Head Shooting Big Game

[IW17]

Shooting at a 2" target that moves A LOT is a hell of a lot different than trying to hit the front half of an elk.

Not saying it isn't. What I am saying is that people should know their limits. Some people are more than capable of head shots. Some people are more than capable of putting a 77 grain bullet through the vitals of an elk at 500+ yards. Some people shoot minute of paper plate and shouldn't do either. Each person has their limitations and as long as you k ow yours and are honest with yourself about, I don't see a problem.

The people that promote small calibers are the same people that acknowledge how poor most shoot and promote practicing from field positions.

Head shots are typically a poor choice.

Most people suck at shooting.

Everyone shoots a small caliber better.

Basically what I said above, but yes, people shoot small calibers better. But many people still suck at shooting as you said. And the smaller the bullet, the smaller the margin of error.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

And the smaller the bullet, the smaller the margin of error.

Do you think a “near miss” of the brain or other vitals is more lethal with one close caliber than another? I defy you to show me a shot placement that would be fatal with a good 7.62mm bullet that would not be fatal with a good 5.56 bullet. Now, if we are comparing 5.56 FMJs with .50 BMG FMJs, it might make a meaningful difference.

 

[IW17]

Do you think a “near miss” of the brain or other vitals is more lethal with one close caliber than another? I defy you to show me a shot placement that would be fatal with a good 7.62mm bullet that would not be fatal with a good 5.56 bullet. Now, if we are comparing 5.56 FMJs with .50 BMG FMJs, it might make a meaningful difference.

Do you think a “near miss” of the brain or other vitals is more lethal with one close caliber than another? I defy you to show me a shot placement that would be fatal with a good 7.62mm bullet that would not be fatal with a good 5.56 bullet. Now, if we are comparing 5.56 FMJs with .50 BMG FMJs, it might make a meaningful difference.

If you hit the vitals, no. Because that's what a near miss is in your example. You nearly missed the vitals. But do I think that in a scenario where the vitals were missed, that a larger bullet of the same construction will make a larger wound channel and increase odds of death? Yeah, because it will. There's no guarantees in life and I'm not making the argument that larger bullets trump bullet placement. But larger holes mean a larger amount of damage.

Every single person here knows at least one jackass who thinks that because they can hit a paper plate at 50 yards they're good to go start slinging lead at deer or whatever animal you have in your region. Which is to the point of my original post about head shooting. People need to start taking accountability for their actions and accept their limitations. Just like I would never take a 1000 yard shot on a living creature with a rifle, or a 60+ yard shot with my bow. I know my limits. I am however perfectly fine with a head shot on a deer sized animal inside of 100 yards. Under the right circumstances. The odds of me injuring a deer taking a head shot at close range is significantly lower than taking a bow shot at 40-50 yards. Yet I'm certainly not going to stop hunting with a bow.

 

[KenLee]

If you hit the vitals, no. Because that's what a near miss is in your example. You nearly missed the vitals. But do I think that in a scenario where the vitals were missed, that a larger bullet of the same construction will make a larger wound channel and increase odds of death? Yeah, because it will. There's no guarantees in life and I'm not making the argument that larger bullets trump bullet placement. But larger holes mean a larger amount of damage.

Every single person here knows at least one jackass who thinks that because they can hit a paper plate at 50 yards they're good to go start slinging lead at deer or whatever animal you have in your region. Which is to the point of my original post about head shooting. People need to start taking accountability for their actions and accept their limitations. Just like I would never take a 1000 yard shot on a living creature with a rifle, or a 60+ yard shot with my bow. I know my limits. I am however perfectly fine with a head shot on a deer sized animal inside of 100 yards. Under the right circumstances. The odds of me injuring a deer taking a head shot at close range is significantly lower than taking a bow shot at 40-50 yards. Yet I'm certainly not going to stop hunting with a bow.

Bows are remarkably unethical and should be banned...now watch all the "pokers" heads explode. Shut up bout head shots, y'all bunch of felons

 

[CMP70306]

I personally don’t like headshots and will only take them under very limited circumstances mostly as a follow up shot for an animal that was either previously wounded or was hit in a way that was not killing it quickly enough.

Even then I do not aim directly at the head but prefer somewhere high on the neck due to less bone in the way potentially deflecting the shot. This year was the first time I took a first round high neck shot since 2011, that one was at 40 yards to avoid killing the deer behind mine. This year it was at 120 yards with the head and the first few inches of the neck being the only thing visible at the time of the shot.

And it wasn’t an impulsive decision, I watched the deer for 30 minutes moving around in the cover trying for a lung shot before I finally took the shot from a seated position off a tripod. In the below picture the deer’s head was in the v of the tree just to the lower left of the crosshair while the body was behind it, the tree is at 70 or so yards, the deer was 120. Without the tripod there is no way I would have taken the shot as the windowsill position wasn’t stable enough to risk it.

 

[KenLee]

I personally don’t like headshots and will only take them under very limited circumstances mostly as a follow up shot for an animal that was either previously wounded or was hit in a way that was not killing it quickly enough.

Even then I do not aim directly at the head but prefer somewhere high on the neck due to less bone in the way potentially deflecting the shot. This year was the first time I took a first round high neck shot since 2011, that one was at 40 yards to avoid killing the deer behind mine. This year it was at 120 yards with the head and the first few inches of the neck being the only thing visible at the time of the shot.

And it wasn’t an impulsive decision, I watched the deer for 30 minutes moving around in the cover trying for a lung shot before I finally took the shot from a seated position off a tripod. In the below picture the deer’s head was in the v of the tree just to the lower left of the crosshair while the body was behind it, the tree is at 70 or so yards, the deer was 120. Without the tripod there is no way I would have taken the shot as the windowsill position wasn’t stable enough to risk it.

View attachment 990238View attachment 990237

70 yards from a box? I wouldn't sit down my likka bottle.

 

[CMP70306]

70 yards from a box? I wouldn't sit down my likka bottle.

120 on the deer, the tree blocking the deer was at 70 yards. Gap was roughly 2 moa so a 1-1/2” window to shoot through between the branches.

 

[MeatMissile]

If you don't like them running 20 yards then shoot them through both front shoulders.

Where do you reckon all the blood ends up when the heart is immediately stopped from pumping? What effect does that have on your meat? THIS Meateater article explains why it's preferred to get the blood out.

Just my $.02, or $.05 in the penny-less age, but the heart does not stop pumping when a round goes through the head. At least not on humans. I’ve seen that happen a few times in my career and can say that head shots drain a lot of blood.

 

[rileybassman]

Bows are remarkably unethical and should be banned...now watch all the "pokers" heads explode. Shut up bout head shots, y'all bunch of felons

Funnily enough, years ago my first deer I shot with a bow I tracked it and found it bedded... I finished her off with a headshot with my bow. Was lights out. Don't know that I'd try it again but worked that time lol.

 

[WoodlandCritter]

Finally shot that hunting rifle match I mentioned. Targets were all 8" steel so no pictures of targets. Low attendance but I'm the bottom name on the list, technically tied for first. All targets were shot from 50-400 yards. Standing, sitting, kneeling with 2 shots per target. Only the 400 yard target was shot prone. 5 points per hit.

 

[WoodlandCritter]

Go shoot a competition with your hunting rifle. Take pictures of every target, and post them here...



Nothing tells the truth like a little pressure. Remember, you miss one target 2" off center and you just maimed that critter.

But if you miss by 5" with a high quality bullet that has some fragmentation and disruption that animal would be dead in seconds if you were aiming for the lungs.

Above was meant to be a reply to this

 

[Trumpkin The Dwarf]

Above was meant to be a reply to this

I salute you sir! Nice shooting.

 

[LongWayAround]

Finally shot that hunting rifle match I mentioned. Targets were all 8" steel so no pictures of targets. Low attendance but I'm the bottom name on the list, technically tied for first. All targets were shot from 50-400 yards. Standing, sitting, kneeling with 2 shots per target. Only the 400 yard target was shot prone. 5 points per hit.View attachment 1087873

Sounds fun. Tell me more about the layout. Our NRL season is basically over and I would like to have some more ideas for fun range days.

 

[WoodlandCritter]

Sounds fun. Tell me more about the layout. Our NRL season is basically over and I would like to have some more ideas for fun range days.

Sure. Its 10 total shooting positions, divided into 3 "stages" mostly for the sake of keeping it obvious which targets to shoot at. The range would get a little cluttered with all targets being up at once.

First stage and first position is offhand standing at 50-60 yards. Next is offhand kneeling around 100-120 then offhand sitting at 150ish. So 3 positions total, 2 shots each.

Second stage starts around 120 yards standing, off shooting sticks. Then kneeling off sticks at ~150. Then sitting off sticks ~200. Again, 3 positions 2 shots each.

For the third stage we have 4 positions, still two shots. First position we have a round, vertical post with a 2x4 base to simulate a tree and you use that for support, standing at 120yds. Next is kneeling at 250yds with a stack of tires for support. Then sitting ~300 yards with tires. And finally 400 yards prone with a tire.

We run a timer with a 30 second par time for each position. The par time isn't strictly enforced, its mostly to help keep the match from dragging on too long. Total number of shots adds up to 1 box of cartridges which is pretty affordable and easy on the shoulder for casual shooters. Could definitely increase the round count if you wanted. Additionally there's a 10lb max weight for rifle w/ accessories, 10x max scope magnification, and .243 minimum caliber. I don't necessarily agree with all those limitations, but I understand why we do it. Trying to keep most "normal" hunting rifles competitive.

 

[Tmac]

Not trying to rile any feathers here, just genuinely curious why the practice doesn't seem to be more common.

It’s a very small target and can move around with no warning even on a stationary standing animal. Heart/lung area equally lethal, many times larger target, and less likely to move while standing. Seems an easy choice.

In over 50 years of hunting big game, taken 3 head/neck shots. Two facing me shot just under the chin from a dead rest under 50 yards with no other area exposed to shoot. One just behind the ear at 70 yards on a stationary broadside buffalo because all I had was a 270 Win with 130 gr. cup and core. All 3 bang flops thankfully.

I’ve read about some paid deer cull hunters that prefer a head shot. They often are shooting at night and from a vehicle iirc.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Not trying to rile any feathers here, just genuinely curious why the practice doesn't seem to be more common.

A lot has to do with traditional - wrong - ideas about how you need to hit a body shot to get the blood out. The idea was that the animal seized up immediately once you hit the brain and everything immediately stopped working. Of course, anyone who has ever headshot a live animal knows that isn’t true.

I’ve finished off deer with a headshot. I’ve also killed one or two outright with headshots at very close range. They all tasted great.

I’ve eaten plenty of squirrels shot through the head. They tasted better than squirrels shot through the body. I only aim for the head on squirrels.

I’ve shot turkeys in the head with a rifle, they tasted far better than ones shot in the body with a rifle. I won’t ever take another body shot on a turkey.

For me though, on deer, aiming at a basketball sized target versus a golfball sized target always seemed to make more sense in most circumstances. But in the right situation, I would take a headshot.