Change the 24 caliber min in washington(added poll please vote)

[pianoman9701]

Not picking on you here John, but just curious how this type of data would be collected.

Not feeling picked on, Doug.  Mortality counts. An unusual number of reports of "poached" animals. Bios' surveys/observations. I'm not sure what information they collect. But, my larger point is that a blanket statement saying it's a mistake to lower the caliber for some big game has no basis in fact. Neither does the statement that this will attract the kind of people we don't want in hunting. That's ridiculous. If someone can show me statistically that taking down a deer with a .225/5.56 comes with a higher lost animal rate or is somehow an irresponsible or unethical firearm choice, I would consider the evidence. I don't think it does. 

[Jonathan_S]

Are you saying that a 22-250 is equally inadequate to the 9mm pistol as a killing cartridge?

Their abilities to kill are probably not too far apart, the difference is more the method--.22-250 is more about energy from high velocity and 9mm would be more penetration from momentum.  I recall a thread earlier in the year where a fisherman with a 9mm in Alaska killed a huge brown bear trying to attack.  The yuge difference between the two is more about getting the bullet into the right place.  A .22-250 can shoot a dime at 200 yds rather consistently even from a novice shooter, I don't know too many people that could hit a dime at ten yards with a 9mm pistol routinely. 

If I had to take one in the chest from a 9mm at 30 feet or a .22-250 at 600 feet, I'd take the 9mm everytime

[Oh Mah]

yes .22 rim fire,when i was told this many years ago i was also told the reasoning was if .22 was allowed poachers could shoot deer and nothing of the bullet could be used to determine what weapon was used to shoot it.no way to trace a .22 rim fire bullet (after) it entered a deer.

Urban legend at its finest.

I disagree with your well thought out statement here  .I will wait for some LEO to chime in and see what they have to say about the caliber restriction reasoning.I am sure that when it was thought out the reason i gave was one of their CONS on the subject.As to the lost, Injured game i doubt.

[hunter399]

I talk to a few co-worker last night,one that is from idaho and said that in Idaho there was not a lot of spraying of bullets and maybe a handful of people he would see useing it,he also said he did not want it here.another guy from Kentucky,made a few points,said we already have sks,ar15,mini14/30, but hunting with fmj should never happen,that's where a lot of run off /wounded animals come from,not the caliber,sks 7.62×39 it's hard to find softpoints and people can go spray deer with ten rounds of fmj and  we allow it.He was for223 , with the ban of fmj.

[hunter399]

Are you saying that a 22-250 is equally inadequate to the 9mm pistol as a killing cartridge?

Their abilities to kill are probably not too far apart, the difference is more the method--.22-250 is more about energy from high velocity and 9mm would be more penetration from momentum.  I recall a thread earlier in the year where a fisherman with a 9mm in Alaska killed a huge brown bear trying to attack.  The yuge difference between the two is more about getting the bullet into the right place.  A .22-250 can shoot a dime at 200 yds rather consistently even from a novice shooter, I don't know too many people that could hit a dime at ten yards with a 9mm pistol routinely. 

The .22-250 overall would be a more lethal round then a 9mm. Just the ability to make many more accurate shots at many different ranges compared to the 9 makes it more lethal. I want to change my vote on the poll now that I know a 9mm is legal for bear and dear. I have a couple 9mm handguns and a .22-250 rifle and if I had to choose between them to hunt with it would be the .22-250.

If I had to take one in the chest from a 9mm at 30 feet or a .22-250 at 600 feet, I'd take the 9mm everytime

I think a lot a people would change there mind ,if they seen these calibers in action,with the right bullet.Deer go down pretty fast,as long as I take your time and look for the animal after the shot ,you'll find it

[Eric M]

Are you saying that a 22-250 is equally inadequate to the 9mm pistol as a killing cartridge?

Their abilities to kill are probably not too far apart, the difference is more the method--.22-250 is more about energy from high velocity and 9mm would be more penetration from momentum.  I recall a thread earlier in the year where a fisherman with a 9mm in Alaska killed a huge brown bear trying to attack.  The yuge difference between the two is more about getting the bullet into the right place.  A .22-250 can shoot a dime at 200 yds rather consistently even from a novice shooter, I don't know too many people that could hit a dime at ten yards with a 9mm pistol routinely. 

The .22-250 overall would be a more lethal round then a 9mm. Just the ability to make many more accurate shots at many different ranges compared to the 9 makes it more lethal. I want to change my vote on the poll now that I know a 9mm is legal for bear and dear. I have a couple 9mm handguns and a .22-250 rifle and if I had to choose between them to hunt with it would be the .22-250.

If I had to take one in the chest from a 9mm at 30 feet or a .22-250 at 600 feet, I'd take the 9mm everytime

I think a lot a people would change there mind ,if they seen these calibers in action,with the right bullet.Deer go down pretty fast,as long as I take your time and look for the animal after the shot ,you'll find it

There's no reason a 22-250 couldn't be used to kill deer. I think the only problem would be what's available on the shelf for a 22-250 might end up coming apart on you. So you turn to handloading and use a heavier bullet then you have to worry about your barrel twist because they might not stabilize. Having said that I think the rule is silly that I can go kill a lion with a 22 centerfire but not a deer.

[huntingfool7]

yes .22 rim fire,when i was told this many years ago i was also told the reasoning was if .22 was allowed poachers could shoot deer and nothing of the bullet could be used to determine what weapon was used to shoot it.no way to trace a .22 rim fire bullet (after) it entered a deer.

Urban legend at its finest.

I disagree with your well thought out statement here  .I will wait for some LEO to chime in and see what they have to say about the caliber restriction reasoning.I am sure that when it was thought out the reason i gave was one of their CONS on the subject.As to the lost, Injured game i doubt.

I may be mistaken but I think JLS is in law enforcement. 

[Oh Mah]

Maybe don't know for sure what area of law is important.I don't want to argue what i said but that is what i was told,If the LEO that told me this was wrong for what some of the reasoning for this rule was then i welcome any LEO to tell us all that my reasoning is ridiculous and has nothing to do with the rule and what the reason they think is.  .

[bobcat]

I'm pretty sure the reason 22 rimfires aren't allowed is it's considered to be not powerful enough to consistently kill quickly and humanely. Pretty simple. Now why the 22-250 is not legal, I have no clue. Especially when you can legally hunt deer, bear, and elk with a 9mm Glock!   

[timberfaller]

One reason is,  you can't teach a lot of hunters about "bullet placement"!!

My dad's hunting buddy, before any "restrictions" were ever thought of,  deer hunted with a 222 Rem.  Never missed and it only took one shot.    My brother in law during his stench with WGD during the mule deer study did the same,  222 Rem, one shot one harvest for study!!

Bullet placement and Practice Practice Practice!!

[fish vacuum]

Especially when you can legally hunt deer, bear, and elk with a 9mm Glock!   

I thought the handgun rules were written the way they are to allow for handguns shooting rifle calibers. If they made the minimum handgun caliber .40 (for example) then that would rule out most of the TC Contenders.

[Bob33]

I'm pretty sure the reason 22 rimfires aren't allowed is it's considered to be not powerful enough to consistently kill quickly and humanely. Pretty simple. Now why the 22-250 is not legal, I have no clue. Especially when you can legally hunt deer, bear, and elk with a 9mm Glock!   

Changing the minimum to .22 centerfire legalizes every .22, not just the 22-250. It includes very weak cartridges such as the 22 WCF which has maybe 250 ft lbs of energy.

If people can be trusted to use good judgment, 22 rimfires can be very effective as well.

[huntnnw]

Shooting a bear with a .223 doesn't seem like a good thing. I'm sure it would kill it, but I bet a lot more would get shot and not recovered then would get recovered.

people don't seem to realize the ribcage of a bear versus a deer is much weaker. Shoulder bones are equivalent of a deer of the same size. It don't matter if you make a poor shot with a .300 or a .223 kiss a bear goodbye. You have to double lung or heart a bear other than head shooting or spine shots which are low percentage

[bobcat]

I'm pretty sure the reason 22 rimfires aren't allowed is it's considered to be not powerful enough to consistently kill quickly and humanely. Pretty simple. Now why the 22-250 is not legal, I have no clue. Especially when you can legally hunt deer, bear, and elk with a 9mm Glock!   

Changing the minimum to .22 centerfire legalizes every .22, not just the 22-250. It includes very weak cartridges such as the 22 WCF which has maybe 250 ft lbs of energy.

If people can be trusted to use good judgment, 22 rimfires can be very effective as well.

That was just an example. The 22-250 isn't even questionable, in my mind, and my 22 WSSM is the pretty much the same. A rule could be written in such a way that would make the standard 223 Remington illegal but the 22-250 and 223 WSSM legal. It wouldn't necessarily have to be just a 22 centerfire minimum.

[Jonathan_S]

Shooting a bear with a .223 doesn't seem like a good thing. I'm sure it would kill it, but I bet a lot more would get shot and not recovered then would get recovered.

people don't seem to realize the ribcage of a bear versus a deer is much weaker. Shoulder bones are equivalent of a deer of the same size. It don't matter if you make a poor shot with a .300 or a .223 kiss a bear goodbye. You have to double lung or heart a bear other than head shooting or spine shots which are low percentage

Yeah people tend to think that black bears have thick hides but they don't. Like you said, bears need to be double lunged or heart shot to be consistently recovered.