farmerj wrote:so what makes a 338 win mag more ethical than a .223?
Shipyard wrote:no kidding. that guy gets banned from here more than i quit this place
Shipyard wrote:farmerj wrote:so what makes a 338 win mag more ethical than a .223?
the person behind it
plblark wrote:Buddy and I dragged out a gut shot der that someone else shot last year. There was no bullet but LOTS of fragments inside.
yukonjasper wrote:All it takes to be cured of not taking the time to sight in a rifle or shooting an inadequate round at an improper distance is having to spend hours tracking a wounded deer over hill and dale through swamps and across rivers.
I wonder if some of the hunters today take the time and spend the energy to track deer. I know that over the last few years we have had 2 deer killed on the property that had been shot already. We didn't dig out the round that was originally shot - probably should have. One of those was in pretty bad shape and seemed like it should have been a deer that would have been tracked by a hunter. In both cases, no hunter showed up. Luckily it was a year when we had an intensive harvest, so it was just another tag to fill, but would have sucked it that was your deer - limping out of the woods, half dead already.
I agree that if you choose a smaller caliber, you had better be confident of your marksmenship skills and be damned sure you know the limits of the caliber.
AutomaticAron wrote:Thanks to everyone for the assistance. My shooting experience is pretty much relegated to plinking and range duty so anything beyond Tula, Wolf, and PMC Bronze is unfamiliar to me. I grabbed a box of 62 grain Fusion soft points today so I'll see how that works out.
xracer390 wrote:forcefed wrote:
.223 is plenty to take down a whitetail.
but not .25 out of a pistol.......
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests