[Tallest]

I’m coming in a little late, but…

The way I see it, from the Original post and the majority of the debate, in this post and every other conversation in which it has come up, are coming from the wrong angle. Are the .223 and 22-250 capable? Sure, under the right conditions in the hands of the right shooter.

But why are we choosing them? We can debate the origins of their respective intentions, but it safe to say that neither cartridge was conceived with deer in mind. And sure, bullet technology has come light years, but that is only compensation, not optimization. Even in the hands of the best shooter who makes no mistakes, a larger bullet has a better chance of ending the life quickly.

So we’re using this round because we like it, then we want to apply that to our intended use. This is, for me, where the ethics come in. I have a lot of experience with both of these rifles, but I won’t use them for deer.

I generally hunt Virginia white tail, and I would classify them as medium on the white tail size scale. I know I can kill them with .223 of whatever bullet/cartridge combination has come out in the past decade with deer in mind. In the 150-200 yd range I have confidence in my shot placement. But I know I can kill them better, reduce fluke chances, and more ethically expedite their demise with a 6mm Rem, a .270, or a 30-06.

For me it is really important to handle it that way because I think the ethical hunt should trump gun preference. 22-250 and .223 are not ideal for deer hunting. Larger bullets are.

Of course, if it’s legal in your state to hunt with .224 center fire, you have to make the call for yourself when it comes to ethics. But I think it strains the argument to debate if these smaller cartridges are right for deer.