View Full Version : smashed head syndrome (300magitis) Very Graphic

December 29, 2005, 09:24 PM

16545may be the attached photos worked. probably not. doe, and a buck . ouchie!!

December 29, 2005, 09:33 PM
Um, wow.

December 29, 2005, 09:53 PM
16546Thank you Armalite, for blessing me with this stick with great killing power.

Art Eatman
December 30, 2005, 07:38 AM
Sure doesn't waste a lot of meat...

Thing is, some folks like brains and eggs for breakfast.


December 30, 2005, 08:16 AM
I came from Wisconsin and CWD was all over the Madison area. I hunted Marquette County. We avoided the brains like the plague.

December 30, 2005, 08:20 AM
How far did they run?


December 30, 2005, 08:38 AM
seems like an effective shot and will make for an interesting mount

December 30, 2005, 08:47 AM
bless you for being such an humane hunter

December 30, 2005, 09:28 AM
How far did it run? Probably did the little "last fire" leap and fell right there. I betcha it's last footprints are in the pictures.

Long Path
December 30, 2005, 10:42 AM
First, congratulations on a successfull harvest! Meat on the ground is meat in your freezer! :)


bless you for being such an humane hunter

I've said it before and I'll say it again: As a rule, I don't like head shots.

Yes, the rusults of a hit are spectacular. But.

That head moves up and down at the end of the neck like the head of a snake. Deer have some of their strongest muscles in their neck, to whip their head up from what they're browsing on, or to look around. Even if you're silent as a crypt, there may be some sound that the deer perceived, which makes him quickly move his head. If you're 100 yards away shooting a round that averages 3000 ft/sec, then it's going to take 1/10 of a second for that bullet to reach the deer, from muzzle to strike. Add in the reaction time of the hunter and you more than double that. Add in the locktime of the rifle (the least of the problems, but there nonetheless), and you've got plenty of time for a deer to whip its head a good foot or two before the shot. Such a distance isn't the problem-- 6 inches is. :( That's all it takes to knock the jaw off the deer, or put a bullet through the esophagous, or to just put a crease through the cranium. Such shots allow the deer to run off, to suffer a long, horrible death.

Have I shot a deer in the head? Yep. I was making a followup shot on a doe that had been shot at multiple times before, and the headshot on the retreating deer running through the dense scrub was a last-ditch method of retrieving the deer with the only shot I could see. But it wasn't my first choice.

If you want an instant "lights out" shot target, may I suggest the high shoulder shot? It almost always imparts shock to the spine by raking the underside of the spinal process if it's dead on or left or right. If it's high, it hits the middle or top of the spine. If it's low, it takes the lungs. If it's VERY low, it takes the heart. If it's forward, it takes the shoulders. Generally, the deer will drop in its tracks because of the raked spine.

I bring this up only to raise the consciousness of the other hunters here. I have many times heard hunters say that they take head shots because they want to be certain that the animal does not suffer. I believe that the highest percentage shot to guarantee that the animal doesn't suffer is to the body, and not the head.

December 30, 2005, 11:15 AM
Close head shots are no more difficult than a deeper body shot. It's not the type of shot, the type of gun or whether you prefer toilet paper under or over the roll......

It's knowing for certain you can make the shot pending any strange unforeseeable factors. That's the heart of good ethics.

December 30, 2005, 05:47 PM
+ with Longpath. the deer can move its head easily in the time it takes to make the shot ,close or far and then it will run like the wind long before you can take a second shot. Then it goes off to die in agony and/ or from starvation. I only ever use it as a cdg on an animal that is still just alive and needs a rapid despatch. I have hunting buddy who is a very good shot and he would say "Ive shot 30 + deer this way and never had a problem", my reply was it can and will happen you make a mess of it. sure enough a couple of trips later, he met me at the agreed place and said I have alost deer can you help look for it, Ive been looking for couple of hours now. I agreed and on the way he told me he had head shot it and it had gone down poleaxed, but a few seconds later it had jumped up and gone hell for leather into thick brush. we looked for nearly three hours and I was along way from where we started out from. I saw a deer in a bit of clear fell about 200yds away looked through the glasses and could see blood all down the head , neck and flank, so I got comfy on a tree stump and heart shot it with my 270. it ran a few yards and rolled over. I fired three quick shots ( inthe air so to speak) and about twenty minutes after my buddy showed up. We walked down to the deer and when we came up to it it had no bottom jaw just a mess of flesh and bone. It had obviously spent the last four hours in terrible agony and had we not found it gone on to die in about five days or so from starvation, maybe longer. No hunter worth his salt can want that and my buddy said as he looked at it, " you were right when you said it would happen one day, it was only fifty yards away and I was sure of it, but it must have lifted its head. Thats the last of head shots for me! " and five years on he hasn't made another.
The other thing which is perhaps less important is that, a head shot doesnt bleed out the carcase properly so the meat is nowhere near as good any way, unless you can hang it in a tree immediately and cut the jugular etc.
there is no meat in the mid chest anyway other than the heart, so you dont lose anything. Its very easy to get carried away with tricky shots and long range, whilst forgetting that we are shooting at a live animal which deserves a humane death and that the meat is used for eating. IMHO

roy reali
December 30, 2005, 06:17 PM
I realize that the majority of us are shooters. Many of us hunt too. Seeing the effects of bullets on game animals does not bother us.

What if a nonhunter, or a curious web surfer was viewing this website?

What if they came across one of our graphic blood and guts photo?

Many folks thing of hunters as barbarians. We don't need to give them ammo to use against us.

December 30, 2005, 07:11 PM
Well if they eat cows, they need to get used to it - cuz their meat meets the same fate, only probably less humanely. But point taken.

December 30, 2005, 07:21 PM
are you suggesting that because pictures like this may offend somone who happens to stumble upon TFL (or how ever they get here) we should not be allowed to post such pictures here?
I just want to be clear on your position.

edit: I did not necessarily mean "be allowed to" post pictures, but rather are we using bad judgement by doing so (in your opinion)

roy reali
December 30, 2005, 07:29 PM
I hunt, therefore I am aware of that blood and guts are part of the picture.

There are many nonhunters that are not anti-hunters. Those are the folks that we need to keep on our side. I do not believe graphic photos help with that.

Gene Hill wrote about the image we should portray to the public. If all nonhunters voted against us and our sport, we would be in trouble. Our public image needs to be a bit sanitized. I do not agree with that morally, but politically I do.

December 30, 2005, 07:32 PM
Good shooting. Having said that:

Long Path + 1 Nothing like finding somebody else's jaw-shot deer to ruin your hunt for the week.

molonlabe +1 Something to think about when you eat beef from CWD or mad cow areas (They kill beef cows with a bolt to the head. ) or eat a head-shot deer. There is good evidence that once the cranium is pierced there is leakage of CSF (brain fluid) down through the veinous sinuses and a siphon effect which contaminates the meat.

I once saw a man halfway though the process of dying of the human verson of this disease. It took him about 16 months and his brain literally rotted one tiny little bit at a time.

December 30, 2005, 08:09 PM
for those of you asking about range, they where both at 175 yards, those of you wondering about the mount, well, i dont need no stinking mounts. I firmly believe these where humane kills, ( obvioulsy) I spend lots and lots of time and ammo practicing, Shooting golf balls, shotgun shells, and grapes with my 300 mag. I know ( GRAPES??)uhm Look at an AR-30 from Armalite .Anyways, the animals went down immiedietly and only wiggled a little bit from nerves.I wont shoot until the shot is perfect. No running, or walking shots, and there aint no way a deer will flinch before that bullet will get there. ( Im very sneaky!!HEHEH) sound at 750 MPH, bullet at 3600 mph or there abouts, whatever 3200 FPS is. I have seen enough deer run off and wheeze and stumble over there guts enough after a vital shot with a 30-06. My father and I chased a deer 500 yards and caught him opnly after his guts or lung or something got caught in a barbed wire fence. I dislike that . Even if i did miss by a few inches ( GOD FORBID) and hit the jaw, the shock of a big fast bullet out of a 300 mag will knock a deer out cold , and he would bleed to death before he came too. The buck was shot from behind, giving me only a vital shot to the head, that is the prefered angle, or in front. Sorry about the graphic photos for any of you squemish hunters, My bad.

roy reali
December 30, 2005, 08:20 PM
I am not squemish at all. However, the image we present to the public is very important to the future of our sport. Hunting is a blood sport, but we should keep that part of it between us at campfires or at the local pub.

Surgery is a messy and bloody procedure. how would you feel if prior to an operation for you or a loved one the surgeon came out in bloody garments. When we speak to the surgeon before and after a procedure they are clean. Not a drop of blood on them. That is their public image. They assume that most of us can not accept the reality of their occupation.

I consider this site, like most websites, to be very public.

December 30, 2005, 08:42 PM
Not everyone is taking headshots. If you buy an Armalite AR30 the chances are you aren't just trying headshots without good load development. You also aren;t taking offhand shots with a rifle THAT heavy.

I've headshot a LOT of deer and never lost one. I do believe, however, that many, many hunters group their gun from the bench and never practice offhand. During season they are forced for an offhand shot and gut shoot the animal. I've seen 10x more gut shot losses from bad shots on the body than jaw shot deer (of which I've seen 2 in 25 years). So....unless we tag the caveat to practice offhand and KNOW your shot to every hunting thread as well as the dangers of wind drift and premium bullets that don't expand (which really tank you if you miss the vitals by a fraction) then I don't understand the hoo-ha about head shots.

December 31, 2005, 08:10 AM
Just try and out react your dog, you are not fast enough for that or any other animal, particularly wild ones. As Longpath has already said you only have to do the math to see that misses/wounding are inevitable eventually.
As for posting the pictures, what is the purpose? to prove you can head shoot deer, to show how much mess a 300 mag causes, or to try to impress somebody?
Who knows, it certainly appears to be pointless and as some have said less than wise to do. IMHO

December 31, 2005, 08:41 AM
I understand, and I do agree.
along these lines (and I dont mean to hijack) anyone catch the tred barta (sp?) hog hunt last night on OLN? He took a pig with a knife - a little grafic, i (as i bet most of you would be) was fine with it, but i can certainly understand how someone might be "offended"

December 31, 2005, 10:17 AM
Well, hunting is a graphic sport. After all, we do eviscerate the animals with our own two hands after shooting and I wager most of us have done it bare handed at one time. You can't avoid it and be a hunter. This is the hunting forum and the pics were linked and the warning delivered.....

It's hard to believe a gun forum/hunting forum would worry about being this PC. Although a head shot shows a lot of blood and trauma, it is rare to see offense to animals shot with arrows on TV all day long left to run and bleed out. Which pictorial shows a higher degree of sufferring to the viewer and which shows a higher degree to the prey?

I find the arguement akin to telling everyone that if I ever have to use my carry gun in self defense, I will make sure I try to shoot the gun out of my aggressor's hand before I try to shoot to "stop" (which is another little PC term than means "if he's not dead, he's folded"). Anyhow, it sounds nicer to the public and antigun folks, but it's not really the truth and hiding the truth is a lame way to defend the sport.

Wanna talk about reaction times? How many deer jump from the sound of an arrow release? A lot. At least bullets are faster than the sound of the shot in most cases and although our rection speed is not always as fast as animals our ability to process visual inputs is faster due to intelligence. Therefore, the caveat that perhaps no one should shoot a deer beyond 15-20 yards with a bow should apply? I think not. Should everyone use a rifle bigger than 30-06 and shoot for center of shoulder (to insure anchoring, but ruin meat)? Even the standard, hunting aimpoint of low and behind the front shoulder (heart shot) has a high margin of error if you pull 6 inches back and stay low. Variables happen..........

December 31, 2005, 09:07 PM
Armed, I don't doubt your excellent skills and markmanship.

The trouble with deer reflexes are that in the early AM and late evening they react not so much to sound but to muzzle flash, which moves at the speed of light.

roy reali
December 31, 2005, 11:29 PM
I am a person that does not loose sleep over being PC or not.

I hunt, therefore blood and guts do not bother me. If we met in a bar and you showed me a bunch of photos of your last hunt I would admire them. If some blood and gore were in the picture, big deal.

My wife's family is a left leaning bunch. However, she has no problem with my hunting activities. When she sees any of my harvest it ready for the frying pan. How smart would it be of me to drag a bloody carcass into my garage and ask my wife to come see it? I know it would bother her, therefore it might end up bothering my future hunting.

Showing graphic hunting images to the general public is unwise. Yes, it is political correctness. But politics does play a role in the future of our sport.

One more point. Did you note how this thread was titled? The author can use his imagination to introduce his topic. I just find it strange to have smashed head as an adjective of any hunting story.

Once again, it does not take much for some to paint us all with the same brush.

January 1, 2006, 01:43 AM
Politics does play a role in the sport. I just can't see sugar coating it because it makes it appear to the anti's that we're hiding something and it destroys our own credibility. It's like saying drunk driving is OK, as long as you don't appear drunk......

We simply need to defend out right to hunt on a stronger basis than to act like hunting is as sanitary as shooting clay pigeons.

roy reali
January 1, 2006, 03:12 AM
Us hunters are in the minority. There are folks that want to ban our sport no matter how we portray ourselves. These are usually the left wing whackos.

There are many people that do not have feelings either way. They do not hunt, but they do vote. The anti's and PETA folks will try to sway them with their propaganda. We do not need to help them.

If you think graphic details of our sport are harmless I have a suggestion.

Buy space on a billboard near a major highway. Plaster a graphic picture of dead animals with a smiling hunter included. In big letters write out your support of our sport. Something like, I'm a hunter and I am proud of what I do.

PETA will make you a poster child for their cause.

January 1, 2006, 06:14 AM
+1 on roy reali. There plenty of people eat a nice roast or a turkey etc but if they had to go down the yard and kill and dress it they would have a heart attack. They buy nice sanitised packages of meat from the supermarket and dont have to deal with the reality of hunt and kill then prepare to eat. So they would stop you in a heartbeat if they get enough of that sort of thing pushed in their faces. The fact is, we all in this forum have seen all this for real many times, wherever you shoot an animal it is graphic and messy. I personally always feel a little sad for any animal I shoot, it doesnt stop me shooting or spoil the pleasure of the hunt and a good shot with a clean kill, but I take no pleasure in making a mess of an animal and certainly dont feel the need to post it on an international forum read by many more than us. Time to be sensible and get on with hunting for the real reasons.

January 1, 2006, 10:35 AM
OH GOOD POINT MEEKAND MILD, never thought of the muzzle flash thing at 186000 miles a second.(wonder if i can get my mag to shoot that fast?) I have shot it at night and flames come out the side of the muzzle break three feet to either side. Its kinda neat. I had no idea starting this thread would Pixx so many people off or get them so rilled up. Those deer i shot make some good chili and fried steak. Yummy!

Long Path
January 1, 2006, 10:57 AM
This is an interesting pair of discussions-- are graphic hunting pics a detriment to our sport?, and is a headshot a bad idea as a regular practice?

I respect the way that everyone here has presented their ideas, and congratulate y'all on going about posting your thoughts in a reasonable manner.

Personally, I have little problem with the pictures of animals taken in an ethical manner. I have NO room for shots of animals with evidence of torture or less then ethical methods employed to take them. But that's certainly what we're talking about here. I'll admit that I've got enough Irish in me to be disinclined to sanitize my posts of pertinent content, just because PETA might be offended. Scroom. And frankly, on the face of it, armedtotheteeth's pics are proof positive that the animals did not suffer. Note also that he posted a warning in the thread title: "Very Graphic".
If someone read the thread title, then opened the thread, and read his post, and then clicked on the link, and were STILL shocked, well, they're beyond help.

The only thing I object to, is that the bullet traveled toward the most moblile part of the deer (in three dimensions) for about 1/5 of a second before it hit, from 175 yards. During that time, a deer's head can easily move enough to create a tragic wounding. Add human reaction time, and it begins to take a lot of the certainty out of a certain kill.

Ever blown a shot? I sure have. Just a tiny throw-off costs not only a perfect kill, but creates a terrible tragedy.

I'd rather take the higher percentage shot.

roy reali
January 1, 2006, 11:50 AM
I am certain that most of us have picked up a hunting magazine ot two. My favorite part of these publications are the photographs.

Have you noticed how blood free their photos are?

You can call the publishers of such magazines sell outs. They are, after all, trying to sanitize a blood sport for public consumption. Would you be happier if they published pictures as they actually would appear in the field?

As far as warning folks that something is going to be graphic is an invitation to look. This is espically true of children.

January 1, 2006, 01:58 PM
Would you be happier if they published pictures as they actually would appear in the field?


When I hunt, I am not going down to the corner store for Cheerios. It is not simply an excersize in food gathering. Hunting is in no way the cheapest or simplest method to get dinner on the table. I am, however, excersizing and honing my skills as a controlled predator. I respect my game and like the challenge. After around 18 years of shooting multiple deer per year, I started looking for more challenge in in using primitive firearms and taking carefully planned headshots for the past 7 years.

Btw, I think the muzzle flash argument is worth considering, but I find deer more spooked by sound or quick movement than flash. If you consider the flash and smoke from a flashpan and the subsequent delay in muzzleloader shooting, it wouldnt be safe to shoot past 25 yards if they were that spooky.

The anti's are out there. They are more likely to use the pic of the AR30 than the deer kill. First, PETA has done this before with the fur and livestock avenues and ends up looking like freaks. The AR30 itself is more menacing to the public and I can see the headline from the anti's now: "Hunter uses military sniper rifle to practice killings. This same weapon also comes in a .50 caliber (AR50) that can kill from a mile away and travel through engine blocks".

Uh,oh. Now we can't post pics of our rifles either unless we continually just show our wood stocked, iron sight weapons. The assault weapons ban came out of this exact thinking and the fact that the PUBLIC was not familiar with the weapons. Looking at the AR30 some Joe Schmoe will more likely say "oh, wow, that deer never had a chance with a gun like that!". Nevermind the AR30 is just a good free floated and braked .30 cal.

Hiding our sport is more likely to allow people to skew the public view on it.

roy reali
January 1, 2006, 04:10 PM
I am not saying that we hide our sport.

I am not saying that we pretend that our sport involved death and blood.

I just think that what we reveal to Joe Blow Public be reasonable.

January 1, 2006, 05:46 PM
I understand. I'm not asking for billboards, but to censor a gun forum and a hunting subforum is a bad idea. Yeah anyone can logon. Anyone can also log on to banged up dot com and see a lot worse. Don't blame the internet. Kids need supervision.....

I can't offer any of you a scientific study, but I can offer a good case example. Last year I shot a decent 8 point and brought pics into my office. The executive director hung an 8x11" glossy in the main lobby. This is a non-profit facility working with kids and families. After 13 months, not one person has complained. The deer's eyes are glazed, there is blood on the hide and horns and the only comment I've heard from a client was "Is that you with the deer?". Well...yes it is.


How can this be ok? Well, culture plays a large part and what we do and do not show as normal can play a lot in shaping a communities future viewpoint.

The local papers in PA also still show a lot of undoctored shots dead trophies every year. Schools still get days off in hunting season.... If it's accepted and understood it tends to be protected.

I'm glad to see armedtotheteeth using an AR to hunt with. It just goes to show you can hunt with a 15lb+ rifle with a brake the size of my fist. It would go a long way to protect gun rights if everyone hunted with evil black rifles and they were accepted as hunting tools by the public. As such, the right to own one would be better preserved.

Unfortunately, on several hunting style forums, it does not fit the status quo to use "magnum" calibers, use large optics, muzzle control devices, non bonded bullets or to make precision shots. I found the muzzle flash arguement interesting, but exactly how well recieved would a Remington Model 700 be with a Vortex or Phantom screwed on the muzzle? I mean...what could possibly be the down side? Yet, the status quo of the hunting community (largely influenced by the sanitized gun rags) would reject it in my opinion....effectively locking out and refucing to protect another effective feature that the anti's have focused on attacking (being one of the evil features in the Assault Weapons Ban).

With the stle of thought that there is only ONE way to hunt correctly and that includes only one style and/or a particular type of weapon, the firearms community has helped to dig it's own hole.

Which brings me back to one of my original posts....if you know as hunter that you can make the shot without any extraneous variables cropping up (which are part of fair chase), then take it with my blessing. That continues to be the heart of ethical hunting.

roy reali
January 1, 2006, 06:15 PM
Maybe our debate here is a regional thing.

As you may know, I live in California. I guess I feel I need to fly under the radar here. Less then 15 pecent of our population hunts here. With over thirty million people that is a mixed blessing. If more folks hunted, the few public areas would be even more crowded. But then we would have more political clout in Sacramento.

I still think our public image helps or hurts our cause in most areas.

January 2, 2006, 01:18 AM
To each their own. I'm not a fan of photographs like this, but I am an adult, and made the decision to do such. I am not offended, and will not lose any sleep over it.

But this is the part that concerns me the most:

Even if i did miss by a few inches ( GOD FORBID) and hit the jaw, the shock of a big fast bullet out of a 300 mag will knock a deer out cold , and he would bleed to death before he came too.

I'm not sure if you are serious or not. I hope not.

Where do you even start with a statement like that? Yikes!!!

Have you ever seen a deer with his jaw shot off?

I have, I'm the one who made the shot. I was going for a neck shot, and he moved and I botched the shot as well. He was not knocked cold, and did not bleed out from that wound. If he had not been shot again, he would have died of dehydration/starvation, not blood loss.

Luckily for me, another shot presented itself, and he didn't have to die a long miserable death.

However, this was not done with a big fast bullet out of a 300 mag, merely a 30'06, so YMMV.

I thought about that buck for a long time afterwards.



January 2, 2006, 01:32 AM
Where do you even start with a statement like that? Yikes!!!

Well I can't effectively defend every circumstance, but gut shots are just as bad. It happens. Going neck andf hitting the jaw is a pretty wide margin. At least as far as going for a heart shot and gut shooting. Assuming you were side shooting the animal and arced up and left/right that's a poor stroke by some of the posts here As I said before, practice is more important than the type of shot and the center shoulder shot is the only PC shoy by general opinion.

I can see the front sight lift on my 1911 in recoil and KNOW if the target moves. I wasn't able to do that without a lot of practice. Id have known if I had blown the shot or the animal had moved. I've seen dust fly off hide in the scope of my 7STW.... Honesty... most people blink.

I also have some pics of 160 gr Nosler Partitions that would have blown the head clean off with the right rifle in the jaw. Ever think that a 160 Partition wouldn't even get through the first shoulder of a whitetail? Think again. (yeah, I can post 'em).

January 2, 2006, 10:21 AM
Long Path, this discussion leads to another tangent, the question of copyright infringment.

Suppose a member posted a photo of a deer which had been killed quickly and humanely, but the picture was 'gross and icky' by the teenaged preppie girl standards by which antihunting organizations attract public attention. Then suppose the picture apears on the antihunting website.

How would the artist go about filing criminal copyright infringement charges on the hostiles who repost his picture? CAN he file charges? Can he sue?

Armed, no I don't think that you'd ever be able to beat the speed of light unless they ever come out with laser rifles. Deer detect motion so it is also possible that in bright light they might see your hand move to pull the trigger. (I think the muzzle flash is more obvious) This is one of the reasons I shoot for bigger parts. You won't mess up much meat shooting through the ribs just behind the front legs unless you eat deer lungs. :barf:

January 2, 2006, 10:32 AM
WHat a way to bust my bubble. Surely I can load about 140 - or 150 grains of IMR 4350 into a 300 mag case, i can get close to that 186000 miles a second. Ow wow!! 982,080,000 feet per second. That may take some better powder, and maybe a saboted bullet.:mad: May not have a place to hunt anymore if these damn fires dont get put out. Half of texas is burning.

January 2, 2006, 02:17 PM
An ethical hunter... 1. Is responsible, careful,considerate,capable and courteous. 2. Is mindful of the non-hunting public. 3.Properly tags and transports game appropriately. 4.Takes safe, considerate and non-offensive photos....Written laws tell us what we can and cannot do. Unwritten laws(ethics) tell us what we should and should not do. This ad is on page 53 of the texas parks and wildlife 2005-2006 annual. Number 4 I thought was strange to be put in there but I can see their point.

Long Path
January 2, 2006, 07:22 PM
Even if i did miss by a few inches ( GOD FORBID) and hit the jaw, the shock of a big fast bullet out of a 300 mag will knock a deer out cold , and he would bleed to death before he came too.
Wow. I had missed that the first time.
I've helped look for deer that other hunters have shot in the head that flopped over, then came to and ran off with a wound to the cranium. Bleeding to death from a shot-off jaw is NOT very likely. Also, with the hinged jaw, the shock imparted to the CNS is very likely not going to put the animal down.

January 2, 2006, 07:44 PM
That was worst case scenareo. A follow up shot would be there in an instant if needed. Never has been. I shoot them from behind anyhow, so hitting a jaw is out of the Question. All i usually see is that little sweet spot between their ears.

January 2, 2006, 10:06 PM
So......is it ethical to headshoot deer with my 7STW with 120gr Ballistic Tips? At 3750fps almost any contact will blow the head clean off.

Bonded bullets are poor for headshots. I've seen a lot more gut shot deer go unrecovered since the advent of hunting shows preaching the wonders of strictly controlled expansion. With the older bullets the large tissue disruption could often help if you had a paunch shot. With the Barnes X or Bondeds you get a hole a fifth of the size for an exit.

Here's a question. In the grand scheme of things, do you think more deer have been lost to botched headshots (ie jaw shots) than to botched shoulder shots (ie gutshots)? I just found one today while muzzleloading that had been shot too far back.

Know your shot. Your skills determine your placement.

January 2, 2006, 10:25 PM
Im beting far more have been lost to gut shots, seen many myself. I do bet the ones that where shot in the head where far more a disturbing site to see though. I last week saw one run for 400 hundred yards tripping over his guts, I guided a friend on a hunt. He shot him 8 inches behind the front shoulder. , but alas, I did not have my trusty Armalite. My friend had to kill him with my .45 , after we found him.
Softpoints work well. Just dont use Match ammo, not very nice. Almost zero expansion.
As Lycanthrope said, Know your shot. I would'nt even try a head shot if i couldnt hit a target the size of a tennis ball 10 out of 10 at 100 yards. Tennis balls are cool!!! AND no!, I dont shot my AR-30 offhand. That'd be dumb.

January 2, 2006, 11:55 PM

January 2, 2006, 11:56 PM
True CWD is rampant in a lot of states.