Peterson 's Hunting - Small caliber article

[JohnJohnson]

He writes articles to given validation and self esteem to people who shoot 10 rounds per year. It's one of the main parts of his schtick. Target audience is somewhere north of 50 years old and are likely to tell you their daddy shot a deer at 700 yards with a lever action by just holding over its back.

 

[BuckSmasher]

"Notably, advocates of using small cartridges and target bullets on big game tend to breeze right past any discussion of both shoulder and steeply quartering shots. Now that’s fair if you’re managing overpopulated deer and have the luxury of waiting for a clean broadside shot. But what if you’re the guy that’s saved for half his life to pay for a premium elk hunt in the Rocky Mountains?"

For real. I would want a bullet/rifle combo that could penetrate more than 5 inches or so. So should anyone!

 

[Hnthrdr]

I thought his family learned to shoot'm in the leg and push'm to bleed? Or maybe that idiocy was a tangent only his brother wandered onto.

Hence the concern for “bone breaking calibers”

 

[BuckSmasher]

Hence the concern for “bone breaking calibe

Only Fudds bullets ever encounter bone.

 

[HunterGatherer]

I’m always surprised by how many of the cannon advocates consider a broadside shot a “luxury”.
“ What if you have been hunting all week and the only shot you have is a steeply quartering (paunch) shot or the animal is running straight away and you have to put one up the butt ?” Well buddy, then you don’t have a shot.

 

[JohnJohnson]

I’m always surprised by how many of the cannon advocates consider a broadside shot a “luxury”.
“ What if you have been hunting all week and the only shot you have is a steeply quartering (paunch) shot or the animal is running straight away and you have to put one up the butt ?” Well buddy, then you don’t have a shot.

Taking unethical shots isn't unethical if you use a 338 Remchesterby Shitkicking Magnum.

 

[mthayr]

Petersens should start putting [Op Ed] in front of everything Joseph von Benedikt writes...

 

[Hnthrdr]

I’m always surprised by how many of the cannon advocates consider a broadside shot a “luxury”.
“ What if you have been hunting all week and the only shot you have is a steeply quartering (paunch) shot or the animal is running straight away and you have to put one up the butt ?” Well buddy, then you don’t have a shot.

Have these dudes ever archery hunted? I’ve passed probably north of 50-60 shots because it wasn’t an ethical shot, good thing it was a resident tag and not some high dollar out of state tag where I would be forced to take bad shots and wound the animal

 

[ckt3]

Pretty much spot on analysis honestly.

The denial of reality is STRONG in the .223 for elk camp.

For real. I would want a bullet/rifle combo that could penetrate more than 5 inches or so. So should anyone!

Only Fudds bullets ever encounter bone.

Found the article writer’s burner account

 

[BuckSmasher]

Found the article writer’s burner account

 

[Forkasauras]

The Fudd cycle:
1. Shoots elk with X cartridges and it runs away.
2. Concludes elk are tough! Use enough gun!
3. Get bigger gun, shooots 3 shots before going afield because recoil is obnoxious.
3. Shoots elk with bigger cartridge and it runs away.
4. Concludes elk are tough! Use a tougher bullet!
5. Buys Barnes bullets.
6. Finally connects on elk lungs, tracks elk 300 yards but at least there is a blood trail.
7. See, it works!!

Reality:
1. Made a bad shot
2. Blames everything but himself
3. Waste money on new gun instead of ammo
4. Makes worse shot because of recoil
5. Wastes money on crappy bullets
6. Exclaims "you can eat to the hole! Look at all that penetration!"
7. Fails next year and says, 'man, elk are tough.'

 

[BuckSmasher]

This thread proves all the .223 is adequate crowd already knows that there position is indefensible. So they ad hominem and straw man while relying on their clique for support.

 

[Hnthrdr]

This thread proves all the .223 is adequate crowd already knows that there position is indefensible. So they ad hominem and straw man while relying on their clique for support.

Nah, we just know that well placed, well constructed bullets are the ticket over thinking that .05” of diameter will somehow save us from poor marksmanship or a poor shot choice.

 

[Hoodie]

I just feel like a lot of carcasses are sufficient evidence.

I don't know why I'm saying this. I guess it's been a week since I've said something on the internet so I have to.

 

[HunterGatherer]

This thread proves all the .223 is adequate crowd already knows that there position is indefensible. So they ad hominem and straw man while relying on their clique for support.

If you think the .223 is inadequate, wait until you hear about archery hunting !

 

[BuckSmasher]

Nah, we just know that well placed, well constructed bullets are the ticket over thinking that .05” of diameter will somehow save us from poor marksmanship or a poor shot choice.

I don't think anyone believes .05 diameter is a big deal, in fact, I don't think YOU think anyone else does either.

 

[43.6N]

The Fudd cycle:
1. Shoots elk with X cartridges and it runs away.
2. Concludes elk are tough! Use enough gun!
3. Get bigger gun, shooots 3 shots before going afield because recoil is obnoxious.
3. Shoots elk with bigger cartridge and it runs away.
4. Concludes elk are tough! Use a tougher bullet!
5. Buys Barnes bullets.
6. Finally connects on elk lungs, tracks elk 300 yards but at least there is a blood trail.
7. See, it works!!

Reality:
1. Made a bad shot
2. Blames everything but himself
3. Waste money on new gun instead of ammo
4. Makes worse shot because of recoil
5. Wastes money on crappy bullets
6. Exclaims "you can eat to the hole! Look at all that penetration!"
7. Fails next year and says, 'man, elk are tough.'

And that’s the crux of it.

Male ego is hard to overcome, and personal ownership of failure is emotionally painful. The industry capitalizes on a fear of failure to generate content and drive sales.

The truth is It’s not a caliber failure, or a bullet failure. It’s my failure because I made a bad shot.

 

[BuckSmasher]

If you think the .223 is inadequate, wait until you hear about archery hunting !

Apples and oranges.

 

[Forkasauras]

This thread proves all the .223 is adequate crowd already knows that there position is indefensible. So they ad hominem and straw man while relying on their clique for support.

Number one reason people fail to harvest elk on guided hunts is poor shooting. For everybody who cleanly misses, there is somebody else who shoots the elk in the guts. JVB is even advocating for that if 'you have enough gun'. Terrible advice. Majority of wound loss during rifle season is from big magnums. Mostly because that is what people use after being told so by gun writers romanticizing the western hunting experience and the mythical elk. Have him come back and talk about all the failures with big magnums and limited expansion bullets. Pot meet kettle.

 

[BuckSmasher]

And that’s the crux of it.

Male ego is hard to overcome, and personal ownership of failure is emotionally painful. The industry capitalizes on a fear of failure to generate content and drive sales.

The truth is It’s not a caliber failure, or a bullet failure. It’s my failure because I made a bad shot.

This is the crux of it, but not in the way I think you meant it. Some people refuse to believe that a well placed shot could fail.