Head shooting

Uncle Buck

Well-Known Member
I myself generally Heart/Lung shoot, after reading a recent article I may now consider it as an alternative.
Even when carried out by the Professional who would have to consider head shooting more so than the
Amature due to the line of work they do. Head shooting is I feel frowned upon by many as a no! no!

So why is it the rabbit and hare dose'nt get a second thought, simple ! meat damage, foxes (not for meat)
are also treated in the same manner. Put Deer in the equation and the "Bambi syndrome" rears it's head.
True not without it drawbacks it can go wrong ! the answer - for the man sqeeze'n the trigger,
to get it right.

As Sportsmen we owe it to whatever the quarry my be to kill as quickly and humanely possible.
" knowing ones limits is paramount "

Your Veiws.

Rgds, Buck.

PS. Know this is a touchy subject which I hope dose'nt esculate !!
 
Laws and ethics are full of contradictions. Why are two terriers allowed to kill a rat, but two hounds can't kill a fox? Why can you run a long dog on a rabbit but not a hare?

Are rats and rabbits less entitled to a humane death than foxes and hares? Which are, in turn less entitled to a humane death than a deer?

I hate it, it all just gives ammunition to antis.
 
I myself generally Heart/Lung shoot, after reading a recent article I may now consider it as an alternative.
Even when carried out by the Professional who would have to consider head shooting more so than the
Amature due to the line of work they do. Head shooting is I feel frowned upon by many as a no! no!

So why is it the rabbit and hare dose'nt get a second thought, simple ! meat damage, foxes (not for meat)
are also treated in the same manner. Put Deer in the equation and the "Bambi syndrome" rears it's head.
True not without it drawbacks it can go wrong ! the answer - for the man sqeeze'n the trigger,
to get it right.

As Sportsmen we owe it to whatever the quarry my be to kill as quickly and humanely possible.
" knowing ones limits is paramount "

Your Veiws.

Rgds, Buck.

PS. Know this is a touchy subject which I hope dose'nt esculate !!
I think you have been reading Sporting rifle, an interesting article, in my view nothing wrong with a head shot, as long as your are confident
 
I think you have been reading Sporting rifle, an interesting article, in my view nothing wrong with a head shot, as long as your are confident



I have Patrickt, and from a different view it seems feasible, as you say if confident.

Rgds, Buck.
 
In terms of meat damage what is the difference between a well placed chest shot and a head/neck shot. As an example two bucks I have shot this week. Both chest shot with a .22-250, one to the butchers at £2.80 /kg and one for myself both with very little damage. If you can't put a chest shot where it will cause minimal damage should you really be taking on head/neck shots.
Nothing wrong with a good head/neck shot but plenty of scope to go wrong.
 
In terms of meat damage what is the difference between a well placed chest shot and a head/neck shot. As an example two bucks I have shot this week. Both chest shot with a .22-250, one to the butchers at £2.80 /kg and one for myself both with very little damage. If you can't put a chest shot where it will cause minimal damage should you really be taking on head/neck shots.
Nothing wrong with a good head/neck shot but plenty of scope to go wrong.

Sums it up nicely. I fully agree!
 
Rabbits are 'normally' shot at ranges of 50yards or less so any average shooter has little room for error.
Deer are taken at anything up to 200 yards so plenty of room for error, so head shots on deer are frowned upon.
Having said that, if a Deer presents itself at anything up to 100 yards and is not aware of your presence and you have a stable platform to shoot from and you know the capabilities of your rifle/scope/bullet combination, then, under those circumstances, a head shot has very little room for error so would probably be taken without a second thought.
 
Rabbits are 'normally' shot at ranges of 50yards or less so any average shooter has little room for error.
Deer are taken at anything up to 200 yards so plenty of room for error,

A deers head is over 4 times the size of the average rabbit, so as a target there is no difference that I can see.

Neil. :)
 
I hate to quote "Dirty Harry" but he was right when he said "A man has got to know his limitations"....the ability to place a shot within 4"in a shooting test is not the same as consistently shooting deer in the field 1" below the ear or in the atlas area at sensible ranges. So much to go wrong if you foul up...check out You Tube etc. for videos of deer with their jaws hanging off/missing and make your own mind up on the subject.
 
If you miss by an inch or so on a rabbit it is likely to be a total miss, if you miss by the same margin on a deer it may be a shot jaw and a painful and long death.
I have always gone for chest shots, as it seems to be 'best practice' but don't see a problem in other areas if appropriate. Not sure that meat damage should necessarily be the sole reason though as this might encourage more riskier shots to head or neck by inexperienced shot, and I would include myself in that group, hence why chest is my preference at the moment.
 
IMHO it is the Bambi syndrome most people do it and just don't say anything.


The worst ones are the ones who head shoot almost every deer and then tell everyone how then everyone else how they shouldn't do it and how unethical it is. These are normally the ones who bang on about best practice. Surely best practice is shooting within your abilities.
 
Last edited:
Well for me after seeing so many struggle to shoot clean standard chest shots or struggle to put 2 shots in a deer target to pass lev one for most the head shot is beyond there limits. But do they know that? and there im afraid lies the problem. I would not advise head shooting to anyone ever.
 
A deers head is over 4 times the size of the average rabbit, so as a target there is no difference that I can see.Neil. :)
As has already been pointed out about the difference a 1" strike will make between the two heads.
An inch back from the nose of a rabbit is a head shot, more or less, whereas 1" back from the nose of a Deer is definitely a jaw shot.
 
Having shot chest only for the past how many years,

in the last few weeks I took 2 muntys with neck shots, no problems at all here,

But this subject will always push apart shooting minded people so it has to be down to the person taking the shot.


bob.
 
I shoot a lot of long range vermin, the big difference between rabbits, pigeons and crows is that the trauma from a centre mass hit from a C/F rifle is fatal.
With deer they are big enough to need calculated shot placement and to some extent fox is the same, a body hit will not create enough trauma to kill the animal.
Killing a rabbit with a C/F rifle is definately the proverbial sledge hammer to crack a walnut scenario the equavilant on deer would to hit it with a RPG.

Ian.
 
Its down to you, your ability and your 100% ability to put the bullet in the same 3" circle.
I have to admit I sometimes shoot sh1t!
If I have a deer at 80 yards and Im in a high seat, great, head shot it is.
If im rested on sticks at 120 yards, no, no, no, I could do it some of the time but I couldn't do it ALL OF THE TIME.
Too many deer are near misses or wounded but all may have been clean kills if heart shot.
My advice is to learn bullet placement and not be drawn into the game dealers preference of head shot deer, a well placed heart shot pays the same; why make things difficult for yourself?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top