bigcountry

Uh oh, do we have to go back to my survival post? comparing a 22 and a bow and arrow?

You know alot of fellers in KY, (where I was born and bred) do the neck shot thing. I don' t. They are so concerned about meat, thats all they care about. The guys I know do this, do this extreamely effectively. Some killing 20 deer a year. Never losing one. And they are using 17Remingtons and 22-250' s and 223s. The ones I know that do this are the best blood trackers I have ever seen. And they arn' t there hounds sure are.

For a guy like me, nope, I need a bigger hammer to drive in that nail. For guys that take it seriously as them, they have a little more time on there hands and are better skilled hunters than I am.

Guys, your forgetting, velocity kills. And a neck shot with a 22-250 is pretty devastating and leaves a hell of a blood trail.

You can' t blanket one case (deer hunting in general) with one statement like " They are not, never were, nor never will be a deer cartridge much less anything bigger" concerning this subject. Not everyone has the same skill or patience. I know my limitations, and know its not for me. I am lucky to bring home 5 or 6 deer a year not counting crop damage deer. (which I am doing this weekend, can' t wait)

I bet ya, if a feller hunted with a 223, and lost several deer he would go out and buy a 30-06. But lets say the guy recovered all the deer with no problem. Why change????? Because you can' t use that gun effectively??? Think about it.

JagMagMan

Not again!!!!!
.22' s of any kind, are not deer calibers, and should be illeagal everywhere!
Anyone who cannot handle a .243' s recoil, shouldn' t be playing with guns anyway!
As for head and neck shots, no they' re not against the law, just plain unethical!
You' d lose less meat with a heart/lung shot than with a neck shot, plus you have about 500% more room for error!
Again, you get no extra points for smallest caliber, or for shooting out the eyeballs without disturbing the eyelashes!!!
You want a challenge with your small calibers, shoot prarrie dogs at several hundred yards, or try for .25 groups on paper, but when you go deer hunting, use a deer rifle!
We owe the deer this much respect at least!

frizzellr

No, because it was irrelevant then and it is irrelevant now. We aren' t talking about survival. We are talking about hunting.

neweboarhunter

Teach the youngen' s how to shoot with the .222, .223, .22-250, etc, then move them up to the .243 win, .250 savage, 6mm rem, .257 roberts.

I don' t know what the recoils #' s are on these rounds but there is not that much differance between the .243 and the .22-250, .220 swift. and you gain a MUCH better round for the job. Better yet a nice short carbine in 7.62x39 or the .44 mag would be also ideal for kids. When you are starting them out they should not be taking shots much past 100 yds. These rounds will work for that distance and a little beyond, plus the margin for error is greater because of the bigger bullet.

bigcountry

Hunting is hunting. These guys always gets thier animals, that your statement totally irrelivent. You knew if you answered you would use the 22-250 and not the bow, then you saying a bow is not enough for hunting deer. And that my friend is totally bogus as a bunch of people in the bowhunting forum will educate you on. Most serious bow hunters I know are twice the hunters that gun only people are. Not all but most.

Now, I don' t shoot deer in the head of neck, but why is this unethical. You guys are confusing. Alot of people including myself likes to heart to eat. Jag, I don' t think these people are looking for a challenge. They are more effective than your average hunter with these calibers.

frizzellr

You are comparing apples to oranges again. The comparison is invalid and you know it if you are the bowhunter you claim to be. Using a razor sharp blade to hemorrage an animal to death is alot different than relying on hydrostatic shock and tissue displacement caused by a bullet. BTW, I bowhunt.

bigcountry

Well, true, I am not that good of a bowhunter, but give it all I got and love it the most next to riding motorcycles. And can' t wait until Sept. 15. I disagree however. I know I could kill a deer with a 22-250 alot more effectively than with a bow at 30 yards. But the bow works for me too within 30 yards without much complaint. Been decently sucessful with it. Thats my personal limit with a bow. And yes, I have lost a bunch of deer with a bow. I knew they were good shots. But do to rain and losing my blood trail or whatever, I never found them. It sucks to no end and stings like a mother. But that doesn' t mean its unethical to use a bow in my opinion. Even though I have lost a lot more deer with a bow than with a gun. You as a bowhunter may have never lost a deer with a bow. And if so, I am glad for you and wish I was lucky as you.

Hey, I am just striking up something for people to think about during our off season here. 10 years ago I would have been on your side on this issue. But things change, and so does my mind as I get older.

whelen36

338 , i checked the pgc website and it doesn' t say anything about them being illegal for use , but as i said i do believe that they are so i kinda miss worded myself and missled you on that one , i appollagize for that , sorry

but my point is make sure you check the lagality of firearms and action types before use

JagMagMan

Comparing hunting to survival, or bullets to arrows is as Frizz said, " comparing apples to oranges."
As to the ethics of head/neck shots, there is NOT ONE justifiable reason to take head/neck shots!
Meat loss? You' d loose more meat on a neck shot than a heart/lung shot!
Animal recovery? Lung shot animals seldom go beyond fifty yards, with a good blood trail to boot! What is the recovery rate for head/neck shots? 100% on " perfect" shots! What of the countless " less than perfect shots" ? Those " assumed" misses would probably bring the recovery rate down to 20% or less!
The fact that those using the .22' s for deer hunting are mostly the same ones advocating head/neck shots, is an admission that they are not using enough gun for the job!
And IF the .22' s are good enough for deer, then why not a head shot on elk or moose too? I' m sure they would go down just as cleanly as a deer would! On a " perfect" shot, that is!
There is just no way to justify head/neck shots and still be called a sportsman!

338

JagMan.. That could be the stupidist responce ever ( Anyone who cannot handle a .243' s recoil, shouldn' t be playing with guns anyway!) .. Here you have a Father (me) taking the time to reload good bullets, sit with my kid to show her when and where to shoot. and you say that .. We have enough of a problem nowadays getting kids to even hunt.. So because she doesn' t like the recoil of a 243 she shouldn' t hunt ... I say let her hunt with the 223 to start and move her up as she is comfortable ..Bill