ORIGINAL: paco97
The other view that Toby Bridges has is he wants to ban the use of the patched round ball, and he over exaggerates the effectiveness of the round ball. After corresponding with him through email, he tries to make you believe the patched round ball is totally in capable of ethically & quickly harvesting game with it. This in spite of the fact that the round ball has probably taken more game than any other projectile in history.
Most people that I know who hunt with a PRB will limit themselves to 50 yard shots, and this is clearly within the PRB effective kill zone, but because Toby wants to take 200 yard shots with a ML he wants people to believe the PRB is totally ineffective and is unable to harvest game even within the limits of the projectile.
If you research his writings you will see that he used to brag about the effectiveness of the PRB, but now he's calling it obselete, and wants us to believe it is unable to harvest game, a complete 180 turn in his writings and beliefs.
He is for an outright ban of the PRB which would wipe out traditional muzzleloader hunting.
[hr]
I was not aware of Mr. Bridge's stance with a patched roundball. Thank you for the information. I will have to do some further reading.
If thoughMr. Bridges feels this informationto really be true, well then I have to be the luckiest hunter on the planet as I have a large number of deer that "thank goodness" have fallen to the"inferior" roundball for me. And might I add very quickly.
Now I will be the first to admit, I would not nor do I endorse the shooting atover 100 yards if at all possible with a roundball to harvest a game animal. Normally I set a 75 yard limit to myself for ball, unless all other things are
perfect. Mostly this is a matter of my ability to accuratly place the ball at further distances in the manner I like. I also limit my conical shooting with open sights for the same reason. If I can't see it and place my shot well, then I can't shoot. Plain and simple.