ORIGINAL: Pglasgow
ORIGINAL: gleason.chapman
so Ihave no need for a bulletthat will not penetrate.
chap, you are still not getting it. I consider the statement above a half truth. In fact, there is context where your conclusionis downright false. If using a powbelt is unethical, then using a roundball is unethical, or using a bow is unethical based on the same arguments you and hank are positing. That's simply ludicrous. Bullets, roundballs, and arrows don't have ethics. Hunters have ethics. It up to an individual to learn to hunt ethically. There are PB users, I am sure, who would take issue with the ethics of taking less than ideal shots because of bullet one has chosen. Likewise you can't make the choice of placing a PB properly a subject of questionable ethics for them.
I didn't say PBs were unethical, I said they didn't penetrate, please use my exact words to rebuke me please. Most folks don't know that the PBsdon't penetrte well. I used PRB last year in FL, cause everybody else did (I was using a borrowed gun), but this year I am using Hornady XTP or Speer Gold Dot 300g with TC hawkin FL that I own. Do I think they are unethical for using PRB, no, they are just not for me. I am a bow hunter, Iuse muzzy 125g, have I used expanding broadheads? yes. Do I now? No. Why? Don't penetrate. The law says that PRB is an acceptablebullet, so I have no ethicalconflict with the law. I know in Colorado theycan't use sabot bullets,is it unethical for them to use PBs? heck no, they are the best they can use for that state's laws.
I am sorry, I don't get your half truth statement, lets take this offline in a PM, becausewe are not adding to the knowledge/content of the forum.
Thanks for your POV,
Chap