Quote:

---

As far as long range shooting is concerned, I competed for years with rifles such as the .30-'06, .308, 7mm-08, .260 Remington, and yes, .223 at ranges up to and including 600 and even 1000 yards, but I would not consider taking a shot beyond 300 yards on game. Shooting at a stationary target at a known distance is one thing. Shooting at a live animal, capable of moving at any instant, including the interval between the bullet leaving the barrel and arriving on target, increases the chances of a shot which merely wounds in direct proportion to .

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

My boundaries and my particular code of hunting ethics are designed by me and for me and I am comfortable with them. However, I would never expect anybody else to have to adhere to them. To each their own, and we each need to answer to ourselves at the end of the day, but I do have my own opinion about what is probably too far to ethically shoot at animals. I share it here not to lecture, but to provoke thought.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Agreed. One must be guided by ones own abilities and/or shortcomings.

As an aside, wrt to those LD Saturday morning "sniping for animals" tv shows, I can't help but wonder how many shots were actually taken off camera in order to capture the "one shot kill" at over 1000 yards and the like that is actually shown to the viewing public? How in the hell do they effectively follow up on the elk with a leg haplessly blown off? How long does it take to cross a heavily wooded valley in order to get to the distant spot where the animal stood? What about the follow up anyway? Does anyone even bother to walk over to validate whether the shot was a hit or miss when the walk is both far and difficult and the animal showed absolutely no sign of a hit? It's TV for heaven's sake. The Internet doesn't have the market corned on deceptive misleading presentment..... Not levelling accusations at any particular crew, but the tinfoil hat skeptic in me can't help but wonder what really is going on when the camera isn't rolling or what gets left on the proverbial editing room floor.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Is the .50BMG a magnum?

---

No, it is small bore, 20mm is medium bore, 30mm is large bore and 40mm is Magnum.................well that's how they rate for Anti Aircraft use

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Yup, I feel you as well bro. What I like to do is sneak in, 'injun-style' and, just as I get underneath the snout of the unsuspecting beast, I leap up and smack it hard with the butt of my rifle. I then clonk the disoriented creature on the swede with a handy rock or stout bit of windfall continuing the assault until the animal goes all limp and floppy.

This approach may sound a little unusual to a Canadian but it has some real advantages. 1) It really saves on the ammo, I can't stress this enough and 2) it causes little or no damage to the skin and 3).....I get to watch the life drain from the eyes of the hapless prey animal.

Yeah...........

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Yup, I feel you as well bro. What I like to do is sneak in, 'injun-style' and, just as I get underneath the snout of the unsuspecting beast, I leap up and smack it hard with the butt of my rifle. I then clonk the disoriented creature on the swede with a handy rock or stout bit of windfall continuing the assault until the animal goes all limp and floppy.

This approach may sound a little unusual to a Canadian but it has some real advantages. 1) It really saves on the ammo, I can't stress this enough and 2) it causes little or no damage to the skin and 3).....I get to watch the life drain from the eyes of the hapless prey animal.

Yeah...........

---

Just make sure that your handy rock has CRF lest you fail to stave the poor creature's brains in on the first go round.

---

Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Yup, I feel you as well bro. What I like to do is sneak in, 'injun-style' and, just as I get underneath the snout of the unsuspecting beast, I leap up and smack it hard with the butt of my rifle. I then clonk the disoriented creature on the swede with a handy rock or stout bit of windfall continuing the assault until the animal goes all limp and floppy.

This approach may sound a little unusual to a Canadian but it has some real advantages. 1) It really saves on the ammo, I can't stress this enough and 2) it causes little or no damage to the skin and 3).....I get to watch the life drain from the eyes of the hapless prey animal.

Yeah...........

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Yup, I feel you as well bro. What I like to do is sneak in, 'injun-style' and, just as I get underneath the snout of the unsuspecting beast, I leap up and smack it hard with the butt of my rifle. I then clonk the disoriented creature on the swede with a handy rock or stout bit of windfall continuing the assault until the animal goes all limp and floppy.

This approach may sound a little unusual to a Canadian but it has some real advantages. 1) It really saves on the ammo, I can't stress this enough and 2) it causes little or no damage to the skin and 3).....I get to watch the life drain from the eyes of the hapless prey animal.

Yeah...........

---

I am surprised and disappointed you've heard of this technique way over in Aussieland.
This stalk and kill method originated with moose hunting in B.C. Yes indeed - it was invented & developed by a sporty Prince George Citizen back in the 1950's when ammo was in short supply and gained popularity in this area then spread throughout the Province. I am surprised you heard of this lonewulf - & I'd like to get my hands on the RRRRAt-bastard who let out 'OUR' hands-on method of killing moose.

---

Daryl, that is the Kiwi method, here in Aussie land we are somewhat more sophisticated and sporting. We sneak in close and throw a bent stick. We then get the animals attention so they are looking at us and don't see the bent stick returning. Whomp on the back of the head takes them out cleanly. Just have to now the trajectory of your bent stick.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Yup, I feel you as well bro. What I like to do is sneak in, 'injun-style' and, just as I get underneath the snout of the unsuspecting beast, I leap up and smack it hard with the butt of my rifle. I then clonk the disoriented creature on the swede with a handy rock or stout bit of windfall continuing the assault until the animal goes all limp and floppy.

This approach may sound a little unusual to a Canadian but it has some real advantages. 1) It really saves on the ammo, I can't stress this enough and 2) it causes little or no damage to the skin and 3).....I get to watch the life drain from the eyes of the hapless prey animal.

Yeah...........

---

I am surprised and disappointed you've heard of this technique way over in Aussieland.
This stalk and kill method originated with moose hunting in B.C. Yes indeed - it was invented & developed by a sporty Prince George Citizen back in the 1950's when ammo was in short supply and gained popularity in this area then spread throughout the Province. I am surprised you heard of this lonewulf - & I'd like to get my hands on the RRRRAt-bastard who let out 'OUR' hands-on method of killing moose.

---

Daryl, that is the Kiwi method, here in Aussie land we are somewhat more sophisticated and sporting. We sneak in close and throw a bent stick. We then get the animals attention so they are looking at us and don't see the bent stick returning. Whomp on the back of the head takes them out cleanly. Just have to now the trajectory of your bent stick.

---

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

So here's a thought: the entire term "magnum" is horrendously flawed. I'd put forth the notion that we have more and less powerful cartridges of all shapes and sizes. Pick the bore size and power level suitable for the job at hand coupled with bullets of a performance envelope appropriate for the given application. Have at 'er.......

It rankles me every time I hear utterly stupid expressions in the MSM such as "it was a high caliber weapon". WTF pray tell is a high caliber???????? Maybe I have too much idle thought time on my hands at this particular moment, but I can't help but wonder if the term magnum is yet another term tending toward the "devoid of meaning" end of the spectrum.

I believe there's an appropriate application for all sporting cartridges whether the may have more or less power respectively, and there's nothing wrong with that!!!!!

---

Agree with this..and agree..WTF is high caliber??? More media sensationalism ..Liberals trying to make something they don't agree with look more dangerous or serious than it really is..all about their agenda an narrative..

As to magnum vs non-magnum...think this is also a discussion that is what it is...no reason to disparage a particular caliber over another, IMHO...if you don't like it don't use it..simple as that..There is certainly a time and place for either...Doesn't really matter if I shoot a 338W Mag or a 270, I can get really close carrying either caliber mo matter what I am carrying..BUT, maybe I am sneaking around in Alaska or Africa..I'd much rather have a mag in my hands vs a 243 should I run into the larger more dangerous game animal..crazy thought I know, but that's just me...

Finally as to getting eye to eye with them...I usually just jump down on their backs from a tree I am perched in. At that point I can ride them around for a while..once they tire they are much easier to choke out and put to sleep..

Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..

Post Extras: