I think what he was trying to say, is that guys KNOW the limitations of their weapons before taking them out...when I take out my 700PSS .308, I know I can shoot a deer as far as I can see it, when I took out a 9mm Carbine, I knew I needed to be within about 40yrds. When I take out my compound (81#), after as many outdoor shoots I've been to, I know I can take a deer at 50yrds no sweat, when I take my 12ga SxS, I'm not taking a shot over 35yrds.

I think his main point is this:
Just because an SKS can't shoot 1MOA out to 600yrds doesn't mean the 4" group it gives at 75yrds won't kill a deer...

And just because you HEARD that SKS's are inaccurate doesn't mean that they all are....my old man was an avid rifleman and shotgunner in his day, he once told me-as I was walking out the door with my SKS to go deer hunting-"Why are you taking that, it isn't accurate!!", I just nodded and said, "yeah, yeah it really is....", he just shook his head and told me to keep my shots short....What he DIDN'T know is that that rifle actually shoots 2.5" groups at 200yrds, on a good day I can get snowmen groups at 100yrds...yes, it's the most accurate SKS I've seen, but it's pretty accurate for ANY rifle, let alone a $102.99 SKS...he didn't say much when I came home that night with the 8pter the "inaccurate SKS" had taken with one shot.

--->another reason people don't think they're accurate is because they've never shot one with a scope....the sights on SKS's suck. They're not precision sights, but a glass on one and you'd be surprised the difference it makes.

Are you kidding me... You would take a deer with a 9mm... O.K. this argument has gotten ridiculous... It is not that you "could" take a deer, it is what is ethical... I just hate to see people injure deer. I have come across too many injured deer to count. It makes me sick. You hunt to Kill a deer, not injure one and you should use an ethical means to the end.

to me an SKS or 9mm carbine just is not ethical... I just see really no need to use a semi-auto weapon. Some skilled hunters are fine with them, but it breeds poor habits... Too many blam, blam, blams I hear (multiple rapid fire shots at animals). It is not really the gun I am concerned about it is the mentality. I wish DNR departments would ban semi-auto rifles for this reason... I know that the BAR's and Rem semi-autos would be dissallowed and that is a shame as most of these "fine" firearms are used by reputable hunters, but that is the price we would have to pay.

By the way, I own a Browning BAR and yes I have varmint hunted with it.

Just to point something else out...the SKS and the 9mm carbine are far and away from being in the same class...the SKS is capable of ~1600ft.lbs. at the muzzle, still over 1000ft.lbs. at 100yrds (many states have a minimum of 1000ft.lbs. at the muzzle requirement)...the 9mm+P carbine performs similarly to a .357mag handgun, capable of ~750ft.lbs. at the muzzle...Very few people find the .357mag in a handgun "unethical" for deer hunting.

I'll challenge that there are fewer deer "injured" with semiautos than you think...truth be told, I'm betting it is universal for all action types, if they're out there taking poor shots, it's not the gun's fault, and I'm sure they don't think that much into it to pick up a semiauto just so they can take a lot of poor shots.

I would HONESTLY bet that there are more deer injured by bullets that EXITED another deer beside them, or by bullets that were deflected by brush than those that are injured by guys spraying and praying with semiautos...and like I said, I'll bet that there aren't really any more deer injured by hunters "rapid firing" semiautos than by hunters with bolt guns that "just winged a shot out there"....

I'd also venture there are FAR more deer deer injured annually by "hunters" who aren't shooters, especially bow hunters (no offense to bow hunting, it's just harder to be "natural" at bow shooting)...guys that take out their rifle and put a few shots on a page at 25yrds, "yep, dead on at 25 is dead on at 100", and then go afield, or guys that leave their bow in the closet until the first day of season.

What you're thinking of is something else, it's not hunting. Guys that just walk out into the woods and let lead fly, from ANY action type, aren't hunters, regardless of whether they bought tags or wore orange, or if season is in or not, of they've got permission to be out there. They may not be honest to God poachers, but they're only not so by the letter of the law, not the intent. But, they aren't hunters. A hunter can ethically kill a deer with virtually any weapon, which is why I feel confident taking a .357mag pistol, or a 9mm carbine afield, I know the capabilities of the round, and I can virtually assure proper bullet placement.

If you banned hunting with semiauto's because guys are out there flinging lead at anything that moves, you'll just see an increase in levergun and pump gun sales...and when you've banned those, you'll still see wounded deer by guys that are just walking out with single shots and winging shots off at deer.

In general function, there is no difference between a SKS and a BAR or 7400, chamber the 7400 in a .30-30 and you've basically got an SKS...they all fire a bullet and automatically load the next round...the difference is in your head, just because you think of the SKS as an assault rifle, and remingtons as hunting rifles.

It's not the guns, it's the people shooting them. Taking away the guns isn't going to stop these so called hunters from being unethical.


I pose these questions: Why is the BAR or 7400 so much more acceptable than an SKS? The only difference is the cartridges? Would a Ruger M77 in 7.62x39mm be ethical then? And how do you feel about the Winchester 94? Why is a leveraction in .30-30, which is basically equivalent in FIRE RATE, POWER, AND ACCURACY acceptable when the SKS isn't?

If it's the fire rate that concerns you, then you can't prefer the BAR, 7400, or Ruger Deerfield, if it's the cartridge, then the .30-30 and the Ruger bolt gun aren't ethical in your eyes either...If it's the accuracy, then you've got to shoot my rifles before you comment on my ethics.

Be honest with yourself, you've fallen for the whole "assault rifle" hype and haven't figured out why yet.

I guess it is just my frustration with poor sportsman... I would venture a guess that most people whom hunt with SKS's are typically the ones who are taking ill-advised shots. They are using a gun that is basically meant for as you put it spraying in praying. People whom have invested the money into a remington 7400 or Browning BAR are typically hunters whom will not take such shots. Granted these are stereotypes, but if the shoe fits... Also I have seen very few scoped SKS's out there, not many 7400 and BAR's with open sights.

Basically people are trying to retrofit millitary guns into hunting guns... They were meant for different purposes. Now taking a mauser action and overall reworking it is completely differet. taking a stock SKS out and using it as a deer rifle just doesn't make sense. I was completely unaware that the 9mm and 357 are in the same class... I thought a 38 special delivered more than a 9mm, I could be wrong, but are you trying to tell me that a 357 Magnum and a 9mm are the same??? I have a hard time beleiving that to be true. Not really the point here I guess. I would make an argument that the .357 is the absolute minimum handgun cartridge to use for deer, I personally wouldn't hunt with anything under a .44 mag.

I agree with Newguy...I wouldn't hunt deer or the same sized game with a handgun load less than .44 magnum. I prefer my FN Mauser 30-06 though :]]

No, the 9mm and the .357mag aren't in the same class, but the 9mm+P+ from a 16.5" carbine bbl IS about on par with a .357mag from a 5.5" revolver bbl...Both of which I have had one shot stops on deer with, I might add. But, that isn't really the topic at hand.

Rifles are rifles, just because something is issued with killing people in mind doesn't mean it isn't effective at killing game...you won't tell me that a Garand isn't a good choice for deer hunting because it was designed to kill people (although it is a poor choice since it WEIGHS so stinkin much), when it throws a .30-06 round accurately to 600yrds with the open sights.

Guns don't kill, and they don't make people kill...on the same coin, guns don't take bad shots, nor do they make people take bad shots.

I've got a whole drawer full of silverware, but I'm not fat, because I know not to misuse my tools.

Nomercy: "It's not the guns, it's the people shooting them. Taking away the guns isn't going to stop these so called hunters from being unethical."

I'm glad to see you refer to them as "so called hunters", but I think maybe Pennsylvania
has it right - they don't allow semi-autos for hunting.
I'm not advocating the ban or confiscation of semi-auto firearms - of any type. But I don't see them as appropriate for hunting. Yes, they can be used for hunting, but are
they appropriate. And there's just too many "hunters" out there that will shoot at
anything - movement, sound, or what they think may be a part of a deer. Putting a high-cap. semi in their hands is just plain dangerous. It's like giving an indy race car to someone who just got their drivers license - it's asking for an accident to happen.

And, I too have been in the woods when some "hunter" starts cranking off shots with an
SKS. It ain't no fun being in the same area. I'm just thankful to the Lord that this idiot
probably can't hit what he's aiming at (hey, it's why they shoot off 10+ rds.), and praying (as I'm kissing the ground) that I'm not anywhere in his line of fire.[:@]
I then leave the woods - before I forget what it is I'm supposed to be "hunting".

Nomercy, I agree with a lot of what you are saying. I do not care what type of gun anyone uses. After all, just about all of the guns we use today, were at one time or another, "military weapons!"
I very much dislike a few calibers that some people call "deer calibers" though! My biggest peeve is when a new hunter asks for opinions on a deer gun and caliber, and someone here tells them to get some caliber like the .22 centerfires or the 7.62X39, with the inherent, 3 dollar a box ammo!
When we do that, we do them a huge dis-service, by not taking into account that their skills may, or may not, (probably not) be up to the level that is needed for hunting with these calibers! Not to mention that the respect big game animals deserve, and the ethics of hunting in general, require that we use the best reasonable guns, calibers, and bullets available, to make quick, and humane kills!

Folks, I can't add much to this discussion. I am 47 now and I find that my tastes in many things, firearms in particular, have changed since I was in my 20s. I don't own an SKS now and ABSOLUTELY would not own one to HUNT with; however, much of my outlook on life is because I now am a well paid manager in middle age whom the Good Lord has blessed with good fortune and opportunity, as opposed to a struggling young man of more modest means. An SKS CAN be used for a variety of tasks, such as hunting, plinking, self defense and so on. I remember a day when I didn't have an extra 20 bucks, and if a guy of modest means, or whose tastes differ from mine, wants an affordable rifle to do a variety of tasks so that he can hunt deer, punch paper, feel safe in his home and do whatever, then power to him!

All I recommend, is that anyone who wants to be a humane and ethical hunter, knows his or her own limitations, knows their weapon, and confine their shots to ethical ones.

Maine has a better answer than a ban on semi autos ..... a limit of 5 rounds in the mag and the mag has to be permently altered if it had a capacity of more than 5 rounds to be 5. This does not apply to .22 rimfire or handguns.

IMHO anyone with a mag holding 20 rounds needs to practice more before going into the woods. SKS or whatever.