Quote:
Originally Posted by West O'5
Haha....I'm kinda/sorta watching "Best of The West" as we type,lol(oddly enough,they're in Africa up close n personal with Cape Buffalo this episode?
Anyhow......I vote no for the same idiot factor Honda610 eludes to.
Sure,deer can be and are killed often with the sub-.23s....doesn't make a .223 a "deer rifle",although the relatively newer chamberings like the Valkyrie and Creedmore etc that can handle heavy for caliber bullets are well suited and capable deer loads,again.....too many idiots out there imho that would be chasing deer with Winny white box or wutever other varmint round happens to be on sale at Walmart/Cambodian Tire that day.
Edit:case in point,I just went back to actually read the entire discussion from beginning and right off the bat(post#10) there's a Rambo saying "it would be nice to hunt deer with a T97" ....good Lord.
Ironic how the .223 advocates will yammer on and on about "shot placement ,shot placement,shot placement........then in the next breath they want to hunt with a spray and pray 3-4MOA Chinese bull pup.  |
Agree with a lot of this. End of day we are left to self train. Can we not already buy $200 sks in 7.62x39 and cases of cheap milsurp? Same thing. Pandora’s box is already open.
We can only control this so much and Kurt has another point at the then end where guys going long because they bought the gear likely wound as many or more than the video gamer sks crowd. You can not eliminate this, there’s argument that a .223 rem running a decent bullet would be far better than a 7.62x39 as a deer round, I’d likely choose that option if given the two. Why allow one and not the other? Anyway, we as individuals have to learn what works for us. Bullet tech has come far enough now I can see the allowing of these diam. bullets. The cartridge choice is another matter.