Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics how much power do you really need 3-9 4-12 etc

A short, fat case that has a specific geometric curve in the shoulder to optimize the gas expansion and direction. Mic McPhearson created a proprietary cartridge, based on the 6 PPC, except he studied the shoulder geometry and created the cartridge I mentioned above.

Bigbuck215,

How about neck sized compared to full length sized?

Steve,

the issues with described practice have been discussed until the cows come home.

When you raise your rifle onto a deer - to study the shot, as you say - through your scope, you chance

a) that you cover something with your muzzle that you took to be a deer with the naked eye that 'evolves' into say a human when looked through your scope.

Don't laugh - this happens to often to negate.

b) that you cover an accurately recognized deer with your muzzle that is standing in front of an unrecognized object making the shooting lane unsafe.

The list goes on.

To sum this up -

by the nature of their attachment to a rifles barrel (mostly with a hot chamber) a rifle scope can not be a safe tool for

- search for targets
- identification of targets
- pre shooting analysis
- back drop evaluation.

At any given time you may come up short - recognizing a hazard - and then you are already covering that hazard with your muzzle.

No two ways about this.

There is a lot you're not seeing. Not just things that you shouldn't cover with a scope but things that you might want in your scope.

Wanna bet that the vast majority of hunters hunt just as Steve does?

I think the amount of magnification you need is pretty much dictated by the terrain / area you are hunting in.
Where we hunt a 1.5-4.5x scope is plenty.
We hunt in heavily forested/ heavy brush type woods where a 150 yard's would be considered a very long shot.
However, if I were to take a trip out west on the prairies I don't think a 4.5x on the upper end would be nearly enough.
Just my opinion, I'm sure others will disagree.
Later
Eric

It is also about what they are comfortable shooting with!

cmg,

How many times has it been posted here that a muzzle, whether it has a scope mounted above it or not, is pointing at something all the time. Unless you carry your rifle shouldered like a marching soldier it has certaily pointed at another hunter, house, car, or someone's livestock. Like one poster posted, even in your vehicle on the way to the range or hunting place, the firearm is pointing at something.

You want someone with a 7X binoc to determine if they want to shoot something when they have a 3-9X or more glass on the scope? And that is safer than verifying with the higher magnification? The fellow with a 6-21X can see way more than he could with the same quality 7X bino.

I would not be surprise if you are one of the guys I see at the range who acts like the gun case is bullet proof. They swing them around as though nothing inside could escape.

We all need to practice safe hunting and gun handling all the time. That means making sure of your target, and what beyond, with the most fidelity available.

Magnumdude,

I bet most of the gun preacher on this site hunt the way Steve describes. This holier than thou is a bunch of hughie.

Well said, Ringman. If a man can't scope a deer before shooting, maybe he shouldn't even carry a gun. How about a camera and a pair of bino's. Sheesh.

Agreed.

DDurst,

Scope a deer all you want.

Just do not scope/barrel something unidentified.
That is the beef right there. How can you, through your scope, identify something w/o pointing your barrel. You are right - you can't.

Then there is the point of errors - mistaking something for a deer with the naked eye - getting the scope on it, and whoops having covered another hunter with your hot chambered barrel.

Nothing to worry-the safety was on, or what?

Perhaps read and comprehend a post before making clear your ignorance.

Ringman,

your argument is ridiculous.

Sure, a rifles barrel is pointing somewhere at all times.
Fact of being.

It is a difference between the object laying cased and the object being pointed by the shooter -

hence the phrasing of the rule

Never let the muzzle cover anything...

cmg

I got the impression (and am not going to re-read this whole thread to look for misplaced words) that Ringman was using the scope to further identify and quantify game he had located with binoculars. Even if only spotted with the unaided eye but definitely identified as a game animal, aiming at a game animal with the scope for further information is acceptable to me.

What would seem risky to me (but only slightly) would be scanning all around looking for game. We have all aimed our guns and looked through the scopes to check to see if the last bit of light was gone or to look at game. There are many safety features that we are all familiar with that make this a safe practice; the safety itself, an unchambered round and finger off the trigger.

Certainly if you see movement then the first step should be to identify it with binoculars. If you don't have binoculars then identify it with the naked eye. If you can't identify it without a doubt then don't point your gun at it! We all know this!

cng,

Give it a rest. You loose!

Yes - I will give it a rest.

No - I do not loose as I was not even competing.

Woods,

Ringman was making the opposite point - the scope doing double duty - for searching, identification, pre-shot assessment etc.

I stated, that the muzzle may only from that point on cover the target that safety and legality of the game animal are clear and verified (through binos or naked eye-dont matter none).

Be that as it may - I have made my point. Please do with it what ever you wish - everyone.

Ringman, once in a while one might learn something here. The way you are going, there is no worry of that.

Your loss.

Godspeed.

cmg,



Please find the quote for me. I don't remember stating that. Especially since I use binos.




Like I've maintained from the beginning: The muzzle is covering someting all the time.



Does this statement suggest we agree with you or are you in your own little world?

We all have our little part of the world to figure out but I'm certain yours is a bit bigger than most.

As I've said before stick with the Bible. It's obvious with your 6,000 year old earth posts and flattening trajectory with the higher ring theory that you do well with fiction.

Ringman - there is the quote that tipped this of. I realize, that also states that you now use binos. Mea culpa.



That I have admitted to be true. The four rules apply to gun handling.

I am sure, we agree on the difference. An unattended gun from responsible ownership will be empty and uncocked, although anone around with any business handling it will do so in the same responsible manner as it were loaded, i. e. muzzle control (safe direction), finger of the trigger and verifying load status.

I am sure you do not fail to see the difference - a gun handler failing to observe the muzzle of the weapon is a potential hazard.

What I maintain is the contious act of pointing the weapon onto an unidentified object or even an identified game animal for the purpose of identification, pre shot assessment, bachground checking etc. is a violation of Rule 4 and not to be tolerated.



Forgive my lousy command of your language - it is second to me.

I ventured to say:

"I have had my say!"

My world is hunting in all forms - as a professional in Germany and Alaska, as a researcher and teacher.

As a PH here I organize driven hunts. 50 hunters on their stands. My collegues and our dogs are driving the game.

I have on occasion looked into rifle barrels from stand hunters
that followed the very quiet noises we make with their scope (and muzzle) waiting for the animal to appear.

With this, I rest my case.

If I misunderstood anyone, I apologize.

I trust, we have cleared any misunderstandings with the added benefits of once more discussing Gun and Hunter Safety. That can not be done enough.

We need an attorney to settle this. Where's VA?

cmg,

Perhaps it escaped you that I saw the deer and then put the scope on it. Even the binocs I use would not have been adiquate. In that very post I mentioned I turned the power ring up to 10X to verify the legality of the naked eye observed deer.




Gun handling is all the time that you are doing something with a gun. You loose. It is not jsut when you are or are not pointing it at a target.



What does this noise sound like. I have never heard a scope, but muzzles emit loud noises when a bullet is fired.

Ringman,

up until now, I thought I was having a debate with a grown up:


This is my original wording.

I know my english is bad, but not as bad as you make it appear by quoting out of context in your last post:



The sounds are made by the beater - not the scope - and my grammar is precice on that.

This proofes to me your mal-intend - you do not care about the argument put forth.

I expect my words to be read and comprehended before answered. That much I value my words and my time.

You have managed to take up enough of both.