This is stupid. The debate is tired and annoying. The loud ones on both sides come off as giant, arrogant douches.
My summary…. You have old school, deeply-rooted hunting-based traditions on one side, and then you have new school, cool kid, tactical-shooting-based viewpoints on the other side.
This is just a glimpse into the microcosm that is society these days. Two polarized viewpoints. But this is also what I don’t understand… Like everything else that gets debated, which is pretty much everything, why is it so hard to recognize that there is merit on both sides?
Imo, the best answers lie in the middle. So we have people, mostly younger and due to growing up with the Internet and an easily accessible preponderance of information, are driven more by “data” (or worse yet, some Internet personality and their version of “data”) and less by experience. Then opposing them, we have people who did not grow up with the www at their fingertips and who instead had to rely on experience and traditions passed down from those who went before them. One side says “head stamps don’t kill animals”, bullets do, and small .22-24 caliber, well constructed bullets work best. The other side says “there is no replacement for displacement” and you should use something with “knock down power” and a big .30-.338” wide chunk of lead thrown by something with a belt around its ass. Know what? They are both effing right!
Therefore, the wise man doesn’t the dismiss either side, instead recognizes the merit from each camp, and ultimately lands in the middle.
Ergo pragmatism… use a 6.5 to 7mm, gosh maybe even a .308, go hunt, be happy and stfu.