The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Hunt

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 14, 2015, 01:25 PM   #76
Theohazard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4runnerman
Snyper- A snipers job is to take the target out ( DEAD) not wound. Not sure where you get your info from. A wound is only if called for, but there main job is to kill the target.
He wasn't saying a sniper's goal was specifically to wound, he was saying that a sniper shot where the target is only wounded isn't a bad thing. Sure, it's better to kill the target, but a wounded enemy is still a good thing and is usually better than not taking the shot at all.

It's different with hunting: Merely wounding the target isn't considered a good thing, and it's usually considered better to not take a shot instead of risk it and end up wounding the animal.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."
Theohazard is offline  
Old March 14, 2015, 01:33 PM   #77
4runnerman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 16, 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,577
Theohazard- I agree. That is why I or you or many others here would take the shot. But to think no one else could is not right
__________________
NRA Certified RSO
NwCP- Performance Isn't Optional
4runnerman is offline  
Old March 14, 2015, 01:53 PM   #78
Theohazard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 19, 2012
Location: Western PA
Posts: 3,829
I don't think anyone is saying that no one could make the shot. What we're saying is that the practice itself is considered a bad one, regardless of the shooter's skill.

It's the same way with gun safety: I know that I'm safe enough and a good enough shot that I could get away with doing things like shoot a sign that my wife holds up or shoot with an insufficient backstop. But things like that go against the principles of established gun safety rules, so I won't do them.
__________________
0331: "Accuracy by volume."
Theohazard is offline  
Old March 14, 2015, 02:37 PM   #79
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,194
Quote:
This started out as a question and went to trash the shooter right away.

I think the reason it went to trash right away is most of us realize that anyone with the skill and knowledge to legitimately shoot at game at 1000 yards is not going to do it with an off the shelf semi-auto .308. I wonder why the guy didn't use the same firearm he had used to shoot all those animals he claims to have shot at 800 yards. Sometimes it's easy to pick out the chaff from the grain.
buck460XVR is offline  
Old March 14, 2015, 03:00 PM   #80
4runnerman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 16, 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,577
Buck460- Bingo. This is the main point I have been trying to make. A 308 whether it be semi or bolt is not the right choice for this shot. If he can do the shot is something only he knows.
__________________
NRA Certified RSO
NwCP- Performance Isn't Optional
4runnerman is offline  
Old March 14, 2015, 04:02 PM   #81
Ruger480
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2013
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 720
I find it interesting that proponents of the 308 aren't rushing to say "yes it can!"
The '06 could make this shot...

Now, I know we're discussing the ethics of using a 308 for long distance "hunting" and many of you think it's unethical to do so. But I remember hearing that Native Americans could get close enough to touch deer and other game. It makes me wonder if they too considered it unethical to shoot game from 50 yards out.
Ruger480 is offline  
Old March 14, 2015, 05:04 PM   #82
Bart B.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 7,893
How many of those in favor of 1K yard shooting of animals who think a lethal zone on them is about 8 to 10 inches in diameter, know how often the best long range competitors hit the 10 inch X ring on an NRA 1000 yard target with their first shot the day after they got a really good zero the day before?

Note.....

Target's at the range the zero was attained at.

Target's standing perfectly still.

Atmospheric conditions will be different.

Nobody shoulders a rifle exactly the same every time they do it.

Shouldered rifles shoot groups at 1000 yards about 1,5 MOA bigger than what they got testing ammo from a supported position.

Cross wind speeds above the line of sight are faster than in the line of sight.

Cross wind speeds nearest the shooter have more effect of drift than cross winds near the target.

How much drop does your bullet have for every 10 yards of target range near 1000 yards? Will you use an accurate rangefinder?
__________________
US Navy Distinguished Marksman Badge 163
Former US Navy & Palma Rifle Team Member
NRA High Power Master & Long Range High Master
NRA Smallbore Prone Master
Bart B. is offline  
Old March 14, 2015, 09:34 PM   #83
RJay
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,936
Deleted, I let my disgust over come my manners, so I deleted the post.
__________________
Ron James

Last edited by RJay; March 14, 2015 at 10:01 PM.
RJay is offline  
Old March 14, 2015, 11:48 PM   #84
Snyper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 3,047
Quote:
But I remember hearing that Native Americans could get close enough to touch deer and other game. It makes me wonder if they too considered it unethical to shoot game from 50 yards out.
They were hunting with spears and very weak arrows with primitive points, and wanted to make sure they recovered the game in order to survive

They weren't doing it to post a Youtube bragging about their shooting prowess and the cost of their equipment
__________________
One shot, one kill
Snyper is offline  
Old March 14, 2015, 11:52 PM   #85
Snyper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 3,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4runnerman
Snyper- A snipers job is to take the target out ( DEAD) not wound. Not sure where you get your info from. A wound is only if called for, but there main job is to kill the target.
A severe wound takes the target out of the fight, and ties up men and resources to take care of him.

A wounded enemy in the right position becomes bait for those who come to help him, providing more targets

Sniping is nothing at all like hunting.
The goals are not the same
__________________
One shot, one kill
Snyper is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 05:39 AM   #86
eastbank
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 7, 2008
Location: pa.
Posts: 2,223
no body is changing any ones mind, dead horse. eastbank.
eastbank is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 07:22 AM   #87
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 7,349
Quote:
Quote:
But I remember hearing that Native Americans could get close enough to touch deer and other game. It makes me wonder if they too considered it unethical to shoot game from 50 yards out.
They were hunting with spears and very weak arrows with primitive points, and wanted to make sure they recovered the game in order to survive

They weren't doing it to post a Youtube bragging about their shooting prowess and the cost of their equipment
__________________
One shot, one kill
I'm honored to have a Native American hunter and traditional weapons maker to count among my friends--I believe characterizing their weapons as weak and primitive is misleading at best and condescending at worst. Who has the most skill--the hunter that can take what is readily available to him using only his intimate knowledge of nature to effectively hunt or the one that relies on sophisticated technology to take down a target at a stand-off distance?
stagpanther is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 10:16 AM   #88
Ruger480
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2013
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 720
Quote:
Who has the most skill--the hunter that can take what is readily available to him using only his intimate knowledge of nature to effectively hunt or the one that relies on sophisticated technology to take down a target at a stand-off distance?
That's my point. Back in those days, the flintlock was the sophisticated technology used to take down a target at stand off distances.
We kept improving that technology until it was 100 yards, then 200, 400 yards. Nobody thought to say, hey we need better hunting skills, we shouldn't be using better equipment. And now, because the tech is here that allows us (some people anyway) to do that, we decide to get judgemental?
Some of you make a lot of assumptions about long range hunters. You don't know if they use patience and wait for just the right shot, how much time they spend in preparation, their knowledge of the terrain or their tracking skills. You simply assume they buy a gun, take it out and make potshots at animals.
I'm not encouraging people to take this up as their hunting style. I'm simply asking you not to condemn it either.
Ruger480 is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 10:44 AM   #89
TimSr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 8, 2013
Location: Rittman, Ohio
Posts: 2,074
Quote:
But don't judge other peoples shooting skills based on how good you are.
Agreed. Nor would I judge others' shooting skills based on how good they say they are.
TimSr is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 10:54 AM   #90
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,194
Quote:
But I remember hearing that Native Americans could get close enough to touch deer and other game. It makes me wonder if they too considered it unethical to shoot game from 50 yards out.

Native Americans at that time were hunting to survive. There is a big difference between the ethics of not starving to death and the shooting of an animal for sport.

Quote:
I'm not encouraging people to take this up as their hunting style. I'm simply asking you not to condemn it either.
Those folks out there that can consistently make perfect shots on game in true hunting situations @ 1000 yards are about as many as those folks that can sneak up and regularly touch unsuspecting game. Lots can talk the talk, but few can walk the walk. As I stated in my other post, even a very experienced long range shooter that teaches others to shoot at 1000 yards, with a spotter, made an error in judgement that fortunately, was so great it made for a clean miss. One wonders how many times the error was not so great and led to a unrecoverable wounded animal and was not shown on T.V.

Everyone has their own version of ethics and those various versions will always be an argumentative topic. While I don't condemn those that take shots at game from 1000 yards, I do hope they have weighed their options and the consequences of those options very carefully before sending a bullet downrange.
buck460XVR is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 11:07 AM   #91
Snyper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 16, 2013
Location: Eastern NC
Posts: 3,047
Quote:
I believe characterizing their weapons as weak and primitive is misleading at best and condescending at worst.
I believe it's being realistic

If they weren't weak and primitive, they would still be in use in their identical forms.

They have since been replaced with more powerful and improved versions or replacements.

That's just the facts
__________________
One shot, one kill
Snyper is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 11:35 AM   #92
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 7,349
Quote:
Quote:
I believe characterizing their weapons as weak and primitive is misleading at best and condescending at worst.
I believe it's being realistic

If they weren't weak and primitive, they would still be in use in their identical forms.

They have since been replaced with more powerful and improved versions or replacements.

That's just the facts
__________________
One shot, one kill
Some skilled hunters--even non-Native Americans, are in fact taking up that very challenge in the name of a "better hunt."

Here's an example of what I'm talking about. Let's take archery. I seriously doubt there many people outside of the Indian community that know what skill it takes to make quality bows and arrows out of wood--weapons which when made right can last almost indefinitely if treated properly.

Comparing a hand-knapped obsidian or other litho-based arrowhead to a modern high-velocity mechanical broadhead would indeed seem like one is "primitive" and one is modern--but what are they advantages of that razor-sharp broadhead if it does a complete pass-through (which happens often) to that wide and jagged stone arrowhead, which much like a wide-bladed knife cuts a jagged and gaping wound--and continues to do damage when imbedded in the game by cutting away while the animal runs? It's hard to argue that these are weak weapons when it's obvious that Native Americans and their antecedents using much the same kinds of weapons for hundreds if not thousands of years were able to successfully hunt with them.
stagpanther is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 12:20 PM   #93
jimbob86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,614
Quote:
He claimed he had lots of experience shooting at that distance and that he had already taken game cleanly at 800 yards with a .308.
RE: this and the plethora of "long range hunting videos" on youtube:

While he/they (the makers of the videos) may well have taken animals "cleanly" at ridiculous ranges .... How many animals did they wound and fail to recover? With the wind and unprecictability of the animal during the time of flight, I'd bet the latter number is far higher than the former .... but they won't tell you of the failures ..... that would not reflect well on them ..... which is the improtant factor for these ..... ahem, people: it's all about inflating their ego. "Look at me!!!!! I shot an Elk at ridiciulous range!" ..... and put it on the web......

How many vids of lost animals are there?

These folks are "hunting" for all the wrong reasons.
__________________
TheGolden Rule of Tool Use: "If you don't know what you are doing, DON'T."

http://nefirearm.com/
jimbob86 is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 12:37 PM   #94
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 7,823
Quote:
I believe characterizing their weapons as weak and primitive is misleading at best and condescending at worst.
Quote:
I believe it's being realistic

If they weren't weak and primitive, they would still be in use in their identical forms.

They have since been replaced with more powerful and improved versions or replacements.

That's just the facts
__________________
um, my brother in law makes long bows. he just made one for his daughters and they much prefer it to the compound bow he bought for them with lighter draw weight. that technology is still being used today and has barely changed in the 200 years that we've been advancing firearms. it is also important to take note that there are still people that hunt with flintlock muzzle loaders.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the stuff people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
tahunua001 is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 12:52 PM   #95
Ruger480
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 23, 2013
Location: Central Iowa
Posts: 720
Quote:
How many animals did they wound and fail to recover? With the wind and unprecictability of the animal during the time of flight, I'd bet the latter number is far higher than the former .... but they won't tell you of the failures ..... that would not reflect well on them ..... which is the improtant factor for these ..... ahem, people: it's all about inflating their ego. "Look at me!!!!! I shot an Elk at ridiciulous range!" .....
Again, you're making assumptions and judging people on those assumptions. Do you have evidence of their motivations or poor performances? Or are you looking at a brief moment of their hunt, filling in a lot unknowns and condemning them?

At present I am watching a TV host hunt grizzly. He was 100+ or - yards from the bear and missed his first shot. He connected on the second but should we hang him for attempting that first one? Because he didn't get within 50 yds? I also just saw a commercial for 200 yard muzzle loader bullets. Who here remembers when 100 yds with a muzzy was pushing the envelope? Now, its common place.

Just because its not done (maybe it is) by a great number of hunters, and yes they are hunters, doesn't mean we should be condescending towards them.
Ruger480 is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 01:07 PM   #96
JungleBoogey
Member
 
Join Date: December 19, 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 26
Some facts

Native American hunting: Without having to provide credentials, I’ll say that I’m of mixed heritage, a part of me being Iroquois (Mohawk) and although I was raised in the city and never lived on a reservation, I was instilled with and learned many Native American traditions and beliefs.

Here's a little of what I think I know:Native Americans who didn’t have or use horses (most non-plains tribes who lived in densely wooded areas) couldn’t afford the time nor had the desire to expend the energy to chase game for a mile after shooting it so they learned how to get as close as possible using various tracking and approaching techniques in order to take the best shot possible. Both bows/arrows and spears were used in hunting. Some might not be aware that blow darts were also used. The types of arrow heads made and used usually did not ensure an ‘instant’ death but they did leave gaping wounds and internal damage which caused the animal to die from a combination hemorrhaging and hypovolemic shock.

Primitive does not mean ineffective. Perhaps these weapons are no longer in use in their identical forms because there are few people left capable of making them; and even if available would not be affordable in comparison to assembly line equipment.

And they didn't take LR shots if not necessary... the taking of the life of an animal was generally considerd sacred and forgiveness was prayed for after the hunt.

Robert 'Lone Wolf Three Crows'
Former Special Events Program Chairman (Federal)
Native American Indian Heritage Month

Last edited by JungleBoogey; March 15, 2015 at 01:22 PM.
JungleBoogey is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 01:27 PM   #97
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 7,349
I don't know why this argument keeps dragging on--the "pro-1000 yd camp" maintains that just because you can't doesn't mean everyone else shouldn't. I agree in principal with this.

The "1000 is too far camp" more or less boils down to this IMO--as the range to target increases--the greater effect even minute changes in a multitude of variables will have on a bullet's trajectory--and hence terminal accuracy. I agree with this also.

Are there a bunch of Carlos Hathcock hunters out there that consistently can make these kinds of shots in a variable hunting environment with their first cold bore shot? Maybe, but I rather doubt it. I see the difference between the two camps of thought as the difference between killing and hunting. But I'm not good at either hunting or long range shooting--so what do I know. : )
stagpanther is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 02:50 PM   #98
JungleBoogey
Member
 
Join Date: December 19, 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 26
Again. I try not to second guess or judge other hunters but I do categorize them and that is how I choose the people I will hunt with. I categorize myself as a hunter, not a killer. And although killing is a part of hunting; it’s all about the frame of mind when you're pulling the trigger.... and sometimes.... the distance you're pulling it from.
JungleBoogey is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 04:19 PM   #99
reynolds357
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 5,362
What gets me is that almost no one questions the fact that prairie dogs can be killed pretty easily at 500 yards, but they act like killing an Elk at 1000 is an impossibility. It is much easier to hit an Elk sized (vital area) target at 1k than it is to hit a prairie dog sized target at 1/2 K.
reynolds357 is offline  
Old March 15, 2015, 04:43 PM   #100
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 7,349
Quote:
What gets me is that almost no one questions the fact that prairie dogs can be killed pretty easily at 500 yards, but they act like killing an Elk at 1000 is an impossibility. It is much easier to hit an Elk sized (vital area) target at 1k than it is to hit a prairie dog sized target at 1/2 K.
I've yet to hear of anyone dropping an Elk at 1000 with a 204 ruger rifle shooting a 30- 50 gr varmint bullet, I guess anything is possible though.
stagpanther is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
.308 , elk , long-range

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10162 seconds with 8 queries