AmateurHunter44857

Actually he bought them at a local sporting goods store called Dunhams Discount Sports. He buys these rounds imported from russia that are wrapped in like a cardboard paper. There were 3 packages in the 50 or packages of 7.62 rounds. He couldn't believe they had them over the counter. I have a feeling it was a mistake but they were available for purchase. so he bought them. Thanks for the the answer and not a bunch of crap about being stupid and asking a dumb question like some on here are

timbercruiser

I know a guy that is talking about using his .17 on a deer.

RugerM77.270

The .223 will kill a deer fast. So will a .22 LR but we all agree not to shoot deer with a .22 don't we. We all need to see that one day we will flinch, our scope got bumped off somehow with out us knowing, the bullet will deflect, or the deer will move at the last instant and we will need some extra insurance that a larger caliber gives us. You never control all the variables when you drive so you get insurance. You never control all the variables when you hunt so get some insurance.

cjwink

I don't see bigger caliber's as insurance. To me, bullet performance is way more important than bullet size.

Tuco

The .223 or 5.56mm has killed many man sized targets around the world and with the right bullet and placement will kill any deer on the planet.

Splitear_Leland

I shot a deer with a spitwad once. I hit him perfectly, right behind the shoulder. He only made it 2-3 years, killed him deader than a hammer. I was shooting a 39 grain wad with approximatly 80 grains of spit, out of a 10" McDonald's straw. Since then I have killed many deer with that straw.

glockman55

Ok if he bought them from Dunhams then they are just full meatal jacket not armor piercing. same effect on Deer, No Good.

okgobbler

Here's my take on the subject. You could frame a house with a tack hammer. The tack hammer would drive the nails, but it would take more time and more hits and more precise hits on each nail. A framing hammer or a nail gun would be much more efficient. Tack hammers work great for hanging pictures, repairing the dog house, and maybe occasionally driving a nail. .223's are great for plinking, good for varmints, and in a pinch occasionally alright for deer if the conditions are right. If you are going to be a carpenter, get get the correct woodworking tools, if your going to be a hunter use the correct tool for the job.

okgobbler

In the long run, the gun or bow itself is probably the least expensive part of hunting. license, tags, ammo, four-wheeler, stands, camo, scope, lease, camping supplies. A gun or bow will still work fine in 10+ years. All of these things must be replaced or bought every year or so. Some more some less, but you get the point. Save up $300-$400 andget a gunthatis for deer size game.

isatarak

The Mini-14 I am talking about cost more than my Model 700 Remington .270 by quite a bit. I don't know what made you think it's an issue of going "cheap". It's really about shot placement. I would'nt try a 200 yard shot with a .223, but 50 to 100 yards it is fine. Some shooters want something with not much recoil. I read guys talking about shooting deer with a bow at 50 yards. I would like my chances with a .223 a whole lot better than an arrow at 50 yards. Sure, the larger the caliber the more killing power. Everyone knows that. If you haven't dressed a deer shot by a .223 you don't have any idea what kind of damage they do.