Head shot at 160 yds.

well that stalker has alot to learn !!!!!

fair enough if the animal was wounded , but laying there in a bush really you cant call that sporting can you ???

regds
lee
 
Disapointing replies to a ridiculous post on the pigeon watch forum also.
What else was behind the bush. Was the bush the backstop.To many ethical and safety points.

Obviously no respect for Deer

Stalking at its ugliest
 
I haven't read the post and have no intentions too!
But can we clarify what is not acceptable, the shot,the safety aspect of it,Head shooting,Distance,edge of darkness etc...


regards
griff
 
Griff don't read it,

It appears that the boy took his first Roebuck, 160 yard side head shot, the beast was lying in a bramble bush chewing the cud, and darkness was approaching. He was also supremely confident because he had put four shots in a an inch circle a few hours beforehand. That's it in a nut shell.

There are a few members off here who are pointing out where he went wrong but with little effect. Jingzy pointed out to him that an inch at 100 yards was 2 inches at 200 yards, plus a little bit of adrenalin would help to expand the size of his grouping and therefore increase the difficulty of his shot. He was however able to report that he had zero adrenalin and had an experienced chap with him!

Basically it would appear, leaving aside whether the head shot was correct or not, that the person was inexperienced in shooting beyond 100 yards, there was no mention of the safety aspect it looks as if the bramble bush was his backstop. He "had" to take the shot as it was getting dark. He appeared to have little or no appreciation of the anatomy of a deer, and worse of all he seems incapable of taking advice from those that know.

I'm sorry I read it now :cry:

John
 
Whatever your opinion is whats done is done. The fact that he posted it is as bad. The fact that he posted a more experienced gun was with him and didn't stop the shot is a worry. For the many obvious reasons that have been mentioned and also for the simple reason of the anti's and their ilk who monitor all these sites and,... yes they do.
Any aspect of the shot that shows a risk quite simply means that the shot must not be taken. When this is put on a site as it was it throws the whole sport and the issuing of FAC's into question. Never mind the support he is given by others obviously taking or willing to take the same sort off "shot".
I wasn't there and so like others I can only opinion on whats been posted. I think its poor and another nail in the lid so too speak.
 
JAYB said:
an inch at 100 yards was 2 inches at 200 yards, plus a little bit of adrenalin would help to expand the size of his grouping and therefore increase the difficulty of his shot.

Might be worth pointing out that, the more you increase the range, the more variables can creep in to multiply the expected group size even further. I wonder how many stalkers have gone back to 200m to see how well they perform even under ideal range conditions? If you haven't, try it. Preferably with a bit of light wind to contend with. It can be a real education.

the anti's and their ilk who monitor all these sites and,... yes they do.

A very good point[/quote]
 
JAYB said:
an inch at 100 yards was 2 inches at 200 yards, plus a little bit of adrenalin would help to expand the size of his grouping and therefore increase the difficulty of his shot.

Might be worth pointing out that, the more you increase the range, the more variables can creep in to multiply the expected group size even further. I wonder how many stalkers have gone back to 200m to see how well they perform even under ideal range conditions? If you haven't, try it. Preferably with a bit of light wind to contend with. It can be a real education.

the anti's and their ilk who monitor all these sites and,... yes they do.

A very good point[/quote]
 
griff said:
I haven't read the post and have no intentions too!
But can we clarify what is not acceptable, the shot,the safety aspect of it,Head shooting,Distance,edge of darkness etc...


regards
griff

The same as griff said. what is not acceptable :confused:
 
i have gone back to 200 yds this morning and with quite a fair wind too ! my 6.5x55 with schmidt & bender with a key hole zreo bang on @ 100 yds and i struggled to get a 3 in zero which in my opinion at this range and conditions would not be suitable for head shooting or a neck shot !
with posts like this being broadcast over the internet makes a mockery of all of us who try do do the best possible job we can !
and as for the bloke he was with i hope his ears are burning !!!

rant over
cheers lee
 
On a similar vein, but different animal, and same forum, but I can't find it now. (might of been deleted)
I was reading about a guy who shot at least 3 Foxs with an engine room shot at 30yds with .....................A .177 AIR RIFLE and killed them.

Unfortunately they walk among us
 
The Croc said:
On a similar vein, but different animal, and same forum, but I can't find it now. (might of been deleted)
I was reading about a guy who shot at least 3 Foxs with an engine room shot at 30yds with .....................A .177 AIR RIFLE and killed them.

Unfortunately they walk among us

when i was younger i had a .22 weirach HW80
i gave it a facelift that took it to 22lbs i recall when it was took off me and checked
i was 14 not allowed a firearms of my own and grandads chickens were dissapearing fast aswell as his racing pigeons
so a conversion on the pellet gun was my only option
i accounted for several foxes and stoats all head shots as that was all i was allowed to take
i know better now with age but still to this day impressed with the accurracy and power an airgun possesed
alot of the tools out there are more than capable of killing animals cleanly in the right hands, but does not mean it is right
how many elephants had Bell accounted for with is favourite pea shooter
160 yard head shot should not be out of any firearms user's capability
but the circumstances behind it makes the situation a dodgy one and i hope the person involved looks back and reflects on how bad it could of turned out
as it was his first deer and that he should be able to rejoice on , but also take into account he was very lucky that it went well
tricky situation but certainly a memorable one, for what ever reasons
 
here here stone as you say its down to the shooters capabilty i dont condem what this chap has done in any way and to be honest i think that the excitment of his first deer has got the better of him i think we have all taken shots that we regrent and anyone who hasnt has it to come but as long as we learn from are mistakes that is what counts i just hope that he realises what he has done and what could of happened
 
Unfortunately in the process of learning by your mistakes or INCOMPETENCE some fine beast has to suffer .
The man was an inconsiderate pratt and those who support him are fools and a danger to our sport in general .
The antis love this kind of crap as it shows us in a bad light .
In the process of humane deer management we all have made a mistake sometime but it is incumbent upon us to minimize the risks at all times .
RANT OVER .

HWH.
 
totally agree with you there H , we have a ass hole on (irish shooters.com) that bragged about head shooting a hind at 385 yds .

when i hopped off him he came back with he is a sniper with the royal marines that done two tours in afghanistan had who was i to tell him he was a bragging prick .

its amazing the ignorance of some to animals these guys should not own firearms
 
Hi IG.
Since I put on my last post I have checked my records of the last 20 stalkers shoots which I have organised .
20 competitions and a total entry of 534 riflemen .
Of these 534 only 45 scored 30 ex 30 on the standard one inch grouping target at 100 yards .

Under field conditions with possible wind problems and head movement of the deer at 160 yards it is IMPOSSIBLE to guarantee a humane kill and with failing light such a shot is an irresponsible act .
[ I have Bill O`T and son arriving on the 14th for a shot at a Roe.]

HWH.
 
Gents, what are find most surprising is the comment of the shooter "there was zero adrenaline". Remember your own first stalk, how many of you can say "zero adrenaline".
 
Back
Top