Quote:
Originally Posted by TangoKilo
Sorry dude,
I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one.
Saying that the Barnes is unethical to hunt with shows your inexperiance in using this bullet on game. You clearly have never seen the chest cavity of an elk turned to Jello as a result of a Barnes X. How much energy was deposited in that animal?
Most people are completely un aware of how a bullet actually kills. Everyone knows that stuff dies when you shoot it, but do not know the mechinism of death.
In the 2 bullet examples that you give (Barnes and Berger), both bullets are quite capable of providing quick humane kills. Both bullets are fully capable of disrupting the central nervous system if directed to head or spine. The same bullets are entirely capable of depriving the brain of oxygin through blood loss and damage to cardiovascular system when directed into the heart/lung area.
Barnes and Berger bullets are designed to perform differently, but disrupt the same systems in the animal. Remember that impact velocity and energy are only second in importance to penetration in their ability to humanely incapacitate animals.
You are entitled to your opinion, but please don't allow your assumptions influance that opinion. And remember, there are a TONNE (thats metric) of guys on this board who shoot Barnes bullets with great sucess on game. It is inadvisable to call all of these fine outdoorsmen UNETHICAL because they fail to agree with your uneducated opinion.
TK
|
I have been waiting for this. Like I said you uses what you want. I shot them for a year.Everything that was shot ran and needed a fallow up shot.Yes I shot where you are supose to tight behind the shoulder.My old man loves them as well as all of the rest of you.I am not puting all the people that use them down I dont like how they work.You talk of disrupting the central nervous system. Which does it better a bullet that is in an animal or the one that blew through???? as we are back to tranfer of energy from one to another.