Are you a Deer Stalker or a killer?
- Thread starter MARCBO
- Start date
Matt-2Para
Member
lol...I hope its a high cliff to ensure a humane 'splat' at the bottom
What a rediculous statement.
MARCBO
Well-Known Member
So, there is no group morality? Everyone should decide for themselves?
You Sir, while practicing with a more primitive weapon are keeping your shot to within your effective range. Most of the "techno-deer killers" are in most cases pushing their capabilites just because they have the latest, whizbang gear. Sure I can take game at long ranges but am I then stalking in terms of hunting? I would argue not.
SS
Last edited:
palmer_mike
Well-Known Member
Be interested to know which statistical study in particular you are referencing here?
308rws
Well-Known Member
Our personal perceptions can often be selective ... I visited a museum recently in Denmark and our ancestors used to herd and drive deer into deep water. They would then canoe alongside the swimming deer and club the deer on the head (with an appropriate tool made of antler of course!), before dragging the carcass ashore. This culling technique pre dates bows & arrows and spears. Slightly off thread perhaps, but nevertheless our ancestors developed an effective technique which combined stalking, driving, killing ... and canoeing!
turkeyhunter
Member
Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Used responsibly, high tech gear offers advantages. But just because the equipment is capable of headshots at 300 meters doesn't mean the trigger puller is. Not saying anyone here would ever try such a stunt.
MARCBO
Well-Known Member
Do we really need a study, look at all the posts here about shooting at 400 plus yards. Or, are you of the impression all of these shots are taken at that range by blokes had the experince to be attempting that?
I feel very comfortable in saying they do not. How you ask? Because after training soldiers and snipers for over 25 years I know what the average shooter is capable especially those that are not firing 3-400 rounds a month from various field positions.
SS
Last edited:
palmer_mike
Well-Known Member
Cant recall seeing very many posts claiming shots at those ranges at all on here, and when the odd long rnge shot post appears there is usually vocal opposition to it on here.
do we need a study? Only if you persist in making claims which you are not able to substantiate.
turkeyhunter
Member
but if they did...(he says pulling on comedy trousers and fastening tin hat just a little tighter)...would it be better to use a .243 or a .270?
There are many factors that would enter into this decision before even considering caliber. The primary components involved in this type of decision are:
Total cost of one's kit (cheap to moderately priced stuff will not work)
Age of equipment (more than two years old won't work)
Whether or not is was marketed as tactical (everyone knows tactical is better)
And finally, the gender of the shooter. I believe the rule is .243 for girls
Cootmeurer
Well-Known Member
I would argue that you have confused morality with ethics. Morality would be whether it is right or wrong to kill deer. Ethics would be your personal choices on how to do so. While I am still staunchly in the "it is morally correct to kill deer" camp, my travels have convinced me to be a bit more ethically flexible. The first native Americans stampeded entire buffalo herds over cliffs, and usually only utilized the dead on top (archeological evidence often shows the ones on the bottom to be untouched). Was that moral? Yes. Was that ethical? More difficult.
Currently, I know of several groups that use full auto machine guns from helicopters for hog hunting. Some may find that less than ethical - I would love to try that. After I try it, if I find it not to my taste then I would refrain from doing so.
i have no interest in extreme long range shooting, but if others wish to do so, then that is their call as long as it is legal. I personally see no interest in creating warmongering factions within the hunting/stalking community.
Coot, best post so far!!
As a long range varmint shooter i agree 100% with what you say.
Ian
MARCBO
Well-Known Member
Sir, I agree, the word was wrong. Should have said ethical. To my defense though one definition of ethic is "moral philosophy". Can it what you will.
On the otherhand, I personally know of no groups using "machine guns" to hunt pigs. Can you tell me where they are doing that?
"Warmongering factions"? Are you against discussion or opinions contrary to yours?
SS
SS
teyhan1
Well-Known Member
I am a deer stalker and a deer killer.
I stalk deer therefore I must kill deer.
Sometimes I will stalk a deer and relish the experience of a long protracted technical stalk.
Other times I will just kill deer without batting an eyelid because that is what I have to do.
I can tell when I am stalking a deer because I will still get a little 'fever'.
Often I can never remember pulling the trigger.
I take clients and therefore make money from killing deer. Yet I try to get the client to enjoy themselves by stalking deer and then killing a deer.
Word pedantry.
I stalk deer therefore I must kill deer.
Sometimes I will stalk a deer and relish the experience of a long protracted technical stalk.
Other times I will just kill deer without batting an eyelid because that is what I have to do.
I can tell when I am stalking a deer because I will still get a little 'fever'.
Often I can never remember pulling the trigger.
I take clients and therefore make money from killing deer. Yet I try to get the client to enjoy themselves by stalking deer and then killing a deer.
Word pedantry.
Cootmeurer
Well-Known Member
Cedar Ridge Aviation - Texas Helicopter Hog Hunts, Full Auto Helicopter Shooting, Predator Control, Wildlife Surveys, Cattle Work, Aerial Photography, and Pipeline Patrols helicopter hog hunts with full auto
I consider discussion of the ethics to be perfectly acceptable, we should challenge each other. However, when we step beyond that and start making proclamations that because someone does it different than we do, then they are NOT a sportsman (or hunter, or stalker, or whatever). If the practice is legal, then I see no point to drawing lines in the sand against each other. The ANTIs are quite happy to see that happen. They make no qualms - according to their MORALITY, all killing of animals is wrong (although many then hypocritically operate dog pounds that euthanize). They would call a humane cull with a rifle no different from a missile strike by a jet against a deer. All is wrong in their eyes. They will never be appeased. We should instead strive to find agreement, and then voluntarily choose to refrain from a practice if it is not your cuppa.
Similar threads
