.30 carbine for white tail deer... why not?

[Gunplummer]

Any deer hit near the spine is probably going to go down. When I was younger I was talking to a guy I met in the woods during deer season. The set up he had looked pretty expensive to me and he said it was a 6MM. I asked him if he thought it was enough with those light bullets. He then preceded to tell how this gun "Blew the front leg right off a doe last year". He did not get that deer. My Ex's father used to carry a .357 along as "A finisher" until I talked him into getting rid of that ridiculously under powered, inaccurate .35 Remington and lent him a sporter 7.7 Arisaka. He then started to literally "Knock them down". True story. Maybe it is a confidence thing?

[22-rimfire]

Limit your shooting distances to archery range and you're probably okay. Personally, I don't know why anyone would choose to hunt deer with this caliber unless it's all you have.

[Will-j]

"Personally, I don't know why anyone would choose to hunt deer with this caliber...."

22-rimfire: It doesn't necessarily need to be a case of whether it's "All one has" or not. There are many reasons why; Shoulder/torso injury(ies) where recoil becomes intolerable... for one.

For whatever reason someone chooses, it's not up to anyone else to question why as long as the caliber/firearm meets the legal requirements for the area hunted, and the person with the equipment is using it capably.

The .30 Carbine was designed as a weapon of war against the human animal and was used effectively to that end. As such, any caliber which will kill a human will also kill a deer, as stated above: [As long as it meets all legal requirements]. All this "Heavy-hitting, large caliber-high-velocity cartridge- needs-to-be-used-or-it-won't-work syndrome" commonly referred to as, [Macho Magnum-itis] crap is unwarranted.

If anyone does not understand something so simple as that...Then no amount of explaining will ever make them see or understand how it is. Not now- Not ever.

Truth be told...The [lowly] .22 rimfire (NO Pun Intended) cartridge, both LR and Magnum versions have taken/killed more deer-sized game than could ever be comprehended. Perhaps not as quickly as some would argue the larger, more powerful calibers would/could have, but dead is dead no matter how it's looked at.

This .30 Carbine issue can be hashed/rehashed indefinitely ad hominem
and perhaps never be resolved. Maybe it's time to put it to rest. If not the Carbine argument, then some/any other cartridges downloaded to low velocities and which may be as effective as the carbine in their own right, but, the argument will persist....As long as there are at least two differing opinions.

WILL.

STAFF; MODERATORS....Any input?

[Ibmikey]

Will, Boy did you tell it like it is, maybe this will finally be put to rest but after reading some of the rebuttals----I seriously doubt it. Thanks for your response.

[MJN77]

maybe this will finally be put to rest but after reading some of the rebuttals----I seriously doubt it.

It won't. When I was a kid, the old .30-30 was the most common deer cartridge around. Now, I hear people say that the .30-30 is "too weak" to kill a deer humanely. In the last twenty years, I have killed over a dozen deer. All but a few of them with either a .30-30 or it's older "weaker" brother the .44-40, both from lever rifles. All of them were shot within 100 yards, not one of them ran more than 10-15 yards and I never lost any of them. Deer are not armor plated. They will die fairly quickly when shot in the right place. The only two deer I have ever tracked were both shot with a .30-06. One was the first deer I ever shot. I was 13 and I blew the shot. The big doe went about 100 yards in a big circle before dropping. The other was a buck shot by my cousin. At the scene of the shooting was a pool of bright pink, foamy blood, a couple pieces of bone and a chunk of "meat". After tracking that deer for almost a mile, the blood trail stopped and we never did find it. The fact is, when used within it's effective range, and the shooter does his part to place the round where it needs to go, the .30 carbine will kill a deer quickly and humanely. Not every deer rifle has to be a "magnum"-something. People killed and recovered plenty of game before "magnums" came about, and plenty of folk still wound and lose game since "magnums" have been around. More power doesn't make up for poor marksmanship.

And as dahermit asked earlier,

What are those "marginal calibers" and how have you determined them to be so?

[22-rimfire]

Will-J, I think I covered things adequately with my limitation to archery ranges. When someone is planning on using the 30 Carbine for deer hunting, I automatically think they are using a carbine and not a handgun like the blackhawk chambered in 30 carbine.

You can't necessarily use the game laws any more to define ethical caliber choices as in my state, it is legal to use a 25 acp to hunt deer. Do you think that is a reasonable choice for deer hunting?

[Rondog]

OK, I gotta post these photos.

These aren't deer obviously, but that sure looks like an M1 Carbine to me! Looks like an old photo, so I'd bet they were shot with military FMJ ammo, and I doubt either was a one-shot kill. But still - brown bears, M1 Carbine.....

And there's these rounds, made for hunting deer. Those are all-copper Barnes 30800 X-bullets in there. I've got some of the bullets, not the loaded ammo, to make my own ammo. When I ordered them from Barnes I was told they made those just for deer hunting. I'm figuring deer and spooks. Or anything else in the way.

What the.....Photobucket IMG links don't work here??? Let's try attaching them.....

[Will-j]

.22-RF:
I think I understand (at least I try) where/how others feel about certain areas of ethics when it comes to those areas to which we restrict ourselves, and fully agree with those who counter my opinions on certain matters as I feel I have the prerogative to do the same.

Whether [or not] it is right (legally, morally, ethically, or in any other sense) to use a certain [take your pick] weapon, caliber, weight or type of, or
number of projectile(s), should not be deemed inappropriate by any one person as to [that] use by anyone else, regardless, unless all the facts and circumstances are fully known and understood by all. In short; What may be completely adequate for one person, given certain circumstances, may, or may not, be adequate for someone else who elects to use that same [equipment] under other circumstances.

While stationed at Ft. Benning in the '70s I was asked (and honored, so I thought at that time) to hunt with some Bn. NCOs. However, during that hunt, I saw some things which were not (to my mind) ethical. Keep in mind, these were "Country Boys" who were from the surrounding area who were used to [civilian] regs. and threw Post regs. to the wind, (.30-30 barrels on H&R Topper actions in shotgun-only areas--with shotgun barrels on-hand if approached by Post Wardens; Buckshot, (illegal on Post) instead of slugs, and a few other things which didn't go over too well with me at the time... (stretching and/or outright violation of Post and Georgia Regulations).

Since these were Staff or Bn. NCOs, and I was just a Jr. NCO at the time, I kept these things to myself but never went hunting with any of them again. I always found some reason/excuse to not be available. Should I have reported them? Perhaps. But given the circumstances and the military's stance on accusations brought on higher-ups by lower ranking personnel, as much as it galled me to stifle my disgust with the events, I let it ride and went on with other matters of importance. I did hear sometime later (a couple years). that they (most of them, anyway) were caught and dealt with; Both military and state (Alabama). I later found that one of the men was family to the girl I was dating at the time. However...I digress.

What I am trying to say is....Unless you know, factually, that any setup being used by someone....anyone, is not being used properly, then it is NOT in the best interest of things to make assumptions as to whether or not the use of said setup is adequate according to the parameters in which it is being used, or by the experience/expertise of the person using it.

What works for you, regardless of what it is, may not... [Not]... work for someone else, and vice versa. THAT is my view on things.

WILL.

[Will-j]

.22-RF;
I think the .25 Auto might...MIGHT..be adequate for dispatching a wounded animal ..IF.. a shot (or two) to the head from close (read that *near-contact* distance) range is/are made. I abhor the phrase "Point-blank"; Too general...and all-too-often misused.
And, PLEASE, for all you readers/posters out there; Let's not open this up to a [How many people have been killed by .25 Autos] issue. It will be totally irrelevant.

Have a good day.

WILL.

[Will-j]

RON;
In a way, I am glad your post came in before mine to .22-RF. The pics illustrate my comment exactly, in reference to the [parameters] of equipment used, and by those experienced in its use, and capabilities.

Good job!

WILL.

[Gunplummer]

Now if someone could define "Archery Range" in the ethical sense....

[Creek Henry]

30 yards for barebow, 50-60 for a strong recurve

But it strongly depends on the archer. If you practice a great deal and have a great rig, you will know your limits. It is the sub par or not well practiced archer that don't.

For the 30 carbine... Personally I'd limit shots on deer to about 100 yards. I just don't see it as a suitable round at longer ranges. That really wasn't what it was designed for.

[Gunplummer]

That is all I ever bowhunted with. Sounds unethical to me. I know for a fact a deer can hear the arrow coming, and most react to it. Feathers are the worst. But hey, do what you want if it works for you. I constantly get flack for shooting a rifle at at moving deer or taking head shots.

[Art Eatman]

Purely opinion: I regard cartridges of the power level of the Carbine as marginal. That is, for all that I strive for precision in my shooting of Bambi, that need is more critical in what I regard as a lesser cartridge.

A somewhat bad hit on a deer with my '06 can still either anchor him or put him down for a second shot. (I've had that happen, twice.) With a marginal cartridge, he might move into brush and then run and escape, possibly to die unfound.

Sure, a marginal cartridge will kill Bambi, but it has limitations which I don't want to deal with.

I figure that if deer hunting is a really important deal and all I have is a Carbine? I'll sell that sucker, buy a good-used scoped bolt action and still have enough money left over to buy Ol' Mama a new dress, shoes, and a lobster dinner.

[Gunplummer]

Lobster! I have often wondered who the first guy was that looked in the water and said "Hey, I think I'll eat that big bug lookin' thing over there."

[Art Eatman]

Lobster? Naw, ya gotta respect the bravery of the first guy to eat a raw oyster.

Can we put all this to bed? The subject will be as the Phoenix, sure to rise again.

[TimSr]

Now, I hear people say that the .30-30 is "too weak" to kill a deer humanely.

Really? While it may be helpful in ridiculing those who question the 30 carbine, I do not believe your claim that people who question the 30 carbine are saying this.


For that matter, this whole thread can be summed in the same manner.

Almost nobody would object to anybody hunting with anything, provided they can consistantly make clean kills without routinely sending game off in the thickets to die uncrecovered, and have no doubts there are a few hunters out there who are good enough to do exactly that with about anything.

I simply do not believe the claims of most of the people advocating using low power rounds, that everything they shoot is quickly and humanely killed and gets recovered before running a mile to die and become scavenger food. If somebody is killing 3 or 4 deer in order to recover and take home one, it IS my business and I DO have right to voice my objections. Sorry, but I've seen too many of those guys to believe they are the rare exception. All the theoretical discussions don't change that, and the foolish comparisons to how far a human can run with a bullet through his lungs compared to a human, based on body weight is strictly egghead theory and not reality to anybody.

The simple fact remains. Unless you know exactly how many animals where shot and never recovered, to compare the success stories to, with a given caliber, you are left to your own beliefs which are better based on experience than ballistic theory.

I don't care what anybody hunts with, but if they have one deer tag, and for whatever reason, their hunt results in more than one dead deer to fill that tag, every other hunter has a right to be concerned. It does, and will happen to the best sooner or later, but it should not be routinely built into your expectations just because you want to kill a deer with a XXXX to prove it can be done. If you might have to shoot a few before you recover one, because your skills aren't adequate to compensate for its limitations or your over abundance of arrogance to admit that it has them, or an ignorance of exactly what those limitations are, that caliber is MARGINAL for you.

[t4terrific]

Originally Posted by Gunplummer

Just a personal observation from the deer woods, but I would bet the 30-30 has hit and lost more game than the .30 carbine ever did. Shotguns probably second on the list.

The 30-30 killed more deer last year than the .30 Carbine ever has.

[Art Eatman]

Looks like we're pretty much running in circles, now. Not much point to that.