Well...here's my "read" on it FWIW which is not really much at all...I am not up for a butt kickin'and would ordinarily avoid it like the plague but here goes...
"Distance" has always been the hobgoblin of riflemen clear back to the blackpowder era;how we deal with distance and wind in our attempts to hit things.I'm sure in the foggy past as we moved from the bowling ball trajectory days of the 45-70 and 45-90 to the "flat trajectory" of that new fangled 30-30(which allowed hunters of that day to hit farther away with a dead on hold,that the BP boys were making noises about what and what wasn't "sporting"
Then came stuff like the 30/06,7x57, etc which we know allowed us to hit farther...and I remember that JOC wrote that he bought one of the first M54 270's that allowed him to hit(with the receiver sights of the day)anything he could see with the naked eye due to the flat trajectory of the 270.To an iron sight shooter, I'm sure such stuff seemed like magic.....meanwhile the BP holdovers were likely moaning and wailing about hunting going to hell in a handbasket.....
The we fast forward through the 30's, 40's and 50's to the magnum craze where everyone from Elmer Keith,JOC, Page,Weatherby,etc touted the flat shooting characteristics of various cartridges that allowed a longer point blank range so we could deal with the uncertainty of "distance".Elmer wrote of wiping Stone Sheep of a mountain side 500 yards out....and Page and O'Connor talked off snuffing elk with Les Bowman in Wyoming in high basins with Mashburns and 270's;Jobson wrote of killing a large bull moose with a 600 yard hold..
..some might have thought such shooting reckless and unsportsmanlike at the time, but these guys likely knew what they were doing with the gear they had available...in any event I don't recall them being unduly ridiculed at the time for such shots...in fact the majority of us emeulated wht they did by buying and using the same rifles and cartridges they pushed for the purpose....in any event we could see that the envelope had been pushed far beyond what the BP boys likely thought "sporting" in 1894.......
For a lot of years we used velocity to cheat gravity,and still do today to some extent,and to provide the bullet upset at distances to create sufficiently large wounds to kill effectively at distances we only dreamed about 50 years ago...and today we have LRF's and better scopes that track reliably and allow us to see better.This with sleek,wind cleaving,gravity defying bullets,and generally more accurate rifles with the knowledge to use them....so this is where we are...the envelope has been extended and where it stops I really don't know, but human beings seemingly always driven to test themselves and their tools, I don't see an end in sight yet..,
Through all of this advancement in technology, the one thing that remains constatnt(or inconsistent)is the skill of the user.Without sufficient experience and expertise of the users,the tools are useless...
Biggest question in my mind is..."What is the effect on game,and our oppourtunity to hunt it?"
As we become more successful at the use of the technology,likely our chances to pursue it will become less frequent and this is a trend already seen in limited quota draws for rifle hunting vs over the counter license sales for bow hunters,and iron sighted muzzleloaders.
The lesser technology makes us less succesful over all,so more get to participate.Those sheep killed on the video aren't on a special draw for nothing.....and I bet that if we all had to use iron sights during the Colorado deer season, residents would not have to be on a draw......
So as I see it while the advancement in technology makes us more likely to be successful in times of limited licenses and shorter seasons,and dwindling game supplies and greater demand, there may be a tug-of-war going on to eventually downgrade the technology to provide more opportunity for more folk.Certainly a balance is going to be reached at some point,and maybe it has already....I dunno.
Humans being humans there will be those who will buy in to the gear and the practice of LR shooting who have neither the facilities to practice, nor the inclination(as in "lazy")but fully expect the reults, so they will try with abysmal results,and either miss, or "worse", wound,which,even though we all know it happens,is or should be, unacceptable.
This is not the fault of Greybull Precision nor other makers of LR shooting gear anymore than it is the "fault" of the SUV manufacturer that some clown drove one through the front window of McDonalds.
