The 223 has proven to be a reliable deer killer when used with deer bullets. Many who have seen failures were using bullets designed for varmits. On deer, it is at least as effective as a 30-30 at reasonable ranges. but not on game larger than being proposed in Wyoming. It is not a long range chambering either. With most chamberings you will probably run out of useable range before you run out of energy to kill game with. With the 223 it is easy to make hits at ranges where you no longer have the energy to make a clean kill. This seems like a fair compromise. I never could understand why a 243 would be legal for a 1500 lb. moose, and a 223 not legal for a 200 lb. deer.
There are in fact very few places where the 223 was not legal. Last time I looked there were about 38 states where it was legal. More than 1/2 of the 12 where it was not legal were shotgun only.
Most the 1/2 dozen or less states where rifles are legal, and the 223 was not did so because of larger game being hunted, such as in Wyoming. While it is a fine deer chambering, it is not a moose or elk round.
I like the idea. But I'd like to see them put a minium bullet weight.
I agree, but such a law is unenforceable in the field. GA used to have a lot of complex laws on what was legal and not legal. All the wardens just shook their heads, how were they supposed to verify that a 357 mag revolver had 500 ft lbs of energy @100 yards. And why did it matter if the hunter never intended to shoot past 25 yards. They finally dropped all those unenforceable laws and leave good judgement up to hunters. To my knowledge there have been no problems.