Aram Von Benedikt

[JRam07]

People shooting at 600+ the frequency they are now is a new thing and in the vast majority of cases the only real thing that changed is they heard about it being done and maybe got a turret or a range finder so since they know it’s possible, send it!

It's not, people just know the yardage now because of LRFs.

A whole industry was spawned around flat shooting fast magnums so people could extend their range, Weatherby, Lazzaroni, P.O Ackley, light bullets traveling at high speed, zero your rifle 2 inches high or 3 inches high at a hundred and hold above shoulder.

It use to be I'd hear about these things every time I walked into a gun store "yeah the deer was way out there so I held a foot above its shoulder and smoked him"

The difference is today the guess work can be taken out, we can measure range, we can adjust turrets (or bow sites) we arent guessing at where the bullet is going we know, gravity is (for our intents and purposes) a constant and is easy to adjust for, its no different than zeroing a scope. The difference is we know that deer was at 600, in the past it was just a long shot.

Back in those days shooting at running game was more popular as well. Use to hear a lot of "he was at a dead run so I aimed at his nose and smoked him"

 

[dieselchessy]

It's not, people just know the yardage now because of LRFs.

A whole industry was spawned around flat shooting fast magnums so people could extend their range, Weatherby, Lazzaroni, P.O Ackley, light bullets traveling at high speed, zero your rifle 2 inches high or 3 inches high at a hundred and hold above shoulder.

It use to be I'd hear about these things every time I walked into a gun store "yeah the deer was way out there so I held a foot above its shoulder and smoked him"

The difference is today the guess work can be taken out, we can measure range, we can adjust turrets (or bow sites) we arent guessing at where the bullet is going we know, gravity is (for our intents and purposes) a constant and is easy to adjust for, its no different than zeroing a scope. The difference is we know that deer was at 600, in the past it was just a long shot.

Back in those days shooting at running game was more popular as well. Use to hear a lot of "he was at a dead run so I aimed at his nose and smoked him"

I agree, long range shooting isn’t a new thing. Read any of the old hunting books with bow and arrow or rifle and they commonly talk of flinging lead and arrows at crazy distance, especially considering the equipment they had and that they had little idea what the actual range was.

Read “Alaskan Yukon trophies won and lost” and then tell me slinging lead is a new thing.

 

[lif]

It's not, people just know the yardage now because of LRFs.

A whole industry was spawned around flat shooting fast magnums so people could extend their range, Weatherby, Lazzaroni, P.O Ackley, light bullets traveling at high speed, zero your rifle 2 inches high or 3 inches high at a hundred and hold above shoulder.

It use to be I'd hear about these things every time I walked into a gun store "yeah the deer was way out there so I held a foot above its shoulder and smoked him"

The difference is today the guess work can be taken out, we can measure range, we can adjust turrets (or bow sites) we arent guessing at where the bullet is going we know, gravity is (for our intents and purposes) a constant and is easy to adjust for, its no different than zeroing a scope. The difference is we know that deer was at 600, in the past it was just a long shot.

Back in those days shooting at running game was more popular as well. Use to hear a lot of "he was at a dead run so I aimed at his nose and smoked him"

The differences you mention are pretty accurate. The thing you left out is the fact that the majority of folks shooting at 600-1000 yards now would have never tried a 400 yard shot 15 years ago. Hell, most of the people shooting at 700+ yards would probably never be able to get into a traditional range to kill the animal they are shooting at. There are two main reasons to shoot long range at animals:
1. You can’t get any closer. For many different reasons.
2. You like the challenge and the coolness of shooting them from a long ways out.

I know a lot of you long range folks are pretty good at it, but a lot more are not very good at it. In my opinion, LR has created a lot of false confidence in below average hunters. Setting your wife or kid up in a high powered scope at 800 yards and telling them to just squeeze the trigger is a common practice now. It sounds like that’s what happened with Rochelle. The fact is, LR shooting has dramatically changed since the days of hold it over the back at 500 yards. The ability of the optics has improved and the inability of the hunters has also increased.

 

[Brandon.miller.4]

I'm all for people limiting their personal max range to what they can reasonably and consistently shoot. However, I am not for ANY more legislation and control over us. More rules is almost never the answer.

 

[Steve300xcw]

I'm all for people limiting their personal max range to what they can reasonably and consistently shoot. However, I am not for ANY more legislation and control over us. More rules is almost never the answer.

well said

 

[Stalker69]

I am sure he "is" the one who kills every dove and pheasant when several people shoot at them also. Cracks me up, shooting clays or when they are the only ones to shoot, misses are far far more common then hits. But every " bird" that falls when several shoot its their ( his) bird. F$%^ing people.

 

[JRam07]

The differences you mention are pretty accurate. The thing you left out is the fact that the majority of folks shooting at 600-1000 yards now would have never tried a 400 yard shot 15 years ago. Hell, most of the people shooting at 700+ yards would probably never be able to get into a traditional range to kill the animal they are shooting at. There are two main reasons to shoot long range at animals:
1. You can’t get any closer. For many different reasons.
2. You like the challenge and the coolness of shooting them from a long ways out.

I know a lot of you long range folks are pretty good at it, but a lot more are not very good at it. In my opinion, LR has created a lot of false confidence in below average hunters. Setting your wife or kid up in a high powered scope at 800 yards and telling them to just squeeze the trigger is a common practice now. It sounds like that’s what happened with Rochelle. The fact is, LR shooting has dramatically changed since the days of hold it over the back at 500 yards. The ability of the optics has improved and the inability of the hunters has also increased.

I had to think on this awhile, and there is some truth in what you're saying, with today's tech I think the entry into long range is lower.

Back in the day it was almost magic, today LRFs, decent scopes, and apps are cheap and plenty.

So more people may be trying, but they also probably have a higher chance of success than the people did in the past to.

Long range for all its built up to be isn't that hard, you're not doing anything different if you can shoot well at 100y you can shoot well at 1000 or further if the winds not bad. Wind is the hardest part, shooter performance is next, and ammo after that, drop probably after that.

In a way this story highlights that to, Rachelle (or Rochelle I dunno I've seen it both ways) a novice shooter on her first animal and Aram, despite many more years of shooting, both shot about similarly, both missed, both wounded.

I try to error on the side of caution, if I'm not 100% confident I'll place the shot where I want to I won't shoot, whether it's at 15 yards or 600, and that's something people only tend to learn hunting and not on the range, on the range it doesn't matter.

And it sounds like after the fact Rachelle and Easton may have learned that, I doubt Aram did though.

 

[lif]

I had to think on this awhile, and there is some truth in what you're saying, with today's tech I think the entry into long range is lower.

Back in the day it was almost magic, today LRFs, decent scopes, and apps are cheap and plenty.

So more people may be trying, but they also probably have a higher chance of success than the people did in the past to.

Long range for all its built up to be isn't that hard, you're not doing anything different if you can shoot well at 100y you can shoot well at 1000 or further if the winds not bad. Wind is the hardest part, shooter performance is next, and ammo after that, drop probably after that.

In a way this story highlights that to, Rachelle (or Rochelle I dunno I've seen it both ways) a novice shooter on her first animal and Aram, despite many more years of shooting, both shot about similarly, both missed, both wounded.

I try to error on the side of caution, if I'm not 100% confident I'll place the shot where I want to I won't shoot, whether it's at 15 yards or 600, and that's something people only tend to learn hunting and not on the range, on the range it doesn't matter.

And it sounds like after the fact Rachelle and Easton may have learned that, I doubt Aram did though.

Well said. I agree with everything you’re saying. And to the long range folks that are doing it well, I have nothing negative to say about what you are doing. Poor Ethics is the only bad part about LR. And I mean ethics to both the animals and fellow hunters. If unqualified shooters weren’t wounding animals like this story, and LR shooters are being considerate to other hunters, I would have no opinion on it.

 

[Sherman]

You guys should start a “long range shooting” thread and take your pissing match there instead of stinking this one up.

 

[lif]

You guys should start a “long range shooting” thread and take your pissing match there instead of stinking this one up.

Lol. I don’t think either of us are having a pissing match. And this thread is about long range shooting. And memes.

 

[dsotm]

Not reading the whole thread but is the other party mad because their bad shooting couldn’t kill the deer?

 

[ddd-shooter]

Not reading the whole thread but is the other party mad because their bad shooting couldn’t kill the deer?

 

[ddd-shooter]

 

[beerbucksducks]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GSPHUNTER]

View attachment 622920

That's just mean.

 

[Deadfall]

View attachment 621112

 

[Deadfall]

Don't know anything about Utah, but if it's anything like montana the only that matters to FWP is last shot. Not first blood.

 

[BobbyMac]

Seems like AVB is foreshadowing to uncle Ron!! Maybe he just got "Frazzled"

 

[Brent]

Don't know anything about Utah, but if it's anything like montana the only that matters to FWP is last shot. Not first blood.

That's how it is in Utah. AVB's claim to the buck is legal. The application of ethic or lack thereof before and during the kill shots are what is on trial.

 

[The Guide]

Don't know anything about Utah, but if it's anything like montana the only that matters to FWP is last shot. Not first blood.

Montana used to be whom ever tagged it first got the animal. Had 2 elk stolen from me when I was a kid. One at Gardner on a winter hunt and a little bull near Dillon. Both were long before cell phone but the FWP officer told my dad that there was no way to prove who shot it and the person who tagged it first had rights to the animal. The guy who took my cow (when I was 12) didn't even have a gun with him. Used snowshoes to beat us to the cow and was gutting her before we could walk the 200 or so yards across the flats from our rocky knob. Second elk was shot at 250 yards and ran over the crest of the ridge and slid down the steep ridge stopping 75 yards from the road an outfitter was driving up. He had his dude slap his tag on it and was gutting it before we could get to it. Both times, neither person fired a shot but I lost my elk. Sometimes life sucks.

Jay