Being a lawyer, I just have to start an argument here...

We still haven't heard what "the fella" is hunting for or why he thinks he needs an "upgrade" to a 300 Magnum. For any North American big game, except arguably, the Polar, Grizzly and Brown Bears, it seems to me that his .308 is "a decent sized gun." "Decent sized" isa relative term and is completely dictated by what the fella is hunting, and the range of shots he is likely to take. If he's hunting rabbits at 400 yards, a 22-250 is a decent sized gun. If he's hunting rabbits at 40 yards, a .22 rimfire is a decent sized gun. If he's hunting elephants in Zimbabwe, then a decent sized gun will be something a bit larger. But, unless he is going for one of the big bears, or is shooting at ranges beyond 400 yards, there's virtually nothinga .300 Magnum will do that a .308 can't do just as well. It's insulting to those of us who use .308's, or .30-06's, or .270's, or 7mm-08's, or .243's,or whatever, to say that we're not using "decent sized guns" just because our chosen round doesn't say "Magnum".