.com
 
Posts: 2341 | Location: Moses Lake WA | Registered: 17 October 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Kabluewy
posted Hide Post
And besides the point as well, and you keep harping about shot placment and the super mags. Start another thread on the topic - oh you did that - and no one cared? Hummm.

KB


~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
 
Posts: 12818 | Registered: 16 February 2006Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  
 

Accuratereloading.com    The Accurate Reloading Forums    THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS  Hop To Forum Categories  Rifles  Hop To Forums  Small Calibers    Shooting deer with 223 - ethical

Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia