22 cal for deer

[hunter399]

One problem with some of those new bullets is that to get the higher weights that perform better on bigger animals, the bullets are increased in length.  The twist can only keep the groups tight (placement being key) for certain ranges of weight.  I'd hope anyone using these would know, and not just grab a box of 75 gr ammo for a .22 cal and throw it into slow twist, do a bore sight/quick off hand zero and off they go.  For me, I'd probably have to leave the .22-250 1:14 in favor of the .223 1:7, if wanted to use a heavy enough bullet for bigger animal.

your right about the twist , most people that build there own ar no better , but some might not ,my ar15 is a 1/7 twist which is the twist u need for heavy bullets,but I can shoot 55 grain with tight groups too for coyotes set it up that way.

[Jonathan_S]

Many hunters have lost respect for the game they hunt. It's not the gun or the ammo size but its the caliber of the hunter. Morals in society have completely bottomed out. I hear hunters more concerned about a successful hunt than their ethics in hunting. If the caliber can ethically kill well I say use it, but people will stretch the limits of the firearm for personal gain. Which is wrong.  That's why I'm against the AR in .22 caliber for hunting. I say man up and use a 24 cal minimum or quit hunting until you can. We bow hunters must draw 40lbs or we legally cant hunt. So get the ability to handle the mighty .24 cal or don't hunt. My daughter was handling shotguns in her teenage years so why cant some men handle the .24? grow a pair or stay at the campsite until you do.

Must be tough to be the arbiter of which calibers are ethically sound for deer hunting in any given situation 

[pianoman9701]

  Blanket statements about which caliber makes you a better, more ethical hunter are as broadly painted and short-sighted as saying ARs should never be used for hunting. Do I want to see a 500-yard shot at a deer with a .223? No. Do I want to see the waste of meat from a shot with a .45-70 at 50 yards? No. Bigger isn't always better. It's up to the hunter to practice and be proficient with whichever firearm he chooses at whatever range he's proficient, with a caliber that's appropriate for the given situation. The same goes for archery, ML, whatever. I would remind the reader that many, especially vet hunters, are deadly with the .223 and are far more practiced with it than many hunters who've used a .30-06 their whole lives. In the right situation, a .223 is the perfect round for some big game.

[Redbeard]

Many hunters have lost respect for the game they hunt. It's not the gun or the ammo size but its the caliber of the hunter. Morals in society have completely bottomed out. I hear hunters more concerned about a successful hunt than their ethics in hunting. If the caliber can ethically kill well I say use it, but people will stretch the limits of the firearm for personal gain. Which is wrong.  That's why I'm against the AR in .22 caliber for hunting. I say man up and use a 24 cal minimum or quit hunting until you can. We bow hunters must draw 40lbs or we legally cant hunt. So get the ability to handle the mighty .24 cal or don't hunt. My daughter was handling shotguns in her teenage years so why cant some men handle the .24? grow a pair or stay at the campsite until you do.

Must be tough to be the arbiter of which calibers are ethically sound for deer hunting in any given situation 

It's actually very simple. Let me explain. Take what the generation taught you when you were young and mix in what you believe is right from wrong. Very very easy

[pianoman9701]

Many hunters have lost respect for the game they hunt. It's not the gun or the ammo size but its the caliber of the hunter. Morals in society have completely bottomed out. I hear hunters more concerned about a successful hunt than their ethics in hunting. If the caliber can ethically kill well I say use it, but people will stretch the limits of the firearm for personal gain. Which is wrong.  That's why I'm against the AR in .22 caliber for hunting. I say man up and use a 24 cal minimum or quit hunting until you can. We bow hunters must draw 40lbs or we legally cant hunt. So get the ability to handle the mighty .24 cal or don't hunt. My daughter was handling shotguns in her teenage years so why cant some men handle the .24? grow a pair or stay at the campsite until you do.

"Hunters have lost respect", "the moral decay of society", "man up" with a specific caliber. "Grow a pair"? You must indeed be very manly!  This discussion has nothing to do with "handling" or not being able to handle a bigger caliber. It's about having different and valid choices for different circumstances. And regardless what caliber someone's using, there's always been someone who will "stretch the limits of the firearm". I also disagree with your premise that things are getting worse ("Hunters have lost respect"). I'm unsure how long you've been hunting, but in the 50 years that I have, ethics and sportsmanship have improved across the board, including my own. And that goes for volunteerism and conservation efforts, which are at an all-time high.

Look, I use a bow for big game. The only reason I have a dog in this fight at all is that hunters shouldn't be trying to dictate standards to other hunters based on their own biases/subjectivity. Live and let live. All due respects; you're not the proper judge of anyone but yourself. Don't want to use another choice? Don't. Pretty simple.

[chuckster]

I would just like the choice of being able to. This state loves having laws. A couple years ago I went deer hunting in Tennessee there any centerfield is legal as long as no fmj are used. Because I was hunting were a longer shot was possible I did not use my ar I used a 30 06 instead. However I liked that I had the choice to if I wanted without the state telling me what I can and can't do. In Tenn. I was allowed three does per day an no more then one buck per day, no more then three bucks per year. For a resident I believe the cost was 17 dollars per year not per deer. I had to pay about 70 for out of state is all and every time you killed a deer you just had to report it and get a free tag, either online or at the gas station that's were we went. No one in our group used 22 cals at all even though it was legal, but the freedom to do so was great. We talk to some locals who said they sometimes used there ar' s on certain stands that the shots would be close. Why can't the state let us make are own choices. Just because it's legal does not mean you have to do it. If 22 cal was legal I probly would not use either of my 223's It's just that I would like to make my own decisions without the state telling me if I can or not.

[JJB11B]

Blanket statements about which caliber makes you a better, more ethical hunter are as broadly painted and short-sighted as saying ARs should never be used for hunting. Do I want to see a 500-yard shot at a deer with a .223? No. Do I want to see the waste of meat from a shot with a .45-70 at 50 yards? No. Bigger isn't always better. It's up to the hunter to practice and be proficient with whichever firearm he chooses at whatever range he's proficient, with a caliber that's appropriate for the given situation. The same goes for archery, ML, whatever. I would remind the reader that many, especially vet hunters, are deadly with the .223 and are far more practiced with it than many hunters who've used a .30-06 their whole lives. In the right situation, a .223 is the perfect round for some big game.

sure kills the heck outta people, and has been for 50years

[MtnMuley]

Yes they do and so has the .22lr for that matter. While it's been debated that a .223 is more than capable of taking down big game, I think the minimum caliber law we have in Washington right now is the best for this state as a whole. 

[jackelope]

Yes they do and so has the .22lr for that matter. While it's been debated that a .223 is more than capable of taking down big game, I think the minimum caliber law we have in Washington right now is the best for this state as a whole. 

Agreed. Here's what I can't help but wonder after reading this thread. Is the big reason that folks want to be able to use the .22 cal so they can use their AR15's? I mean....I don't know if anyone has put up a good reason to switch other than they just want to.
Is there a benefit to making the switch other than just so we can?

[JJB11B]

Honestly it's because I am tired of all the stupid friggen rules. I would love to see the caliber rule as it applies to varmint hunters during MF big game season get thrown out. There are so many stupid rules it makes my head spin. Plus I'd love to be able to hunt with a suppressed .223 I don't like attention when I'm hunting. M spots are getting more and more busy to where I can't even call them my spots anymore. Part of that is my truck being parked places and part of that is people hearing me shoot

[JimmyHoffa]

Blanket statements about which caliber makes you a better, more ethical hunter are as broadly painted and short-sighted as saying ARs should never be used for hunting. Do I want to see a 500-yard shot at a deer with a .223? No. Do I want to see the waste of meat from a shot with a .45-70 at 50 yards? No. Bigger isn't always better. It's up to the hunter to practice and be proficient with whichever firearm he chooses at whatever range he's proficient, with a caliber that's appropriate for the given situation. The same goes for archery, ML, whatever. I would remind the reader that many, especially vet hunters, are deadly with the .223 and are far more practiced with it than many hunters who've used a .30-06 their whole lives. In the right situation, a .223 is the perfect round for some big game.

sure kills the heck outta people, and has been for 50years

And that's generally been with FMJ or some sort of penetration round, which tends to considered not sufficient for wild game regardless of caliber for lots of states and magazine writers.  What's going on here?!!!!

[JJB11B]

Kills the heck out of coyotes too, and they can be tough buggers

[JJB11B]

Blanket statements about which caliber makes you a better, more ethical hunter are as broadly painted and short-sighted as saying ARs should never be used for hunting. Do I want to see a 500-yard shot at a deer with a .223? No. Do I want to see the waste of meat from a shot with a .45-70 at 50 yards? No. Bigger isn't always better. It's up to the hunter to practice and be proficient with whichever firearm he chooses at whatever range he's proficient, with a caliber that's appropriate for the given situation. The same goes for archery, ML, whatever. I would remind the reader that many, especially vet hunters, are deadly with the .223 and are far more practiced with it than many hunters who've used a .30-06 their whole lives. In the right situation, a .223 is the perfect round for some big game.

sure kills the heck outta people, and has been for 50years

And that's generally been with FMJ or some sort of penetration round, which tends to considered not sufficient for wild game regardless of caliber for lots of states and magazine writers.  What's going on here?!!!!

I tend to think people that write in magazines are extremely closed minded or stupid, misinformed... etc. case in point Chris Costa

[JJB11B]

Tuck a 62gr FMJ into the pocket behind the front shoulder of a deer and it will die just as quick as if an arrow hit em

[JJB11B]

Tuck a 62gr FMJ into the pocket behind the front shoulder of a deer and it will die just as quick as if an arrow hit em

I have seen M885 and SS109 kill deer and coyotes and all sorts of crap...donkeys...