Post by: chuckster on December 19, 2016, 08:31:15 PM
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 19, 2016, 08:33:05 PM
Post by: chuckster on December 19, 2016, 08:35:00 PM
Post by: millerwheeler on December 19, 2016, 08:35:10 PM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on December 19, 2016, 08:36:51 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 19, 2016, 08:39:35 PM
Post by: chuckster on December 19, 2016, 08:40:01 PM
Post by: 257wbymagkiller on December 19, 2016, 08:40:41 PM
I dont see the point in it i like the 24 cal or bigger :twocents:
Post by: JJB11B on December 19, 2016, 08:41:55 PM
I like to duh use my truk to rund thems over, the tag dont cost me know moneys :chuckle:I dun did that to an coyote de udder day
I dont see the point in it i like the 24 cal or bigger :twocents:
Post by: huntnphool on December 19, 2016, 08:43:04 PM
you shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
What difference does the rifle style make? :chuckle:
Post by: JJB11B on December 19, 2016, 08:43:59 PM
all the differenceyou shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
What difference does the rifle style make? :chuckle:
Post by: carpsniperg2 on December 19, 2016, 08:44:13 PM
I like to duh use my truk to rund thems over, the tag dont cost me know moneys :chuckle:
I dont see the point in it i like the 24 cal or bigger :twocents:
Got to hunt them with the 5.7 not the gun the hemi :cue:
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 19, 2016, 08:44:53 PM
you shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
What difference does the rifle style make? :chuckle:
All the difference to some of the brain trust around here.
Post by: Buzz2401 on December 19, 2016, 08:45:03 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 19, 2016, 08:45:35 PM
your inbox is full Jayyou shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
What difference does the rifle style make? :chuckle:
All the difference to some of the brain trust around here.
Post by: huntnphool on December 19, 2016, 08:45:43 PM
all the differenceyou shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
What difference does the rifle style make? :chuckle:
Joke, got it. :chuckle:
Post by: Bob33 on December 19, 2016, 08:46:06 PM
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,205241.msg2729212.html#msg2729212 (http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,205241.msg2729212.html#msg2729212)
Post by: JJB11B on December 19, 2016, 08:46:49 PM
Post by: huntnphool on December 19, 2016, 08:48:24 PM
did you use the same pollers as CNN did for the election?
Nate Silver and 538. :rolleyes:
Post by: Buzz2401 on December 19, 2016, 08:49:30 PM
you shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
AR-10 in 308 would be sweet but heavy as hell. I'm not a fan of the common AR-15 calibers for big game. Not that they don't work but no sense in using a toyota tacoma to tow your triple axle fifth wheel.
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 19, 2016, 08:53:49 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 19, 2016, 08:54:34 PM
Post by: h2ofowlr on December 19, 2016, 08:55:38 PM
Post by: boneaddict on December 19, 2016, 08:56:59 PM
Post by: Jonathan_S on December 19, 2016, 08:58:16 PM
Most people wouldn't be able to make a quality shot to put the animal down in a sensible and sportsman like way . I think it should stay at caliber rating we have now , plus let's be real some yahoo would empty his/her 20 round clip . I just see no good in it in my opinion :twocents: :twocents: :bdid:
If people can't kill them in a quality and sportsman like way with a .22 centerfire than they can't with a 243, 250 savage, 257 Roberts, .30-30, rifles and pistols in .357 mag and .45 LC...and other low energy calibers. And as far as mag dumping, people already hunt on AR platforms with that capability.
Post by: chuckster on December 19, 2016, 09:08:25 PM
Post by: chuckster on December 19, 2016, 09:11:28 PM
Post by: Buzz2401 on December 19, 2016, 09:15:21 PM
Post by: Buzz2401 on December 19, 2016, 09:17:11 PM
Post by: Igor on December 19, 2016, 09:25:04 PM
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 19, 2016, 09:27:20 PM
Have some respect for the animal you are hunting, and use a caliber large enough that you are able to kill that animal ethically and humanely.
Maybe it would be better to not judge others based on your own skill sets?
Post by: Dan-o on December 19, 2016, 09:31:24 PM
Have some respect for the animal you are hunting, and use a caliber large enough that you are able to kill that animal ethically and humanely.
Maybe it would be better to not judge others based on your own skill sets?
Certainly some hunters are more skilled than others.
It just seems to me that there should be a reasonable minimum........ because not everyone can do what some of you can.
Personally, I like the 24 cal minimum, and I'd also go for an energy minimum (but that's just me).
Post by: Bob33 on December 19, 2016, 09:42:33 PM
You could still use your 300 rum if you wanted to I just have not seen any issues reported in the other 41 states about 22cal.How would you propose that states capture the number of deer lost to certain calibers?
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 19, 2016, 09:46:14 PM
You could still use your 300 rum if you wanted to I just have not seen any issues reported in the other 41 states about 22cal.How would you propose that states capture the number of deer lost to certain calibers?
Why would the States need to?
Post by: Bob33 on December 19, 2016, 09:48:22 PM
I'm referring to his comment that other states haven't reported any issues with .22 caliber. How could they unless they've collected data?You could still use your 300 rum if you wanted to I just have not seen any issues reported in the other 41 states about 22cal.How would you propose that states capture the number of deer lost to certain calibers?
Why would the States need to?
Post by: bobcat on December 19, 2016, 09:50:29 PM
Post by: Bob33 on December 19, 2016, 09:53:34 PM
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 19, 2016, 09:55:22 PM
I'm referring to his comment that other states haven't reported any issues with .22 caliber. How could they unless they've collected data?You could still use your 300 rum if you wanted to I just have not seen any issues reported in the other 41 states about 22cal.How would you propose that states capture the number of deer lost to certain calibers?
Why would the States need to?
You would think that those states would change and put the .22 caliber cartridges on a restricted list if there was an issue.
Maybe folks from those states are better shooters?
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 19, 2016, 09:58:16 PM
As for 41 states argument....43 states have state income tax, 43 states don't have legal recreational weed.
Post by: PastorJoel on December 19, 2016, 10:16:54 PM
(I just wanted to say "knock down power." Please continue with your discussion :hello: :chuckle:)
Post by: bobcat on December 19, 2016, 10:20:41 PM
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 19, 2016, 10:21:55 PM
Why does the state allow archery gear and muzzleloaders?
So dem injuns and pilgrims have something to hunt with?
Post by: chuckster on December 19, 2016, 10:32:50 PM
Post by: mountainman on December 19, 2016, 10:47:17 PM
Weren't we arguing about this last week.this argument had become the topic "de jour" lately..must be post-hunting season's again Bone😏
Post by: JJB11B on December 19, 2016, 10:55:39 PM
Post by: kentrek on December 19, 2016, 11:06:55 PM
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html
Post by: cbond3318 on December 19, 2016, 11:17:55 PM
Here is a good read for those interested in learning about this stuff....kind of dry but lots of good information on ballistics and animals
http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/methods.html
I'all leave all this bookworm Mumbai jumbo to the chart thumpers. I once put a
Two two round clean through both sides of a propane tank. That's good enough for the deer I eat.
Where do I sign?
Post by: boneaddict on December 20, 2016, 09:56:29 AM
Forget the 22 min Arizona allows air rifles
Forget the air rifle,New Mexico allows for spear.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 20, 2016, 09:58:18 AM
Post by: boneaddict on December 20, 2016, 09:59:02 AM
Weren't we arguing about this last week.this argument had become the topic "de jour" lately..must be post-hunting season's again Bone😏
I know you and I can kill a deer or elk with a .22 or a pellet rifle, but some of these yayhoos, I wouldn't trust them with a .375 :chuckle:
Post by: Dan-o on December 20, 2016, 10:14:10 AM
Post by: Blacktail Sniper on December 20, 2016, 10:18:15 AM
WWEKD?
What would Elmer Keith do???
Post by: hunter399 on December 20, 2016, 10:48:18 AM
Post by: Bob33 on December 20, 2016, 10:51:40 AM
WWEKD?I suspect he'd move to a state with no restrictions so he could blaze away with his Red Ryder.
Post by: Bill W on December 20, 2016, 10:55:07 AM
WWEKD?
Elmer would want something big... probably at least .33 caliber for deer. A .33something OKH.
Post by: JDHasty on December 20, 2016, 11:40:16 AM
Post by: mountainman on December 20, 2016, 10:16:42 PM
yep. Lol, very true!Weren't we arguing about this last week.this argument had become the topic "de jour" lately..must be post-hunting season's again Bone😏
I know you and I can kill a deer or elk with a .22 or a pellet rifle, but some of these yayhoos, I wouldn't trust them with a .375 :chuckle:
Post by: sled on December 20, 2016, 10:23:58 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 20, 2016, 10:33:02 PM
223 caliber can and will kill deer.There are a lot of YouTube videos.Fish and wildlife dept. In other states are just a lot smarter then ours.just as long as it's not fired from an AR-15
Post by: hunter399 on December 20, 2016, 11:30:16 PM
I will legally hunt with my ar15,sks,bolt action,9mm,or whatever I feel like as long as it 24 caliber or larger.this topic is a dead horse , and more :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse:223 caliber can and will kill deer.There are a lot of YouTube videos.Fish and wildlife dept. In other states are just a lot smarter then ours.just as long as it's not fired from an AR-15
Post by: JJB11B on December 20, 2016, 11:34:43 PM
Post by: Smoke on December 21, 2016, 11:17:42 AM
all the differenceyou shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
What difference does the rifle style make? :chuckle:
rifle design has no bearing what so ever on the effectiveness of caliber to do it's job... an AR chambered in 308 will take moose... lot tuffer then deer...
Post by: JJB11B on December 21, 2016, 11:52:19 AM
its not ethical. We learned it in the "internet ethics police class" when I went through then ethics police academyall the differenceyou shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
What difference does the rifle style make? :chuckle:
rifle design has no bearing what so ever on the effectiveness of caliber to do it's job... an AR chambered in 308 will take moose... lot tuffer then deer...
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 21, 2016, 11:55:02 AM
its not ethical. We learned it in the "internet ethics police class" when I went through then ethics police academyall the differenceyou shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
What difference does the rifle style make? :chuckle:
rifle design has no bearing what so ever on the effectiveness of caliber to do it's job... an AR chambered in 308 will take moose... lot tuffer then deer...
Or the, "I'm more ethical than you competition" Sponsored by Huntwa.
Post by: BULLBLASTER on December 21, 2016, 11:57:32 AM
And besides that ar rifles are too scary looking to have hunters using. How will anyone know they are a hunter and not a bad guy out with a evil assault rifle! :dunno:its not ethical. We learned it in the "internet ethics police class" when I went through then ethics police academyall the differenceyou shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
What difference does the rifle style make? :chuckle:
rifle design has no bearing what so ever on the effectiveness of caliber to do it's job... an AR chambered in 308 will take moose... lot tuffer then deer...
Or the, "I'm more ethical than you competition" Sponsored by Huntwa.
:chuckle:
Post by: hunter399 on December 21, 2016, 01:30:39 PM
This way of thinking will hurt our gun rights some day,making 223 a sporting caliber ,might help your gun rights some day , but nobody thinks about the big picture.223 caliber can and will kill deer.There are a lot of YouTube videos.Fish and wildlife dept. In other states are just a lot smarter then ours.just as long as it's not fired from an AR-15
http://www.progressivestoday.com/2016-washington-state-bill-ban-almost-modern-firearms/
This will ban any gun that holds more than ten rounds,22,handguns,rifles with thumbhole stocks,lots of guns that are not ar15.
Post by: Bob33 on December 21, 2016, 01:44:58 PM
I’m not sure I follow the logic. If .22 caliber “assault rifles” were to become legal for “ruthlessly slaughtering innocent Bambi-like creatures” how would they become less of a target for anti-gunners?This way of thinking will hurt our gun rights some day,making 223 a sporting caliber ,might help your gun rights some day , but nobody thinks about the big picture.223 caliber can and will kill deer.There are a lot of YouTube videos.Fish and wildlife dept. In other states are just a lot smarter then ours.just as long as it's not fired from an AR-15
http://www.progressivestoday.com/2016-washington-state-bill-ban-almost-modern-firearms/
This will ban any gun that holds more than ten rounds,22,handguns,rifles with thumbhole stocks,lots of guns that are not ar15.
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 21, 2016, 01:48:59 PM
I’m not sure I follow the logic. If .22 caliber “assault rifles” were to become legal for “ruthlessly slaughtering innocent Bambi-like creatures” how would they become less of a target for anti-gunners?This way of thinking will hurt our gun rights some day,making 223 a sporting caliber ,might help your gun rights some day , but nobody thinks about the big picture.223 caliber can and will kill deer.There are a lot of YouTube videos.Fish and wildlife dept. In other states are just a lot smarter then ours.just as long as it's not fired from an AR-15
http://www.progressivestoday.com/2016-washington-state-bill-ban-almost-modern-firearms/
This will ban any gun that holds more than ten rounds,22,handguns,rifles with thumbhole stocks,lots of guns that are not ar15.
Because they are legitimate sporting rifles and if more people see them or what they are they might be able to see through the drama.
Post by: Bob33 on December 21, 2016, 01:53:47 PM
That's possible, although I'm not sure how many anti-gunners would see it that way. Perhaps the undecideds would.I’m not sure I follow the logic. If .22 caliber “assault rifles” were to become legal for “ruthlessly slaughtering innocent Bambi-like creatures” how would they become less of a target for anti-gunners?This way of thinking will hurt our gun rights some day,making 223 a sporting caliber ,might help your gun rights some day , but nobody thinks about the big picture.223 caliber can and will kill deer.There are a lot of YouTube videos.Fish and wildlife dept. In other states are just a lot smarter then ours.just as long as it's not fired from an AR-15
http://www.progressivestoday.com/2016-washington-state-bill-ban-almost-modern-firearms/
This will ban any gun that holds more than ten rounds,22,handguns,rifles with thumbhole stocks,lots of guns that are not ar15.
Because they are legitimate sporting rifles and if more people see them or what they are they might be able to see through the drama.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 21, 2016, 01:58:05 PM
I would actually argue that to a degree. The argument set forth by those wanting to use small caliber rifles is that "it's all about shot placement". Much of that argument is true. But not all rifle designs or rifles within a solid proven design are the same. Some rifles (lever guns come to mind) have external hammers that take longer to strike after trigger pull or have separated stocks with a foregrip/magazine that attach and alter barrel harmonics. ARs have spent a lot of time proving to be accurate enough, but one kind of wonders how much better it could be if the firing pin was spring driven like a bolt gun vs having to strike the pin with a rotating hammer.all the differenceyou shouldn't be allowed to use an AR type rifle to deer hunt. they aren't powerful enough to ethically kill a deer.
What difference does the rifle style make? :chuckle:
rifle design has no bearing what so ever on the effectiveness of caliber to do it's job... an AR chambered in 308 will take moose... lot tuffer then deer...
Post by: hunter399 on December 21, 2016, 02:07:34 PM
But same caliber,same length barrel,and ammo,same distance of target ,your gonna get the same result.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 21, 2016, 02:32:34 PM
Post by: Squidward on December 21, 2016, 02:43:08 PM
Right, it has a specific design to meet what was needed. But it trades off a little of X to get a little better of Y. I'm was just stating that rifle design has some effect on accuracy. And when one of the main arguments for using small cal rifles is accuracy, then doesn't rifle design come into some kind of consideration? A .22-250 of one model that is .3 MOA vs another model that is 1.3 MOA is a little different of argument than the .375 that is .3 MOA and a different one that is 3 MOA.
same argument can be made about any caliber at that point, because it's all shot placement, it don't matter the cal if you hit a hoof. should the FWL tell you what rifle brand and model you can & can't use in your bolt rifle because the MOA is different than the next rifle?
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 21, 2016, 02:43:59 PM
Right, it has a specific design to meet what was needed. But it trades off a little of X to get a little better of Y. I'm was just stating that rifle design has some effect on accuracy. And when one of the main arguments for using small cal rifles is accuracy, then doesn't rifle design come into some kind of consideration? A .22-250 of one model that is .3 MOA vs another model that is 1.3 MOA is a little different of argument than the .375 that is .3 MOA and a different one that is 3 MOA.
It is much easier for the average person to accurize a AR than a bolt rifle.
All of the AR15 rifles I've built are deep sub MOA rifles.
Ok, ok there was one mutt but even that one I'd hunt with.
Post by: hunter399 on December 21, 2016, 02:54:08 PM
Post by: Curly on December 21, 2016, 02:54:14 PM
Wyoming's law seems adequate to me for allowing .224" bullets. I think they set a min grain weight of 60.
I don't really care though if the state changes the law. Seems like too much opposition to the change so I sure won't worry about it. Although it did seem like lighted knocks would never be allowed, so I suppose anything is possible.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 21, 2016, 02:59:25 PM
Yeah, gets tricky trying to think how WDFW would even go about trying to figure out how to approve rifles/ammo on individual basis. Don't think anyone wants to even start going down that path.Right, it has a specific design to meet what was needed. But it trades off a little of X to get a little better of Y. I'm was just stating that rifle design has some effect on accuracy. And when one of the main arguments for using small cal rifles is accuracy, then doesn't rifle design come into some kind of consideration? A .22-250 of one model that is .3 MOA vs another model that is 1.3 MOA is a little different of argument than the .375 that is .3 MOA and a different one that is 3 MOA.
same argument can be made about any caliber at that point, because it's all shot placement, it don't matter the cal if you hit a hoof. should the FWL tell you what rifle brand and model you can & can't use in your bolt rifle because the MOA is different than the next rifle?
I don't think the shot placement argument is as strong with the higher cal/higher energy. Sure, you still have to get vitals/break bones/leave a wound channel for a bleed out; the larger cals/energy are more forgiving for a less precise shot. A .220 Swift, a .22-250 and a .223 Rem all fire the same bullet but at differing velocity, which one is more forgiving? A range mis-estimation or slight wind and you're not threading the needle anymore.
Post by: jay.sharkbait on December 21, 2016, 03:07:55 PM
Yeah, gets tricky trying to think how WDFW would even go about trying to figure out how to approve rifles/ammo on individual basis. Don't think anyone wants to even start going down that path.Right, it has a specific design to meet what was needed. But it trades off a little of X to get a little better of Y. I'm was just stating that rifle design has some effect on accuracy. And when one of the main arguments for using small cal rifles is accuracy, then doesn't rifle design come into some kind of consideration? A .22-250 of one model that is .3 MOA vs another model that is 1.3 MOA is a little different of argument than the .375 that is .3 MOA and a different one that is 3 MOA.
same argument can be made about any caliber at that point, because it's all shot placement, it don't matter the cal if you hit a hoof. should the FWL tell you what rifle brand and model you can & can't use in your bolt rifle because the MOA is different than the next rifle?
I don't think the shot placement argument is as strong with the higher cal/higher energy. Sure, you still have to get vitals/break bones/leave a wound channel for a bleed out; the larger cals/energy are more forgiving for a less precise shot. A .220 Swift, a .22-250 and a .223 Rem all fire the same bullet but at differing velocity, which one is more forgiving? A range mis-estimation or slight wind and you're not threading the needle anymore.
They aren't all that different at Huntwa distances.
I think you guys are over thinking this...
Post by: Lefthook on December 21, 2016, 03:10:42 PM
Not sure if that makes sense to anybody that hasn't used both. The .22-250 is one wicked little cartridge.
I'm probably over thinking it, but it does come down to confidence also.
Post by: theleo on December 21, 2016, 03:26:50 PM
Yeah... debating rifle design is pointless. Rifle design is and always will be an arbitrary line in-between X and Y. The lever action was the first assault rifle. Looking at the evolution of lever actions with external hammers one can see parlels in evolution to that of the AR/M16 platform, with the first lever action being the Henry with a high ammo capacity of relatively low power ammunition being the equivalent to the original M16 sent into service. Then you have newer Marlins like the 338 Express that has extended the original lever action abilities far beyond what it originally could just like many of the custom AR15's can do now compared to the early incarnations.
I would actually argue that to a degree. The argument set forth by those wanting to use small caliber rifles is that "it's all about shot placement". Much of that argument is true. But not all rifle designs or rifles within a solid proven design are the same. Some rifles (lever guns come to mind) have external hammers that take longer to strike after trigger pull or have separated stocks with a foregrip/magazine that attach and alter barrel harmonics. ARs have spent a lot of time proving to be accurate enough, but one kind of wonders how much better it could be if the firing pin was spring driven like a bolt gun vs having to strike the pin with a rotating hammer.
The argument for the small caliber guys is that if I can use a lever action with 38 Specials how is it more effective than a .223 loaded with suitable rounds for deer?
Post by: Igor on December 21, 2016, 03:27:21 PM
Post by: Jimmy33 on December 21, 2016, 03:40:19 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 21, 2016, 03:57:21 PM
Most people wouldn't be able to make a quality shot to put the animal down in a sensible and sportsman like way . I think it should stay at caliber rating we have now , plus let's be real some yahoo would empty his/her 20 round clip . I just see no good in it in my opinion :twocents: :twocents: :bdid:
I don't think it has to be all or nothing. The .24 requirement may be more than needed and a .22 may be less. It might be changed to include all centerfire cartridges. A .223 is plenty of velocity and bullet to kill a deer in its tracks.
Post by: Lefthook on December 21, 2016, 04:08:26 PM
Most people wouldn't be able to make a quality shot to put the animal down in a sensible and sportsman like way . I think it should stay at caliber rating we have now , plus let's be real some yahoo would empty his/her 20 round clip . I just see no good in it in my opinion :twocents: :twocents: :bdid:
I don't think it has to be all or nothing. The .24 requirement may be more than needed and a .22 may be less. It might be changed to include all centerfire cartridges. A .223 is plenty of velocity and bullet to kill a deer in its tracks.
:yeah:
I can see both being correct in their own way.
I think where this all gets weird is like that other thread. When the pistol calibers come up, the States' argument get's a little iffy.
Post by: Jonathan_S on December 21, 2016, 04:33:24 PM
I love the .223 with a good quality bullet for deer. I use one during the late whitetail hunt in Idaho when my shots will be close 100 yards or less) and I don't take shots that I feel I cant double lung them with. I have killed multiple whitetails with this caliber. I also feel that it is a great cartridge to get youth shooting if they start hunting at an early age. Great for teaching them not to flinch and learning how to be patient and passing up shots that aren't optimal.
Wait...so real world experience? How about that :dunno:
:tup:
Post by: Lefthook on December 21, 2016, 04:40:00 PM
I love the .223 with a good quality bullet for deer. I use one during the late whitetail hunt in Idaho when my shots will be close 100 yards or less) and I don't take shots that I feel I cant double lung them with. I have killed multiple whitetails with this caliber. I also feel that it is a great cartridge to get youth shooting if they start hunting at an early age. Great for teaching them not to flinch and learning how to be patient and passing up shots that aren't optimal.
Wait...so real world experience? How about that :dunno:
:tup:
There is definetly a lot of real world experience, but once you go down that road you will here about all the "lost" animals also.
I wonder how many of these .22 threads pop up during a year?
Post by: Curly on December 21, 2016, 04:49:53 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 21, 2016, 04:57:32 PM
From hunting other states, the guys that seemed to do great with the small cals were shooting from fixed stands over bait/meadow or shooting an unspooked deer in the back forty. They kill lots of deer that way with the .224 cal rifles. But when doing a drive/still hunting and animals were moving and shooting offhand, it seemed like the small cals lost more than the guys with bigger cals--those using the .224s wounded/lost more than the .243s wounded/lost more than the 7 mags, etc. That was my experience anyways.I love the .223 with a good quality bullet for deer. I use one during the late whitetail hunt in Idaho when my shots will be close 100 yards or less) and I don't take shots that I feel I cant double lung them with. I have killed multiple whitetails with this caliber. I also feel that it is a great cartridge to get youth shooting if they start hunting at an early age. Great for teaching them not to flinch and learning how to be patient and passing up shots that aren't optimal.
Wait...so real world experience? How about that :dunno:
:tup:
There is definetly a lot of real world experience, but once you go down that road you will here about all the "lost" animals also.
I wonder how many of these .22 threads pop up during a year?
Post by: chuckster on December 22, 2016, 11:32:00 PM
Post by: chuckster on December 22, 2016, 11:34:43 PM
Post by: Firedogg on December 23, 2016, 12:00:12 AM
Post by: chuckster on December 23, 2016, 12:33:35 AM
Post by: BOWHUNTER45 on December 23, 2016, 12:56:26 AM
I like to duh use my truk to rund thems over, the tag dont cost me know moneys :chuckle:haha ! That's funny ! People are now buying brush guards for their trucks now ! New way of hunting ! This just kills me how they make up laws !
I dont see the point in it i like the 24 cal or bigger :twocents:
Post by: Matth on December 23, 2016, 02:59:09 PM
As a side note i think the poachers of this state would get a kick out of this thread as they probably kill more deer with slow 22's every year than we do with our long guns.
Post by: chuckster on December 24, 2016, 05:09:51 PM
Post by: konradcountry on December 28, 2016, 08:30:52 AM
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 28, 2016, 09:02:43 AM
The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.With the low price of .223 ammo and able to buy in bulk, I'd imagine that the target practice while hunting would go up. I guess a pro to that is more verification of zero and familiarization. A con would be having to hear all the extra shooting
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
Post by: hunter399 on December 28, 2016, 10:19:04 AM
Post by: konradcountry on December 28, 2016, 10:38:18 AM
35 percent said they want change , now if wdfw lost 35 percent in sales for the year I bet they would change it sometimes majority is not everthing,this does not account for our of state sales they lose now cause of it.watch YouTube 9 out 10 video is youth,and everybody loves talking about it .
Anyone that can afford the out of state tag probably has a dozen rifles.
But I could see allowing the 223 for deer in exchange for banning semi-autos, with the exception of shotguns. I think you would have to propose a compromise that makes the rules more sporting if you really wanted it changed.
But my first question would be why bother with the effort when you can get a .243 at Wally World for $250? I would rather them revisit muzzleloader rules that ban the more common rifles that are produced for other states.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 28, 2016, 10:47:54 AM
Post by: JDHasty on December 28, 2016, 11:11:31 AM
The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
That is a very real and valid concern.
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 28, 2016, 11:41:08 AM
The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
That is a very real and valid concern.
Really? Show me a single hunting incident in WA related to an AR and someone "spraying a deer at 300 yards with a volley of shots". Because people have been hunting here with ARs for years.
You guys need to quit reading the NYT Editorial pages. It's a gun, no matter how black it is. I can't even believe this was posted AND acknowledged as a "valid concern". No wonder we keep losing ground in the gun rights arena.
Post by: hunter399 on December 28, 2016, 11:44:48 AM
your valid concern is already reality,some people act like nobody's hunting with ar15 already,but reality most people that are into ar15 are hunting with one that's above 24 caliber and will continue to do so as long as it's legal.The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
That is a very real and valid concern.
Post by: hunter399 on December 28, 2016, 11:48:19 AM
Post by: predatorpro on December 28, 2016, 11:57:54 AM
Post by: dan11011 on December 28, 2016, 12:21:19 PM
And any kind of ban on guns will lead to no guns at all ,so making 223 a sporting caliber does help your gun rights,let's say someone starts plinking people with a rem 700 do you think there not gonna try to ban it too.
"Any kind of ban on guns will lead to no guns at all" this is a common misconception but is not true. Rules in the hunting regs are there to keep hunting ethical. Not to take away rights.
Post by: BULLBLASTER on December 28, 2016, 01:06:46 PM
:yeah:The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
That is a very real and valid concern.
Really? Show me a single hunting incident in WA related to an AR and someone "spraying a deer at 300 yards with a volley of shots". Because people have been hunting here with ARs for years.
You guys need to quit reading the NYT Editorial pages. It's a gun, no matter how black it is. I can't even believe this was posted AND acknowledged as a "valid concern". No wonder we keep losing ground in the gun rights arena.
And we all know it's not possible to mame or injure deer or get off multiple shots with a boltgun... :rolleyes:
Post by: Gringo31 on December 28, 2016, 01:33:01 PM
This is not one of them. :twocents:
Post by: Skillet on December 28, 2016, 01:37:45 PM
Seriously, get out of my gun safe.
Post by: jackelope on December 28, 2016, 01:42:51 PM
There are plenty of things to change that would/may make a meaningful positive difference.
This is not one of them. :twocents:
:yeah:
Post by: Bob33 on December 28, 2016, 01:44:42 PM
+2There are plenty of things to change that would/may make a meaningful positive difference.
This is not one of them. :twocents:
:yeah:
Post by: boneaddict on December 28, 2016, 02:06:00 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 28, 2016, 02:11:48 PM
Post by: jackmaster on December 28, 2016, 02:15:54 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 28, 2016, 02:19:15 PM
as long as you paint your AR some other color besides black it would be fine. They kill better that wayI thought black made them super deadly, and into an 'assault' rifle?
Post by: JJB11B on December 28, 2016, 02:20:28 PM
it in fact makes them Super Predators according to Killaryas long as you paint your AR some other color besides black it would be fine. They kill better that wayI thought black made them super deadly, and into an 'assault' rifle?
Post by: JDHasty on December 28, 2016, 08:10:18 PM
The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
That is a very real and valid concern.
Really? Show me a single hunting incident in WA related to an AR and someone "spraying a deer at 300 yards with a volley of shots". Because people have been hunting here with ARs for years.
You guys need to quit reading the NYT Editorial pages. It's a gun, no matter how black it is. I can't even believe this was posted AND acknowledged as a "valid concern". No wonder we keep losing ground in the gun rights arena.
I have provided documentation wherein spraying big game with a volley of shots from an AR15 was actively being advocated for and discussed online as a legitimate big game hunting method.
I did not find that particular discussion in the NYT Editorial pages, I found it being discussed a little closer to home.
Each time I post the documentation that people's concern that the mentality that that practice is a legitimate hunting method, actually does exist... it is removed.
Post by: konradcountry on December 28, 2016, 09:10:24 PM
The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
That is a very real and valid concern.
Really? Show me a single hunting incident in WA related to an AR and someone "spraying a deer at 300 yards with a volley of shots". Because people have been hunting here with ARs for years.
You guys need to quit reading the NYT Editorial pages. It's a gun, no matter how black it is. I can't even believe this was posted AND acknowledged as a "valid concern". No wonder we keep losing ground in the gun rights arena.
AR-10s and ARs in 6x are legal but they are for the most part out the price range of the jack-ass community and under their radar.
I don't read the New York Times editorials. I base my opinion on my own experiences and that of others.
I know someone who was nearly killed during general firearm by someone bush shooting. Where I target shoot is basically a warzone opening weekend. I had 10 trucks pass my spot in less than 30 minutes during the second weekend this year.
No I do not want $500 ARs in general. I would ban semis in general with the exception of shotguns.
Certain areas of Western Washington are overhunted and overran with jack-asses. I don't know the answer but I do not want to throw $500 ARs in the mix.
And I own an AR-15.
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 29, 2016, 05:52:22 AM
Post by: singleshot12 on December 29, 2016, 08:12:34 AM
Post by: JJB11B on December 29, 2016, 08:14:37 AM
I would bet there are just as many Jack-Asses as there are AR's. Jack-Asses and semi-auto's are a very bad mix. Too bad we can't just ban the Jack-Asses that are ruining it for everyone.seen a lot of *censored* stuff done with all manner of weaponry
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 29, 2016, 08:21:23 AM
The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
That is a very real and valid concern.
Really? Show me a single hunting incident in WA related to an AR and someone "spraying a deer at 300 yards with a volley of shots". Because people have been hunting here with ARs for years.
You guys need to quit reading the NYT Editorial pages. It's a gun, no matter how black it is. I can't even believe this was posted AND acknowledged as a "valid concern". No wonder we keep losing ground in the gun rights arena.
I have provided documentation wherein spraying big game with a volley of shots from an AR15 was actively being advocated for and discussed online as a legitimate big game hunting method.
I did not find that particular discussion in the NYT Editorial pages, I found it being discussed a little closer to home.
Each time I post the documentation that people's concern that the mentality that that practice is a legitimate hunting method, actually does exist... it is removed.
There is a vastly overwhelming majority of people who use semi-auto rifles, shotguns, and pistols for hunting everyday who aren't "spraying" their shots at wild game. Yes, there are hosers out there who do things which suck. But, there are extremely few. However, you never, never, ever take away the rights of the people based on the actions of a few. This is the justification for gun grabbers use to push the laws they seek to disarm the law-abiding populace. It's wrong there and it's wrong here.
Post by: hunter399 on December 29, 2016, 08:24:16 AM
so a 120 dollor 300 blk out barrel is out of most ar15 owners price range,just because you own a ar doesn't mean you know a lot about them, let me guess that you use a semi auto shotgun since you support them so much,so we should lose our guns but not you.The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
That is a very real and valid concern.
Really? Show me a single hunting incident in WA related to an AR and someone "spraying a deer at 300 yards with a volley of shots". Because people have been hunting here with ARs for years.
You guys need to quit reading the NYT Editorial pages. It's a gun, no matter how black it is. I can't even believe this was posted AND acknowledged as a "valid concern". No wonder we keep losing ground in the gun rights arena.
AR-10s and ARs in 6x are legal but they are for the most part out the price range of the jack-ass community and under their radar.
I don't read the New York Times editorials. I base my opinion on my own experiences and that of others.
I know someone who was nearly killed during general firearm by someone bush shooting. Where I target shoot is basically a warzone opening weekend. I had 10 trucks pass my spot in less than 30 minutes during the second weekend this year.
No I do not want $500 ARs in general. I would ban semis in general with the exception of shotguns.
Certain areas of Western Washington are overhunted and overran with jack-asses. I don't know the answer but I do not want to throw $500 ARs in the mix.
And I own an AR-15.
Post by: JJB11B on December 29, 2016, 08:28:17 AM
I know a lot of rich morons. In fact most of the morons I know are rich. they do whatever they want cuz they're rich. Bullwinkle comes to mindso a 120 dollor 300 blk out barrel is out of most ar15 owners price range,just because you own a ar doesn't mean you know a lot about them, :yeah:The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
That is a very real and valid concern.
Really? Show me a single hunting incident in WA related to an AR and someone "spraying a deer at 300 yards with a volley of shots". Because people have been hunting here with ARs for years.
You guys need to quit reading the NYT Editorial pages. It's a gun, no matter how black it is. I can't even believe this was posted AND acknowledged as a "valid concern". No wonder we keep losing ground in the gun rights arena.
AR-10s and ARs in 6x are legal but they are for the most part out the price range of the jack-ass community and under their radar.
I don't read the New York Times editorials. I base my opinion on my own experiences and that of others.
I know someone who was nearly killed during general firearm by someone bush shooting. Where I target shoot is basically a warzone opening weekend. I had 10 trucks pass my spot in less than 30 minutes during the second weekend this year.
No I do not want $500 ARs in general. I would ban semis in general with the exception of shotguns.
Certain areas of Western Washington are overhunted and overran with jack-asses. I don't know the answer but I do not want to throw $500 ARs in the mix.
And I own an AR-15.
Post by: hunter399 on December 29, 2016, 08:38:08 AM
https://www.midwayusa.com/s?userSearchQuery=300+blackout+barrel&uac=true
Post by: JJB11B on December 29, 2016, 08:41:51 AM
Here's a link for anybody that wants to turn there ar15 into a hunting rifle I was wrong 89.99 will buy a new barrel.that is so unethical!
https://www.midwayusa.com/s?userSearchQuery=300+blackout+barrel&uac=true
Post by: Mongo Hunter on December 29, 2016, 09:27:27 AM
Second a 5.56/.223 will kill a deer just fine. I don't like the government telling me whats ethical. you let me decide and if people want to be jerks and make unethical shots they have that right. I don't agree with it but normally those people don't hunt for very long because they normally loose all their hunting buddies.
Third use some logic. Its unethical and dangerous for someone to take a shot with a .223 from an AR, but its ethical and safe for someone to use a .50BMG? because that's how the law is now. I cant use a .223 but I can bust out the Barrett .50 to shoot bambi. or a Glock 9mm as long as it has a long enough barrel.
let people use what they want. quit wasting the fish cops time with gun restrictions and let them catch the people shooting animals out of season or on land that's restricted. that does more damage to the animal population than the caliber I use. just my 2 cents.
Post by: JDHasty on December 29, 2016, 10:05:40 AM
Here's a link for anybody that wants to turn there ar15 into a hunting rifle I was wrong 89.99 will buy a new barrel.
https://www.midwayusa.com/s?userSearchQuery=300+blackout+barrel&uac=true
A barrel for an AR is not an interchangeable barrel like would be a barrel for a Contender and my inclination is that you more likely than not know that.
The concern that was expressed is this: "The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots."
That is the same concern that I have. I did not just come up with that all on my own. Anyone who has the time and inclination can locate threads on AR enthusiast websites in which the value of having five to 30 rounds available and ready to be unleashed downrange is discussed. In these threads magazine dumping, spraying, double tapping , triple tapping , quadruple tapping, and believe it or not, quintuple tapping or whatever euphemism you wish to apply to directing volley fire in the direction of big game have active apologists who are ready and willing to weigh in and discuss the fine points of.
I have never seen a discussion in which there was anything even remotely close to this type of behavior would even be tolerated, much less batted around and discussed, except when the topic revolved around the use of the AR15 based platform for hunting. If you have any familiarity with... let's say lever action enthusiasts entertaining this topic, I encourage you to post a link to those discussions.
Post by: jackelope on December 29, 2016, 10:26:33 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 29, 2016, 10:30:42 AM
Here's a link for anybody that wants to turn there ar15 into a hunting rifle I was wrong 89.99 will buy a new barrel.
https://www.midwayusa.com/s?userSearchQuery=300+blackout+barrel&uac=true
A barrel for an AR is not an interchangeable barrel like would be a barrel for a Contender and my inclination is that you more likely than not know that.
The concern that was expressed is this: "The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots."
That is the same concern that I have. I did not just come up with that all on my own. Anyone who has the time and inclination can locate threads on AR enthusiast websites in which the value of having five to 30 rounds available and ready to be unleashed downrange is discussed. In these threads magazine dumping, spraying, double tapping , triple tapping , quadruple tapping, and believe it or not, quintuple tapping or whatever euphemism you wish to apply to directing volley fire in the direction of big game have active apologists who are ready and willing to weigh in and discuss the fine points of.
I have never seen a discussion in which there was anything even remotely close to this type of behavior would even be tolerated, much less batted around and discussed, except when the topic revolved around the use of the AR15 based platform for hunting. If you have any familiarity with... let's say lever action enthusiasts entertaining this topic, I encourage you to post a link to those discussions.
Show me. I've never seen anything like this discussed as acceptable on this forum. I may have missed it. Regardless, one person saying they'd be OK with it isn't a valid reason to eliminate semi-autos from hunting, which is what was proposed. That's ridiculous.
Post by: BULLBLASTER on December 29, 2016, 10:35:24 AM
I'm surprised you haven't seen it p man... hasty feels a compulsive need to post his quoted thread in every thread on huntwa... luckily for the rest of us it is usually removed fairly fast. :chuckle:Here's a link for anybody that wants to turn there ar15 into a hunting rifle I was wrong 89.99 will buy a new barrel.
https://www.midwayusa.com/s?userSearchQuery=300+blackout+barrel&uac=true
A barrel for an AR is not an interchangeable barrel like would be a barrel for a Contender and my inclination is that you more likely than not know that.
The concern that was expressed is this: "The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots."
That is the same concern that I have. I did not just come up with that all on my own. Anyone who has the time and inclination can locate threads on AR enthusiast websites in which the value of having five to 30 rounds available and ready to be unleashed downrange is discussed. In these threads magazine dumping, spraying, double tapping , triple tapping , quadruple tapping, and believe it or not, quintuple tapping or whatever euphemism you wish to apply to directing volley fire in the direction of big game have active apologists who are ready and willing to weigh in and discuss the fine points of.
I have never seen a discussion in which there was anything even remotely close to this type of behavior would even be tolerated, much less batted around and discussed, except when the topic revolved around the use of the AR15 based platform for hunting. If you have any familiarity with... let's say lever action enthusiasts entertaining this topic, I encourage you to post a link to those discussions.
Show me. I've never seen anything like this discussed as acceptable on this forum. I may have missed it. Regardless, one person saying they'd be OK with it isn't a valid reason to eliminate semi-autos from hunting, which is what was proposed. That's ridiculous.
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2016, 10:37:00 AM
Post by: BULLBLASTER on December 29, 2016, 10:39:38 AM
There is a big difference between taking multiple shots at an animal still alive to ensure it is killed quickly, and "spray and pray." I suspect more than one animal has been lost to the "one shot one kill" advocates that should have been shot multiple times.100% agreed. If an animal has been hit once and I am able to get another shot into it I will each and every time until it is dead.
Post by: Jonathan_S on December 29, 2016, 10:41:12 AM
There is a big difference between taking multiple shots at an animal still alive to ensure it is killed quickly, and "spray and pray." I suspect more than one animal has been lost to the "one shot one kill" advocates that should have been shot multiple times.
:yeah: I had a situation this year where if I didn't keep sending Bergers afield, I'd have lost my ID buck
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 29, 2016, 10:43:37 AM
Post by: Ridgeratt on December 29, 2016, 10:45:29 AM
There is a big difference between taking multiple shots at an animal still alive to ensure it is killed quickly, and "spray and pray." I suspect more than one animal has been lost to the "one shot one kill" advocates that should have been shot multiple times.
:yeah: I had a situation this year where if I didn't keep sending Bergers afield, I'd have lost my ID buck
Extended yardage?
Post by: Mongo Hunter on December 29, 2016, 10:52:41 AM
I'm done with this. You've apparently got one incident that you've been using to justify gun bans. Sorry, but you're not going to convince me that we need to penalize all hunters for the acts of one or two. Let's move on.
:tup:
Lets also not forget there are guys out there using .300 win mags that think they are Chris Kyle trying to shoot deer a 600+ yards and wounding animals to never be found.
If your a unethical jerk it doesn't matter what weapon you use.
Post by: JDHasty on December 29, 2016, 10:55:48 AM
I have a bolt action .223 that holds 5 rounds, would that be better?
I have never seen or overheard any discussions wherein racking the bolt and pulling the trigger as fast as you can get off five shots with a bolt action rifle has ever been discussed as a legitimate strategy for big game hunting. I have never seen any serious discussion of that methodology being advocated by lever action aficionados. What I have seen is quite a few serious discussions wherein volley fire was being discussed and the pro magazine dumping side had people lining up to defend it as a legitimate way to use an AR15 for bringing down big game. My concern is that if the only thing standing between hordes of people with a "$500 AR from Dicks" and quintuple tapping deer at 300 yards is that those hordes cannot today legally use their "$500 AR from Dicks" for legally hunting deer.
Post by: Mongo Hunter on December 29, 2016, 11:04:52 AM
I have a bolt action .223 that holds 5 rounds, would that be better?
I have never seen or overheard any discussions wherein racking the bolt and pulling the trigger as fast as you can get off five shots with a bolt action rifle has ever been discussed as a legitimate strategy for big game hunting. I have never seen any serious discussion of that methodology being advocated by lever action aficionados. What I have seen is quite a few serious discussions wherein volley fire was being discussed and the pro magazine dumping side had people lining up to defend it as a legitimate way to use an AR15 for bringing down big game. My concern is that if the only thing standing between hordes of people with a "$500 AR from Dicks" and quintuple tapping deer at 300 yards is that those hordes cannot today legally use their "$500 AR from Dicks" for legally hunting deer.
Seriously? how about a $300 semi auto shotgun using 3" shells of buck shot. 3 rounds "triple tapping" would give you 45 pellets flying through the air. that's cheap and legal but you have no problem with that? or the old semi auto hunting rifles in .308 or 30-06 that typically go for less than $500?
AND the AR platform has become more popular and advanced in the last decade yet hunting accidents are on the decline.
your logic is flawed, go home your drunk :chuckle:
Post by: Jonathan_S on December 29, 2016, 11:06:14 AM
There is a big difference between taking multiple shots at an animal still alive to ensure it is killed quickly, and "spray and pray." I suspect more than one animal has been lost to the "one shot one kill" advocates that should have been shot multiple times.
:yeah: I had a situation this year where if I didn't keep sending Bergers afield, I'd have lost my ID buck
Extended yardage?
Hit high at 300. Follow up shots at 475
Post by: jackelope on December 29, 2016, 11:10:31 AM
I'm done with this. You've apparently got one incident that you've been using to justify gun bans. Sorry, but you're not going to convince me that we need to penalize all hunters for the acts of one or two. Let's move on.
:tup:
Lets also not forget there are guys out there using .300 win mags that think they are Chris Kyle trying to shoot deer a 600+ yards and wounding animals to never be found.
If your a unethical jerk it doesn't matter what weapon you use.
There's this, which should be considered a major factor in this discussion. Anyone can fire multiple rounds at excessive range(or not at excessive range) at big game animals irresponsibly. They don't have to be using AR's, expensive or cheap. Hell I can throw 3 rounds downrange out of my single shot/no lever/no bolt/no pump/no magazine TC Encore pretty darn quick. Doesn't mean I'm going to.
The debate over whether or not someone should be able to hunt with a .22 caliber centerfire rifle should absolutely not be centered around the use of AR rifles if you ask me. The focus should be on the killing power, the energy the bullet has at range, etc. Those sort of things are the things that should be debated and not a specific type rifle that some people like and some people don't like.
Post by: JJB11B on December 29, 2016, 11:12:25 AM
Post by: JDHasty on December 29, 2016, 11:13:04 AM
I'm done with this. You've apparently got one incident that you've been using to justify gun bans. Sorry, but you're not going to convince me that we need to penalize all hunters for the acts of one or two. Let's move on.
Nobody has suggested banning anything. The question is: Do you think the law should be amended to include 224 as minimum caliber for deer? I am not in favor of that change and I have given you the reason that I am not in favor of changing the law.
Post by: jackelope on December 29, 2016, 11:13:39 AM
You know, as long as they only Ban AR-15's and still let me use my Mini 14 I'd be happy.
Sweet baby Jesus. Does it have a wood stock? If so, it's alright with me.
:yike:
Post by: jackelope on December 29, 2016, 11:15:41 AM
I'm done with this. You've apparently got one incident that you've been using to justify gun bans. Sorry, but you're not going to convince me that we need to penalize all hunters for the acts of one or two. Let's move on.
Nobody has suggested banning anything. The question is: Do you think the law should be amended to include 2244 as minimum caliber for deer? I am not in favor of that change and I have given you the reason that I am not in favor of changing the law.
This guy did.
The concern I have is the guy that buys the $500 Dick's special AR-15 as his "all rounder" and then sprays a deer 300 yards away with a volley of shots.
There are already too many jack-asses in the woods. I would vote to keep the 223 out of general for this reason. We also don't need anymore negative news stories about the AR.
That is a very real and valid concern.
Really? Show me a single hunting incident in WA related to an AR and someone "spraying a deer at 300 yards with a volley of shots". Because people have been hunting here with ARs for years.
You guys need to quit reading the NYT Editorial pages. It's a gun, no matter how black it is. I can't even believe this was posted AND acknowledged as a "valid concern". No wonder we keep losing ground in the gun rights arena.
AR-10s and ARs in 6x are legal but they are for the most part out the price range of the jack-ass community and under their radar.
I don't read the New York Times editorials. I base my opinion on my own experiences and that of others.
I know someone who was nearly killed during general firearm by someone bush shooting. Where I target shoot is basically a warzone opening weekend. I had 10 trucks pass my spot in less than 30 minutes during the second weekend this year.
No I do not want $500 ARs in general. I would ban semis in general with the exception of shotguns.
Certain areas of Western Washington are overhunted and overran with jack-asses. I don't know the answer but I do not want to throw $500 ARs in the mix.
And I own an AR-15.
Post by: JJB11B on December 29, 2016, 11:15:58 AM
lolYou know, as long as they only Ban AR-15's and still let me use my Mini 14 I'd be happy.
Sweet baby Jesus. Does it have a wood stock? If so, it's alright with me.
:yike:
Post by: Bob33 on December 29, 2016, 11:16:02 AM
Nobody has suggested banning anything.
Quote
I would ban semis in general with the exception of shotguns.
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 29, 2016, 11:17:35 AM
I'm done with this. You've apparently got one incident that you've been using to justify gun bans. Sorry, but you're not going to convince me that we need to penalize all hunters for the acts of one or two. Let's move on.
Nobody has suggested banning anything. The question is: Do you think the law should be amended to include 2244 as minimum caliber for deer? I am not in favor of that change and I have given you the reason that I am not in favor of changing the law.
Quote from konradcountry that you agreed with: "I would ban semis in general with the exception of shotguns. " So yes, both of you promoted banning semi-autos. Either you didn't read his post or your memory is affected.
Post by: JJB11B on December 29, 2016, 11:18:42 AM
this argument is about caliber minimums, please start another thread if you want to discuss firearm restrictions. :chuckle: :tung:I'm done with this. You've apparently got one incident that you've been using to justify gun bans. Sorry, but you're not going to convince me that we need to penalize all hunters for the acts of one or two. Let's move on.
Nobody has suggested banning anything. The question is: Do you think the law should be amended to include 2244 as minimum caliber for deer? I am not in favor of that change and I have given you the reason that I am not in favor of changing the law.
Quote from konradcountry that you agreed with: "I would ban semis in general with the exception of shotguns. " So yes, both of you promoted banning semi-autos. Either you didn't read his post or your memory is affected.
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 29, 2016, 11:20:25 AM
Post by: JJB11B on December 29, 2016, 11:22:02 AM
Sorry. I said I was done. Now I am.sorry Pman I was trying to be funny
Post by: JDHasty on December 29, 2016, 11:24:22 AM
I'm done with this. You've apparently got one incident that you've been using to justify gun bans. Sorry, but you're not going to convince me that we need to penalize all hunters for the acts of one or two. Let's move on.
Nobody has suggested banning anything. The question is: Do you think the law should be amended to include 2244 as minimum caliber for deer? I am not in favor of that change and I have given you the reason that I am not in favor of changing the law.
Quote from konradcountry that you agreed with: "I would ban semis in general with the exception of shotguns. " So yes, both of you promoted banning semi-autos. Either you didn't read his post or your memory is affected.
This thread and the other I commented on are about what the minimum caliber should be for deer and that is what I was commenting on.
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 29, 2016, 11:39:33 AM
Sorry. I said I was done. Now I am.sorry Pman I was trying to be funny
No ire directed at you, 11B. :tup:
Post by: JJB11B on December 29, 2016, 11:52:37 AM
Post by: JJB11B on December 29, 2016, 12:20:15 PM
Post by: Curly on December 29, 2016, 12:35:49 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 29, 2016, 12:39:53 PM
Post by: chuckster on December 29, 2016, 07:11:38 PM
Post by: hunter399 on December 29, 2016, 07:51:16 PM
Here's a link for anybody that wants to turn there ar15 into a hunting rifle I was wrong 89.99 will buy a new barrel.
https://www.midwayusa.com/s?userSearchQuery=300+blackout+barrel&uac=true
A barrel for an AR is not an interchangeable barrel like would be a barrel for a Contender and my inclination is that you more likely than not know that.
I can change a barrel on ar15 in about 10 min it is very project that can make a deer rifle quick and lots of YouTube on the how to,no it's not as quick contender , but that's all you need is a barrel , your bolt ,mags,all other parts interchange on 300 blk .
Post by: Buzz2401 on December 29, 2016, 10:55:02 PM
Post by: konradcountry on December 30, 2016, 06:44:13 AM
You lost me with "...I would ban...". How does a gun owner even go there? Incredible.
I'm talking about banning them for general firearm hunting.
Do you have a problem with restrictions? Or do you think we should allow jack-asses to hunt elk with 10/22s? Because that is exactly what would happen if you ended the rules.
Post by: konradcountry on December 30, 2016, 06:57:20 AM
Ok first off you can use an AR for hunting as long as its a big enough caliber. so for those of you talking about people "spraying bullets" have no idea what you are talking about. they are already being used and I don't see hunters throwing lead all over the place with them.
And yet there are videos of people doing this in other states where AR-15s are legal for hunting:
Second a 5.56/.223 will kill a deer just fine. I don't like the government telling me whats ethical. you let me decide and if people want to be jerks and make unethical shots they have that right. I don't agree with it but normally those people don't hunt for very long because they normally loose all their hunting buddies.
Yea let's let people shoot elk with 22 LRs. Sounds like a great idea. Then some wounded elk is going to get on the news and PETA will write up some anti-hunting bill for the King county voters to pass.
Post by: konradcountry on December 30, 2016, 07:20:23 AM
I have a bolt action .223 that holds 5 rounds, would that be better?
I have never seen or overheard any discussions wherein racking the bolt and pulling the trigger as fast as you can get off five shots with a bolt action rifle has ever been discussed as a legitimate strategy for big game hunting. I have never seen any serious discussion of that methodology being advocated by lever action aficionados. What I have seen is quite a few serious discussions wherein volley fire was being discussed and the pro magazine dumping side had people lining up to defend it as a legitimate way to use an AR15 for bringing down big game. My concern is that if the only thing standing between hordes of people with a "$500 AR from Dicks" and quintuple tapping deer at 300 yards is that those hordes cannot today legally use their "$500 AR from Dicks" for legally hunting deer.
Seriously? how about a $300 semi auto shotgun using 3" shells of buck shot. 3 rounds "triple tapping" would give you 45 pellets flying through the air. that's cheap and legal but you have no problem with that? or the old semi auto hunting rifles in .308 or 30-06 that typically go for less than $500?
AND the AR platform has become more popular and advanced in the last decade yet hunting accidents are on the decline.
your logic is flawed, go home your drunk :chuckle:
Hunting with a shotgun requires you to get close and buckshot loses energy fast past 50 yards. That's why numerous Eastern states only allow shotguns in certain areas with high population densities. The 223 bullet is deadly past 500 yards and the AR-15 is easy to shoot out of the box.
There are areas near where I live that are overhunted and I would not want to add AR-15s in them during general. I do not want jack-asses showing up with their $500 AR-15 to hunt deer. Yes I would prefer them to show up with a $300 shotgun. Most of these guys are "road hunters" and would never get close enough with a shotgun. Half of them can barely walk.
Next time try asking for an explanation instead of jumping to insults.
Post by: Mongo Hunter on December 30, 2016, 07:24:47 AM
Ok first off you can use an AR for hunting as long as its a big enough caliber. so for those of you talking about people "spraying bullets" have no idea what you are talking about. they are already being used and I don't see hunters throwing lead all over the place with them.
And yet there are videos of people doing this in other states where AR-15s are legal for hunting:Second a 5.56/.223 will kill a deer just fine. I don't like the government telling me whats ethical. you let me decide and if people want to be jerks and make unethical shots they have that right. I don't agree with it but normally those people don't hunt for very long because they normally loose all their hunting buddies.
Yea let's let people shoot elk with 22 LRs. Sounds like a great idea. Then some wounded elk is going to get on the news and PETA will write up some anti-hunting bill for the King county voters to pass.
So because of the actions of a few we should ban AR's from hunting? if we go down that slope NONE of us will be allowed to hunt anymore. How many of us know someone that has done something unethical during hunting season? Taken a bad shot? didn't know their equipment well enough? over estimated their own skill level? I guarantee everyone here knows or has heard of someone doing something stupid. And second that's a pig hunting video, not deer. People shoot those things from helicopters because they have become such a nuisance. Also they were shooting at an area where they could see their targets and what beyond it. not spraying bullets through the woods.
as for your second comment, people already use guns and tactics they probably shouldn't during hunting season. If someone is an unethical jerk they always will be. if someone used a .22LR for an elk for one they are an idiot and two they would probably use a subpar caliber anyways even with a restriction. but your going to the extreme to make a point that I frankly think would never happen. I don't see any hunter using a 22LR for an elk.
and PETA is already up our butts for being hunters.
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 30, 2016, 07:27:24 AM
You lost me with "...I would ban...". How does a gun owner even go there? Incredible.
I'm talking about banning them for general firearm hunting.
Do you have a problem with restrictions? Or do you think we should allow jack-asses to hunt elk with 10/22s? Because that is exactly what would happen if you ended the rules.
Some restrictions are good. Some suck. That's not my problem here. My problem is with people who think their way is the only way and are fine with screwing everyone else who sees differently by pushing for more restrictions. Trad archery guys v. compound. Flintlock v. inline. Archery v. Modern - It's all infighting BS, it's hypocritical, and it creates divisions in our community when what we really need is more unity. Our government is fully capable of restricting us without your help or mine. I've got a novel idea. Why don't you legally hunt the way you want and I'll legally hunt the way I want and we can both support each other in our legal hunting efforts.
Post by: Mongo Hunter on December 30, 2016, 07:30:35 AM
I have a bolt action .223 that holds 5 rounds, would that be better?
I have never seen or overheard any discussions wherein racking the bolt and pulling the trigger as fast as you can get off five shots with a bolt action rifle has ever been discussed as a legitimate strategy for big game hunting. I have never seen any serious discussion of that methodology being advocated by lever action aficionados. What I have seen is quite a few serious discussions wherein volley fire was being discussed and the pro magazine dumping side had people lining up to defend it as a legitimate way to use an AR15 for bringing down big game. My concern is that if the only thing standing between hordes of people with a "$500 AR from Dicks" and quintuple tapping deer at 300 yards is that those hordes cannot today legally use their "$500 AR from Dicks" for legally hunting deer.
Seriously? how about a $300 semi auto shotgun using 3" shells of buck shot. 3 rounds "triple tapping" would give you 45 pellets flying through the air. that's cheap and legal but you have no problem with that? or the old semi auto hunting rifles in .308 or 30-06 that typically go for less than $500?
AND the AR platform has become more popular and advanced in the last decade yet hunting accidents are on the decline.
your logic is flawed, go home your drunk :chuckle:
Hunting with a shotgun requires you to get close and buckshot loses energy fast past 50 yards. That's why numerous Eastern states only allow shotguns in certain areas with high population densities. The 223 bullet is deadly past 500 yards and the AR is easy to shoot out of the box.
There are areas near where I live that are overhunted and I would not want to add ARs in them during general. I do not want jack-asses showing up with their $500 AR to hunt deer. Yes I would prefer them to show up with a $300 shotgun. Most of these guys are "road hunters" and would never get close enough with a shotgun. Half of them can barely walk.
Next time try asking for an explanation instead of jumping to insults.
I stay with that I don't want the government putting restrictions on me on what tool I decide to use.
Those road hunters will be the same with or without an AR. they could have there granddads 30-30 in their car and spray out the window with that. The tools are not going to change someone ethics. they could use an old semi auto 30-06 and "spray bullets". jerks are going to be jerks doesn't matter the tools. and why use a $500 AR from dicks to hunt when you could spend less on a bolt hunting rifle? because it looks cool? like I said most of these guys wouldn't last long anyways as hunters.
I swear this I why the gun community can be its own worst enemy. even we forget its about the individual right. if you don't want to use an AR .223 to hunt then don't use on. don't restrict other peoples rights.
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 30, 2016, 07:43:41 AM
Back to the original thread, I would support lower caliber restrictions for deer. .223 or other centerfire .22 caliber are plenty of killing power. But pushing for it it would open us up to further restriction and I'm against that. Personally, I'd leave it alone.
Post by: konradcountry on December 30, 2016, 08:21:48 AM
So because of the actions of a few we should ban AR's from hunting? if we go down that slope NONE of us will be allowed to hunt anymore. How many of us know someone that has done something unethical during hunting season? Taken a bad shot? didn't know their equipment well enough? over estimated their own skill level? I guarantee everyone here knows or has heard of someone doing something stupid. And second that's a pig hunting video, not deer. People shoot those things from helicopters because they have become such a nuisance. Also they were shooting at an area where they could see their targets and what beyond it. not spraying bullets through the woods.
So first you say no one is spraying bullets and now you acknowledge it is done during hog hunting. I would even bet a million dollars I could email a land based Texas hog outfitter and tell him I can only "spray and pray" with an AR and he would welcome me to a hunt.
You are deluded if you think no one has sprayed and prayed deer in our state. A jack-ass who comes across a good size buck is not going to simply let it go with one shot if he has a semi-auto. He is going to trail it with bullets and everyone knows it. But the typical jack-ass at least will not buy an AR-10 or Garand for being cost prohibitive. Opening the 223 without restrictions would bring in the black friday special ARs and I don't see a good cost/benefit ratio in doing so.
as for your second comment, people already use guns and tactics they probably shouldn't during hunting season. If someone is an unethical jerk they always will be.
Hunting rules work, otherwise they wouldn't exist. Of course there are pricks that will always ignore the rules but there are also the guys in the middle that won't risk losing their license just to save a few hundred dollars on a new rifle.
if someone used a .22LR for an elk for one they are an idiot
Well of course but being an idiot isn't going to be enough of a deterrent.
but your going to the extreme to make a point that I frankly think would never happen. I don't see any hunter using a 22LR for an elk.
Poachers use a 22 for everything. In Alaska the natives shoot all kinds of stuff with a 22 to save money on ammo.
and PETA is already up our butts for being hunters.The point is that this is Washington and we are not the majority. We have to tread carefully or King county voters will go with a crude ban that they don't even understand. Just like they did with the trapping bill.
Post by: Bob33 on December 30, 2016, 08:26:29 AM
:yeah: Not to mention that the comment of "Half of them can barely walk" shows no empathy for older and disabled hunters who benefit greatly by road hunting and/or using an AR to continue hunting instead of having to quit because of some random shotgun restriction pushed by a "fellow" hunter. Again, it's ridiculous and arbitrary.The number of threads and disagreements that have resulted from this topic on Hunt WA lend credence to that.
Back to the original thread, I would support lower caliber restrictions for deer. .223 or other centerfire .22 caliber are plenty of killing power. But pushing for it it would open us up to further restriction and I'm against that. Personally, I'd leave it alone.
Post by: JDHasty on December 30, 2016, 08:28:59 AM
Here's a link for anybody that wants to turn there ar15 into a hunting rifle I was wrong 89.99 will buy a new barrel.
https://www.midwayusa.com/s?userSearchQuery=300+blackout+barrel&uac=true
A barrel for an AR is not an interchangeable barrel like would be a barrel for a Contender and my inclination is that you more likely than not know that.
I can change a barrel on ar15 in about 10 min it is very project that can make a deer rifle quick and lots of YouTube on the how to,no it's not as quick contender , but that's all you need is a barrel , your bolt ,mags,all other parts interchange on 300 blk .
You obviously don't know what you are talking about, you need specialized tools or you will a) likely distort your upper receiver b) not have the first clue whether your barrel nut is tightened to within specification c) you probably should also have a selection of barrel nuts or maybe a barrel nut shim kit on hand in order to get the barrel nut properly timed when torqued to spec... unless you have a lathe available.
I suppose that a guy could possibly use a hone or lap the receiver in place of a lathe for c in order to have the nut timed when the barrel nut is tightened to within spec, but I don't think I would do it that way.
It has been quite a while since I have assembled an upper receiver assy, but I do remember that much.
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 30, 2016, 08:31:42 AM
:yeah: Not to mention that the comment of "Half of them can barely walk" shows no empathy for older and disabled hunters who benefit greatly by road hunting and/or using an AR to continue hunting instead of having to quit because of some random shotgun restriction pushed by a "fellow" hunter. Again, it's ridiculous and arbitrary.The number of threads and disagreements that have resulted from this topic on Hunt WA lend credence to that.
Back to the original thread, I would support lower caliber restrictions for deer. .223 or other centerfire .22 caliber are plenty of killing power. But pushing for it it would open us up to further restriction and I'm against that. Personally, I'd leave it alone.
I yielded to your wisdom on this one, Bob. It makes sense. They never give something without taking something away.
Post by: Mongo Hunter on December 30, 2016, 08:35:59 AM
.22 Caliber center fire is allowed but limit detachable box mags to 5 rounds?
Its a comprises but most of us that hunt with bolt guns only get 3-5 rounds anyways.
just an idea. open to thoughts.
Post by: konradcountry on December 30, 2016, 08:52:32 AM
Those road hunters will be the same with or without an AR. they could have there granddads 30-30 in their car and spray out the window with that. The tools are not going to change someone ethics. they could use an old semi auto 30-06 and "spray bullets". jerks are going to be jerks doesn't matter the tools. and why use a $500 AR from dicks to hunt when you could spend less on a bolt hunting rifle? because it looks cool? like I said most of these guys wouldn't last long anyways as hunters.
It's called adding fuel to the fire. You know as well as I do that the vast majority of them do not have access to an old semi 3006 and the AR-15 is far easier to spray than anything with a lever. Yes they are going to buy the $500 AR because they think it is cool. You must not work with the public much if that is a surprise to you. I even once talked to a gun store owner who said he likes how he can always sell them all year long because of the cool factor.
I swear this I why the gun community can be its own worst enemy. even we forget its about the individual right. if you don't want to use an AR .223 to hunt then don't use on. don't restrict other peoples rights.
Hunting with an AR-15 isn't a right anymore than hunting with a 338 next to an urban center in the middle of the night. Gun ownership is a right but there is no right to hunt however you want with whatever caliber you want.
Post by: jackelope on December 30, 2016, 08:53:43 AM
So because of the actions of a few we should ban AR's from hunting? if we go down that slope NONE of us will be allowed to hunt anymore. How many of us know someone that has done something unethical during hunting season? Taken a bad shot? didn't know their equipment well enough? over estimated their own skill level? I guarantee everyone here knows or has heard of someone doing something stupid. And second that's a pig hunting video, not deer. People shoot those things from helicopters because they have become such a nuisance. Also they were shooting at an area where they could see their targets and what beyond it. not spraying bullets through the woods.
So first you say no one is spraying bullets and now you acknowledge it is done during hog hunting. I would even bet a million dollars I could email a land based Texas hog outfitter and tell him I can only "spray and pray" with an AR and he would welcome me to a hunt.
You are deluded if you think no one has sprayed and prayed deer in our state. A jack-ass who comes across a good size buck is not going to simply let it go with one shot if he has a semi-auto. He is going to trail it with bullets and everyone knows it. But the typical jack-ass at least will not buy an AR-10 or Garand for being cost prohibitive. Opening the 223 without restrictions would bring in the black friday special ARs and I don't see a good cost/benefit ratio in doing so.as for your second comment, people already use guns and tactics they probably shouldn't during hunting season. If someone is an unethical jerk they always will be.
Hunting rules work, otherwise they wouldn't exist. Of course there are pricks that will always ignore the rules but there are also the guys in the middle that won't risk losing their license just to save a few hundred dollars on a new rifle.if someone used a .22LR for an elk for one they are an idiot
Well of course but being an idiot isn't going to be enough of a deterrent.but your going to the extreme to make a point that I frankly think would never happen. I don't see any hunter using a 22LR for an elk.
Poachers use a 22 for everything. In Alaska the natives shoot all kinds of stuff with a 22 to save money on ammo.and PETA is already up our butts for being hunters.The point is that this is Washington and we are not the majority. We have to tread carefully or King county voters will go with a crude ban that they don't even understand. Just like they did with the trapping bill.
konradcountry...
I totally 100% disagree with legalizing .22 caliber centerfire rifles for big game hunting. Your first comments make it sound like you think the price of the rifle or the size of your wallet will make the difference whether or not people do dumb things behind the trigger.
Pretty sure in Alaska a lot of the subsistence hunters are using AR rifles in .223, not .22LR rifles, for their hunting. Maybe .22LR running traplines or something like that, but they're not out hunting with their rimfires unless they're hunting ptarmigan or the like.
Post by: jackelope on December 30, 2016, 08:57:27 AM
Most of these folks I've watched shoot can't shoot sub-6" groups with them at 50 yards. Having shot rifles over the last couple years with a group of men who are predominantly not hunters, it amazes me how much they don't know about sighting rifles in, shooting accurately, etc. and these guys are shooting Daniel Defense, LMT, high priced custom builds, etc. not the $500 rifles.
Post by: hunter399 on December 30, 2016, 09:05:00 AM
Post by: Mongo Hunter on December 30, 2016, 09:09:27 AM
Those road hunters will be the same with or without an AR. they could have there granddads 30-30 in their car and spray out the window with that. The tools are not going to change someone ethics. they could use an old semi auto 30-06 and "spray bullets". jerks are going to be jerks doesn't matter the tools. and why use a $500 AR from dicks to hunt when you could spend less on a bolt hunting rifle? because it looks cool? like I said most of these guys wouldn't last long anyways as hunters.
It's called adding fuel to the fire. You know as well as I do that the vast majority of them do not have access to an old semi 3006 and the AR-15 is far easier to spray than anything with a lever. Yes they are going to buy the $500 AR because they think it is cool. You must not work with the public much if that is a surprise to you. I even once talked to a gun store owner who said he likes how he can always sell them all year long because of the cool factor.I swear this I why the gun community can be its own worst enemy. even we forget its about the individual right. if you don't want to use an AR .223 to hunt then don't use on. don't restrict other peoples rights.
Hunting with an AR-15 isn't a right anymore than hunting with a 338 next to an urban center in the middle of the night. Gun ownership is a right but there is no right to hunt however you want with whatever caliber you want.
I do work with the public and I know people buy AR's because its cool but I don't think that makes it a hunting problem. strip away the fancy plastic and rails and what is an AR? a semi auto .223, nothing more. so saying Hunting with an AR-15 isn't a right you are saying we shouldn't hunt with ANY semi auto rifles. and there are already laws against hunting near an urban area so that remark is ridiculous.
I know of a couple people who hunt with an AR style rifle (6.8 I believe) and they are not $500 Dicks specials and ive never heard of them spraying anything.
I have been hunting for 16 years now and 99% of the hunters I come across hunting deer use bolt guns or semi autos of high caliber. you are trying to make the slippery slope/fuel to the fire argument in the same way libs use it for gun control in general.
when they were first introducing modern concealed carry laws all the libs were in an uproar saying the streets were going to be like the wild west again. same slippery slope argument. the laws passed and what happened? nothing. no wild west shootouts.
and also think of the benefits of allowing .22 center fire. $500 dicks special guns and inexpensive ammo. it might get more people interested in hunting. I see it as more people on our side, more money going to conservation. just a thought.
Post by: hunter399 on December 30, 2016, 09:11:53 AM
Post by: JDHasty on December 30, 2016, 09:17:49 AM
Most of the people I know who own AR rifles because "they're cool" are rolling the $1500 rifles, not the $500 rifles. And they're fully rigged for battle for some reason.
Most of these folks I've watched shoot can't shoot sub-6" groups with them at 50 yards. Having shot rifles over the last couple years with a group of men who are predominantly not hunters, it amazes me how much they don't know about sighting rifles in, shooting accurately, etc. and these guys are shooting Daniel Defense, LMT, high priced custom builds, etc. not the $500 rifles.
That is my experience as well.
Post by: konradcountry on December 30, 2016, 09:28:02 AM
konradcountry...
I totally 100% disagree with legalizing .22 caliber centerfire rifles for big game hunting. Your first comments make it sound like you think the price of the rifle or the size of your wallet will make the difference whether or not people do dumb things behind the trigger.
Yes price is absolutely related to what people can do when it comes to dumb things behind the trigger.
If .50 BMG rifles were $200 at Wal-mart then we would hear far more stories about jack-asses doing dumb things with them.
Quote
Pretty sure in Alaska a lot of the subsistence hunters are using AR rifles in .223, not .22LR rifles, for their hunting. Maybe .22LR running traplines or something like that, but they're not out hunting with their rimfires unless they're hunting ptarmigan or the like.
The Inuit headshot caribou and seal with them. Here is a thread on it:
http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?25514-Biggest-Animal-with-22
Post by: hunter399 on December 30, 2016, 09:33:38 AM
Post by: konradcountry on December 30, 2016, 10:06:27 AM
I put this in the last post on 22 for deer,all you that keep voting for it to stay the same as it is ,would like to see 380,9mm,45,carbine out in the woods,these guns are the younger generation ,don't want mag limits, but talk about spray, run n gun hunting,can't see past the ar15 to see any benefit to change.
And what makes you think we are all fine with 4" 380s in general?
Just because some of us voted no does not mean we fully agree with the existing rules.
223 and the AR15 are overlapping issues. You would probably get more support if you proposed bolt only 223 and exclusively for deer, not elk. A poll on the 380 issue might be interesting as well.
Post by: chuckster on December 30, 2016, 05:10:44 PM
Post by: chuckster on December 30, 2016, 05:22:27 PM
Post by: hunter399 on December 30, 2016, 06:11:23 PM
The way I see it majority of you on the poll would rather have people out in the woods with there 380 over 223.Even though 223 is a proven deer caliber in other states.I put this in the last post on 22 for deer,all you that keep voting for it to stay the same as it is ,would like to see 380,9mm,45,carbine out in the woods,these guns are the younger generation ,don't want mag limits, but talk about spray, run n gun hunting,can't see past the ar15 to see any benefit to change.
And what makes you think we are all fine with 4" 380s in general?
Just because some of us voted no does not mean we fully agree with the existing rules.
223 and the AR15 are overlapping issues. You would probably get more support if you proposed bolt only 223 and exclusively for deer, not elk. A poll on the 380 issue might be interesting as well.
Post by: hunter399 on December 30, 2016, 06:13:01 PM
223 trophy bonded tip:yeah:
https://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/federal-fusion-223-rem-jacketed-soft-point-62-grain-3000-fps-20-round-box-f223fs1-029465060381.do?sortby=ourPicks&refType=&from=Search
A lot better bullets than years ago.
Post by: chuckster on December 30, 2016, 07:27:32 PM
Post by: Dan-o on December 30, 2016, 08:00:05 PM
223 trophy bonded tip
I'd hunt deer with this, if it was all I had..... But I would want more juice.
How far would you take shots?
Post by: chuckster on December 30, 2016, 08:18:21 PM
Post by: hunter399 on December 30, 2016, 08:21:36 PM
Post by: Dan-o on December 30, 2016, 08:37:39 PM
Under 100 yards, were I hunt 99 percent of the deer I have shot have been under 50 yards. It's thick in the ne corner.
Thanks.
that makes sense.
Where I hunt, you can see for miles.
Post by: Redbeard on December 30, 2016, 10:04:19 PM
Post by: MadMooner on December 31, 2016, 05:26:51 AM
Some one earlier brought up why not 17 or .204. The answer is bullets.
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 31, 2016, 07:31:30 AM
Post by: hunter399 on December 31, 2016, 08:08:41 AM
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.I don't think anybody has a problem with the recoil on 24 caliber,hunted 20 year with the set I got so think I'm good there.guns are just tools,sometimes it not how big your tool is its how you use it.
Post by: hunter399 on December 31, 2016, 08:14:38 AM
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.
Post by: Jonathan_S on December 31, 2016, 08:56:10 AM
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 ;)
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 31, 2016, 09:14:11 AM
Post by: Redbeard on December 31, 2016, 12:41:34 PM
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 easyMany 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 ;)
Post by: pianoman9701 on December 31, 2016, 01:12:53 PM
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! :chuckle: 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.
Post by: chuckster on December 31, 2016, 03:47:06 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 31, 2016, 03:51:10 PM
:yeah: 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
Post by: MtnMuley on December 31, 2016, 04:20:28 PM
Post by: jackelope on December 31, 2016, 05:19:16 PM
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. :twocents:
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?
Post by: JJB11B on December 31, 2016, 05:24:27 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 31, 2016, 05:48:50 PM
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?!!!!:yeah: 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
Post by: JJB11B on December 31, 2016, 05:58:30 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 31, 2016, 06:00:08 PM
I tend to think people that write in magazines are extremely closed minded or stupid, misinformed... etc. case in point Chris CostaAnd 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?!!!!:yeah: 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
Post by: JJB11B on December 31, 2016, 06:01:50 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 31, 2016, 06:07:46 PM
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 emI have seen M885 and SS109 kill deer and coyotes and all sorts of crap...donkeys...
Post by: MtnMuley on December 31, 2016, 06:18:53 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 31, 2016, 06:28:18 PM
Post by: Jimmy33 on December 31, 2016, 06:31:51 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: chuckster on December 31, 2016, 06:43:38 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 31, 2016, 06:44:06 PM
Freedom...it's about freedom. This state has so many rules and regulations that other states do not. I love the 223. It's a great caliber that has plenty of punch in the right conditions for deer. I've shot plenty with them.I'm also manly enough to shoot deer with a 338. I've also shot deer with a compound, recurve, and muzzy. The 223 is a perfect deer killing caliber. We don't need any more rules in this state. We need to fight for less.agreed
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Bob33 on December 31, 2016, 06:54:13 PM
Freedom...it's about freedom. This state has so many rules and regulations that other states do not. I love the 223. It's a great caliber that has plenty of punch in the right conditions for deer. I've shot plenty with them.I'm also manly enough to shoot deer with a 338. I've also shot deer with a compound, recurve, and muzzy. The 223 is a perfect deer killing caliber. We don't need any more rules in this state. We need to fight for less.I take it you're in favor of no minimum caliber restriction?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: JJB11B on December 31, 2016, 06:55:58 PM
i am, I just think people who do dumb crap that is blatantly unethical should have their souls....how to say this lightly... souls crushed. That's appropriate right?Freedom...it's about freedom. This state has so many rules and regulations that other states do not. I love the 223. It's a great caliber that has plenty of punch in the right conditions for deer. I've shot plenty with them.I'm also manly enough to shoot deer with a 338. I've also shot deer with a compound, recurve, and muzzy. The 223 is a perfect deer killing caliber. We don't need any more rules in this state. We need to fight for less.I take it you're in favor of no minimum caliber restriction?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Bob33 on December 31, 2016, 06:58:03 PM
I don't agree, but think that is a more defensible position than simply changing .24 to .22.i am, I just think people who do dumb crap that is blatantly unethical should have their souls....how to say this lightly... souls crushed. That's appropriate right?Freedom...it's about freedom. This state has so many rules and regulations that other states do not. I love the 223. It's a great caliber that has plenty of punch in the right conditions for deer. I've shot plenty with them.I'm also manly enough to shoot deer with a 338. I've also shot deer with a compound, recurve, and muzzy. The 223 is a perfect deer killing caliber. We don't need any more rules in this state. We need to fight for less.I take it you're in favor of no minimum caliber restriction?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Jimmy33 on December 31, 2016, 07:01:27 PM
I like the freedom to use any centerfire.Freedom...it's about freedom. This state has so many rules and regulations that other states do not. I love the 223. It's a great caliber that has plenty of punch in the right conditions for deer. I've shot plenty with them.I'm also manly enough to shoot deer with a 338. I've also shot deer with a compound, recurve, and muzzy. The 223 is a perfect deer killing caliber. We don't need any more rules in this state. We need to fight for less.I take it you're in favor of no minimum caliber restriction?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: chuckster on December 31, 2016, 08:11:21 PM
Post by: konradcountry on January 01, 2017, 02:49:57 PM
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.
It isn't merely an issue of personal biases or subjectivity. There are government-enforced rules in place and there is a valid question of whether they should be changed.
There is nothing subjective about a 380 auto being a terrible weapon for hunting elk.
And yet Washington rules allow it but not a 223 bolt action rifle.
If you find these discussions offensive to your imagined "right to kill moose with a slingshot" belief then leave yourself out of them.
Post by: Redbeard on January 01, 2017, 09:19:13 PM
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.
It isn't merely an issue of personal biases or subjectivity. There are government-enforced rules in place and there is a valid question of whether they should be changed.
There is nothing subjective about a 380 auto being a terrible weapon for hunting elk.
And yet Washington rules allow it but not a 223 bolt action rifle.
If you find these discussions offensive to your imagined "right to kill moose with a slingshot" belief then leave yourself out of them.
This is a forum where everyone is free to speak their opinion. I have spoken my thoughts here and others have responded positively or negativity. I respect those comments either way. Its also their opinions which they are entitled to. The more we communicate the more we learn from others. I believe telling someone to leave themselves out of them is completely off base.
We have opinions because we all have a passion for Hunting/fishing/outdoors lifestyle.
Post by: JeffRaines on January 03, 2017, 11:54:03 PM
Perhaps make it legal for Whitetail and Blacktail only. I can see where it might not be ethical taking a mule deer at 400-500 yards, but the others probably won't get that kind of opportunity. If you're really worried about people using ARs and dumping mags, put a 3/4 round limit on magazines similar to a bolt action, kinda similar to upland/waterfowl with a shotgun.