Originally Posted by David_Walter
Originally Posted by dmsbandit

and the Native Americans in Canada shoot wolves and polar bears with a .223 also, but that doesn't mean it's a better cartridge than a 30-06 or 300magnum for the job. for someone to claim otherwise shows they are off their meds. Thousands of deer have been killed with a 22LR, but does anyone think that is better than a centerfire for killing of deer?


You're all over the place. You didn't say the rifle and cartridge he chooses is suboptimal in your opinion, you said it is irresponsible, and I called you out for your choice of words.

I also asked you to list how many deer and especially elk you have killed and to compare that to John's pile of animals killed with the 243/105 VLD. You are conjecturing, he is presenting evidence.

They are not even close to the same.


shooting elk at 600yds with cartridges much bigger than the 243 is pushing the limits of good ethics buy many people in the industry, so for someone to say the 243 [a deer cartridge] shooting a fragile bullet is a better killer than a gun DESIGNED to kill elk and other big animals is irresponsible, regardless of success. It promotes bad choices and bad decisions by people who don't have the knowledge or experience killing any big game animal.

Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be done or promoted. To do so is irresponsible regardless of individual results. If he had said he "prefers" the 243 to the 358, that would be different than saying it was better than the 358.

I don't drink or Smoke. I spend my money on gunpowder and gasoline.