Head Shooting Big Game

[KenLee]

Y'all would have shit a brick when I headshot dozens of deer with "Stangers" as a teenager. After shooting 2-300 coons out of tall trees in the dark, often seeing nothing but eyes, it was a cakewalk. I'll readily admit that at 58 with health issues, I'm not the same shooter anymore. Good light, calm animal, and on a somewhat steady day, the wsm still noggin pops some fat does.

 

[KHntr]

Y'all would have shit a brick when I headshot dozens of deer with "Stangers" as a teenager. After shooting 2-300 coons out of tall trees in the dark, often seeing nothing but eyes, it was a cakewalk. I'll readily admit that at 58 with health issues, I'm not the same shooter anymore. Good light, calm animal, and on a somewhat steady day, the wsm still noggin pops some fat does.

Not at all.

Big difference between shooting 300 raccoons between the blinkers, and shooting one deer and 5 grouse in total though.

 

[KenLee]

Not at all.

Big difference between shooting 300 raccoons between the blinkers, and shooting one deer and 5 grouse in total though.

I've never seen a grouse, but I'd bet I've noggined 30-35 deer with Stangers

 

[omicron1792]

Most saying it’s inhumane would shoot a hog in the head. Why is that?

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Most saying it’s inhumane would shoot a hog in the head. Why is that?

We don’t have feral hogs where I hunt, so I have never hunted them. But, if I did, I’d aim in the way that ensures the quickest death and most likely recovery. Your experience may be different, but the pigs I have seen don’t have long necks, unlike deer, so they don’t move their heads in a way that can quickly turn an instantly fatal shot into a catastrophic wound. I would still prefer to take shots at the largest vital area.

I suspect, however, that many people view feral hogs - or predators - as vermin and don’t particularly care how horribly they die. And, as far as I can tell, a lot of people don’t eat them and don’t bother to recover them.

I certainly never much care to shot placement on a groundhog. I aim center mass and squeeze the trigger. The varmint bullet takes care of the rest. Anything that’s not lying on the ground after the shot counts as a miss.

But, I shoot squirrels in the head because it is the best way to ensure recovery with minimal meat loss. And, the way squirrels move, it makes for a good target that doesn’t move much. Unlike deer, they don’t move their heads in a way that can quickly turn an instantly fatal shot into a catastrophic wound. At ranges under 50 yards, I am unlikely to miss, especially given the amount of time I have to take a shot on a squirrel. Also, hitting a dime-sized brain isn’t much harder than hitting a quarter-sized heart and lungs.

If I could arrange for deer to stand still, at 50 yards or less, while I calmly aim and blow their heads off, I might plan on taking that shot more often. But given the choice between hitting a volleyball or a golf ball, where only raw hits count and there are no points for taking a harder shot, why risk it?

If you need two points to win and have the time, there’s no point taking half-court shots. I lump most people who *brag* about taking headshots in the same category as people who *brag* about taking long shots. Many of them seem more interested in proving something about themselves than in considering the best way to ensure clean recovery. That’s not directed at anyone in particular, just a general observation.

 

[omicron1792]

We don’t have feral hogs where I hunt, so I have never hunted them. But, if I did, I’d aim in the way that ensures the quickest death and most likely recovery. Your experience may be different, but the pigs I have seen don’t have long necks, unlike deer, so they don’t move their heads in a way that can quickly turn an instantly fatal shot into a catastrophic wound. I would still prefer to take shots at the largest vital area.

I suspect, however, that many people view feral hogs - or predators - as vermin and don’t particularly care how horribly they die. And, as far as I can tell, a lot of people don’t eat them and don’t bother to recover them.

I certainly never much care to shot placement on a groundhog. I aim center mass and squeeze the trigger. The varmint bullet takes care of the rest. Anything that’s not lying on the ground after the shot counts as a miss.

But, I shoot squirrels in the head because it is the best way to ensure recovery with minimal meat loss. And, the way squirrels move, it makes for a good target that doesn’t move much. Unlike deer, they don’t move their heads in a way that can quickly turn an instantly fatal shot into a catastrophic wound. At ranges under 50 yards, I am unlikely to miss, especially given the amount of time I have to take a shot on a squirrel. Also, hitting a dime-sized brain isn’t much harder than hitting a quarter-sized heart and lungs.

If I could arrange for deer to stand still, at 50 yards or less, while I calmly aim and blow their heads off, I might plan on taking that shot more often. But given the choice between hitting a volleyball or a golf ball, where only raw hits count and there are no points for taking a harder shot, why risk it?

If you need two points to win and have the time, there’s no point taking half-court shots. I lump most people who *brag* about taking headshots in the same category as people who *brag* about taking long shots. Many of them seem more interested in proving something about themselves than in considering the best way to ensure clean recovery. That’s not directed at anyone in particular, just a general observation.

See. I think most are anthropomorphizing or majestically thinking of deer and elk compared to hogs. I think animals are animals, and an ethical shot on one is the same as another (within reason).

Lots of depredation deer shooters do only head shots stacking up 100s of deer.

I think there is a lot of fuddism in the arguments here, similar to the “lack of ethics” with shooting a deer or elk with a 223.

Of note I have killed tons of hogs and deer.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

See. I think most are anthropomorphizing or majestically thinking of deer and elk compared to hogs. I think animals are animals, and an ethical shot on one is the same as another (within reason).

Lots of depredation deer shooters do only head shots stacking up 100s of deer.

I think there is a lot of fuddism in the arguments here, similar to the “lack of ethics” with shooting a deer or elk with a 223.

Of note I have killed tons of hogs and deer.

I don’t disagree at all that many people anthropomorphize animals, especially “cute” or “majestic” ones. If I ever stop feeling some sense of respect for animals, I think I might have to stop hunting and/or eating them. Wantonly taking life bothers me. I’ve known people who treat killing about like taking a shit and I am glad I don’t feel that way. The only things I ever killed over which I don’t have any positive feelings are snakes and people.

I still won’t take a shot at a golfball if I can achieve the same outcome - with a lower chance of catastrophic wounding - by hitting a volleyball.

I do disagree that it is in anyway akin to shooting a deer with a good .224 caliber bullet. If I am playing the percentages, most people have a far greater chance of making a clean kill with a good .224 bullet than with other calibers. What you call “fuddism”, I would call a “stubborn belief in what we already know know” or “ignorance.” Trying to convince some people that a good .224 bullet is great for deer is like trying to convince them that Jesus wasn’t the son of God or that Allah wasn’t a prophet.

 

[omicron1792]

I don’t disagree at all that many people anthropomorphize animals, especially “cute” or “majestic” ones. If I ever stop feeling some sense of respect for animals, I think I might have to stop hunting and/or eating them. Wantonly taking life bothers me. I’ve known people who treat killing about like taking a shit and I am glad I don’t feel that way. The only things I ever killed over which I don’t have any positive feelings are snakes and people.

I still won’t take a shot at a golfball if I can achieve the same outcome - with a lower chance of catastrophic wounding - by hitting a volleyball.

I do disagree that it is in anyway akin to shooting a deer with a good .224 caliber bullet. If I am playing the percentages, most people have a far greater chance of making a clean kill with a good .224 bullet than with other calibers. What you call “fuddism”, I would call a “stubborn belief in what we already know know” or “ignorance.” Trying to convince some people that a good .224 bullet is great for deer is like trying to convince them that Jesus wasn’t the son of God or that Allah wasn’t a prophet.

I’m not talking about a 800 yard shot.

For most deer shot at 100 yards you or I can easily hit them in the head.

Agree with most of your post btw.