Things That Might Make You Reconsider Deer Hunting With a .223

Bambi Buster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2004
Messages
31,023
Location
Middle Tennessee
1644719299200.png
 

Rakkin6

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
7,102
Location
Clarksville
Would never do it. Seen to many little brown men take multiple shots with a 5.56 and just keep coming. And a head shot to me is just to small a target and unethical with little room for error. If you are off you just blow their jaw up and they suffer. In MY opinion the .223 shouldn't be legal for deer. .243 should be the minimum. The recoil is manageable for even small children and older people. Heck my grandmother shoots my 25-06 every now and then.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Rancocas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2005
Messages
551
Location
Ocoee Country/Cleveland
Would never do it. Seen to many little brown men take multiple shots with a 5.56 and just keep coming. And a head shot to me is just to small a target and unethical with little room for error. If you are off you just blow their jaw up and they suffer. In MY opinion the .223 shouldn't be legal for deer. .243 should be the minimum. The recoil is manageable for even small children and older people. Heck my grandmother shoots my 25-06 everyone and then.
^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 

younggun308

Well-Known Member
2-Step Enabled
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
2,172
Location
Cleveland, TN
Would never do it. Seen to many little brown men take multiple shots with a 5.56 and just keep coming. And a head shot to me is just to small a target and unethical with little room for error. If you are off you just blow their jaw up and they suffer. In MY opinion the .223 shouldn't be legal for deer. .243 should be the minimum. The recoil is manageable for even small children and older people. Heck my grandmother shoots my 25-06 everyone and then.

If soft-point and hollow-point bullets weren't against the Geneva Convention, don't you think the results on people would have been different?
 

Rockhound

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
4,904
To each their own if it's legal I am not going to judge. There are just so many better options out there. I mean I could kill a moose with a .270 but I am not going to. Minimum would be a 30-06 but that's just me. Why go for the minimum and take chances.
Can you explain why a 30-06 would be a better moose round than 270? I'm interested.
 

Rakkin6

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
7,102
Location
Clarksville
Honestly I said the minimum, I don't own a 30-06 I have a .300 Win Mag. I just said for the minimum for me that is what I would take. I would take my .300 Mag with 220 grain rounds. And has far has 30-06 over a .270 the fact that you can shoot a .30 caliber bullet which has a larger sectional density along with a heavier bullet at greater speeds creating more ft/lbs of energy, kinetic energy and joules. Momentum knocks them down and KE kills.
 

Latest posts

Top