Its not the cartridge, its the shooter

[bigandrich44]

I got something to add to this. I was 9 years old, with a Remington 700 ADL youth in .243. I shot a buck that was facing away from me at 250 yards. Ran 10 feet, then dropped like a rock. Hit him square in the heart. he was facing like this= / Hard shot? Yes. Did I make it? Yes. Pwned

[lefty o]

the fact is BRG3 has never killed an animal- he has shot at them as i recall. maybe he'll clarify that.
and no there is no margin for error, where did you see me say that?

guess what frozentorso, you sit here and admonish me for belitlling others, yet you've done it to me- "otherwise you make yourself look like a clown" ,yet you say you dont do it to others. apparently when others do it its not allright, but when you do it, your not really doing it!

[bigandrich44]

There is no margin of error if your hunting something like grizzly bear, elephant, wildebeet, Cape Buffalo, etc.

[Elkhound]

Nice to know hunters all around the world debate this issue and it's not just a Canadian arguement

I think bullet construction and placement is more important than bullet size any day. !!!!, I know an experienced hunter who took a moose of opportunity at 70yrds with a 22-250 last week. While it is not something I would go out and do, he dropped it with one shot and it made no more than 3 steps. Cannot argue that it does not work. So a well constructed bullet and placement is more important. Wound a game animal with a poorly placed .375 and it's still wounded.

[lefty o]

no , its not just a canadian thing. and maybe i get a little passionate about how i believe it should be, but like i said "its more about the shooter than the cartridge" no matter how hard everybody twists, turns and tries to manipulate what i say.

[Elkhound]

Originally Posted by lefty o

no , its not just a canadian thing. and maybe i get a little passionate about how i believe it should be, but like i said "its more about the shooter than the cartridge" no matter how hard everybody twists, turns and tries to manipulate what i say.

I agree. It's all about the shooter's shot placement as my example above with the moose

[frozentorso]

You are right, and I owe you an apology. I usually let my replies sit for awhile to make sure I'm not being emotional. I guess I just got worked up over your reply to BRG3(whom I'm sure would no doubt have as much compassion for prey as you and I and seems to have a major clue). Maybe if we re-frame your thread, we can straighten things out between us. I admire your passion for wanting all prey to die quickly. If you simply meant no hunter should ever take an iffy shot, I vote MAN LAW! I could'nt agree more. I think where we differ is 'margin of error'. BRG3 and I simply look at it logicaly, physically when we say there is a margin of error. I can only speak for myself, and probably you, when I say if there is a margin of error it will be outside of our control. Am I close?
Now I'm going to Cabellas for an elk sandwich!

[lefty o]

your close. dont worry about it. now i have taken some tiny shots at BRG3, but its because he kinda fits in the category of giving advice without the benefit of experience, and that irritates me. though in time im sure he'll learn to be a good hunter. MAN LAW could definately be applied here " dont take the shot, if you can't make the shot".

[BattleRifleG3]

And you know what about my hunting experience?

[BattleRifleG3]

So a good deal of this is based on what one presumes they know about my hunting experience?

Yes I have killed animals. Yes it has been with a single shot. I have waited to take shots confidently while others have shot without such confidence. I have seen good judgement prevailed over by bad judgement and the result was a wounded animal that was eventually found, hours later, warm, and gut shot with lots of meat damage and a pretty foul smell. I had the honor of dragging it up a hill while its shooter revisited the same excitement that made them miss in the first place (on top of having a poorly set up rifle.)

I'm saying you need to practice and identify how accurate you are capable of being under given conditions. Use that data, and yes it is data, it's a number, to measure, by estimation, or you could hate the word estimation and call it "your best judgement", to determine whether you can confidently hit what you consider to be the necessary humane kill zone.

You call it "the size of a softball", I call it "four inches" and you call me a nerd.

[BattleRifleG3]

Oh yes, and sorry for telling newbies who ask what a good deer rifle would be that the 30-06 is a good choice. That's such a crazy fringe textbook opinion, and no good deer hunter uses the 30-06. I've of course also told them that this magical 30-06 will hit any deer they shoot at, so they don't need to practice.

[lefty o]

so you've been deer hunting since last year? i'll bet we can go back to some old posts from last year that you said was your first year of hunting, and you did not kill, but had fired shots. am i incorrect? never called you a nerd though, i have definately implied your a rookie with little experience! maybe im wrong, wouldnt be the first time, but after a few years of hanging around here, i get this impression about you on more subjects than just hunting.

[BattleRifleG3]

Here's a question - is a person who's been doing something for a single digit number of years but has been very earnest in learning and developing his skill and understanding the rookie, or a person who has been doing something carelessly for decades?

I don't mean to apply either description to either of us. I mean to assert that there's a big difference between quality and quantity of time spent learning something. There's also the fact that, like it or not, there are certain technical realities that make all the difference in a hunting situation and some people scoff their nose at them and decide to learn from excessive experience while ignoring the universal rules that explain those experiences.

And more to the point, as to why you decided to target me here, i'll pose a question - take a look at some of the advice I've given and you tell me if it has been bad advice. Frankly I don't care how long someone has been doing something - what matters is whether they're doing something right. Some people learn quickly, some people never learn. Age and experience only matter when you make use of them, and some people are able to make a relatively small amount go a very long way. I wouldn't call mine small at all, except that there are many people who have had the opportunity to have much more. Those who have made that opportunity count have my respect and attention.

My advice has been to choose a rifle of about medium power, ie 30-06 give or take, choose an optic with which you are comfortable, and practice until you are confident of where your shots will land at a given range. Learn enough about ballistics so that you have some idea of what the bullet will be doing and where it will be. But most of all I have never labeled anything I say as comprehansive advice. What I post is my contribution, and what others post is theirs, and I think you'll be hard pressed to find a case where I have been as disrespectful to the earnest contributions of others as you have been to me.

And to come from another angle, for you to say there is no room for error implies getting something right the first time. In that case, I don't see why you care at all how long someone has been hunting, since if they go by your advice, they shouldn't shoot an animal at all when they have any room for improvement. I don't entirely disagree, ie I believe that one should only take a shot where they know that the bullet will end up where it belongs. I believe that as the shooter's ability improves he will find more shots that he knows he will be able to take.

[lefty o]

you are correct that a person thats done it once, can be better than a long term slob hunter. you became a target when you stepped in and tried to be technical and question my methods/meanings, when by mean of your previous postings i know that you have very, very limited experience as a hunter. if you'll re-read my very first post in this thread, i pretty well spelled out what i think of unlearned advice by gunwriters, and rookies. like i said earlier in this thread, my thread my rant. its about my opinions, and i'll defend my opinions- if for no other reason than they are mine. unless somebody proves me dead wrong they are still my opinions. i appologize for making you a direct target, but i still believe my assumptions (yes ,dangerous) to be correct.
if this thread serves no ther purpose than to let some other newby's/rookies know how important a good shot is, than it has served its purpose.

[lefty o]

to comment on your last paragraph. as to a newby taking or not taking shots based on their "lack" of skills. i think if you'll look back at many previous posts that i always recommend to first time hunters to keep their shots close- 100yds or less. and my opinion is that most hunters in the woods dont have what it takes to make good shots at over 100yds, despite their experience level. i particularily think that rookies should keep their shots close for a couple of seasons until they learn how to control their emotions/excitement/buck fever (pick whichever you feel applies) until after the trigger is pulled. this is one of those things that come with experience, even though some can never get control of it. maybe this will help clear up a little of why i pick on rookies.

[jerry]

Is this what you guys are cussing and discussing? LOL

YouTube - if u miss a deer three times, quit hunting

[BattleRifleG3]

Words are like bullets - shoot them off irresponsibly and they'll do damage you wouldn't expect, and they're not so easy to pull back.

[frozentorso]

Sometimes we type words onto a computer screen that we would never say in a room full of people. Aaahhhhhh, the computer age.

How about that Eli Manning?

[frozentorso]

And it would be wise to be nice to BRG3. Anyone with half man/ half horse body could really kick your butt, and there's no way you could run away fom him.
Just kidding.

[Gio]

Let'm duke it out frozen.