Risks of Taking a Headshot?

This is utter BS!! I have seen at least 4 animals shot in the neck that went down like a ton of bricks, lay still for a few seconds, then up they got and would have made off if they had not been shot again. One large cow moose was so hit, and when she got up, was in high gear practically instantly. A shot through the lungs let her down permanently.
Click to expand...

I have seen this myself happen with deer.The deer dropped at the shot,and never moved,so the hunter slung his rifle over his shoulder and began walking to the deer.The deer sprung to it's feet and ran off,requiring a very long tracking job.

Only take head shots if the animal is either facing directly toward you or directly away. That removes the risk of wounding the animal without killing.
Click to expand...

That does not remove the risk of a wounded animal,a bullet can still damage an eye,pierce an ear or rip a piece out of the scalp with no fatal wound being delivered.
 
Nothing like seeing a deer run away with its jaw and face blown to pieces :( I avoid head shots, after having seen this scenario many years ago. I prefer heart lung shots, for me there is no wasted meat since I do not eat the ribs, or a high neck shot. Keep in mind all my neck shots are taken 75yards and under, and I have not had one move one inch after being hit in the neck at that distance.
 
I do not take head shots - again relatively small target easy to miss or wound.

The main reason however is I believe even with a well executed head shot which would be like instantly turning the lights off upstairs, the animal will not get a chance to bleed out properly.
A heart lung shot ensures that there are a few seconds before death where the chest cavity is pumped full of blood ensuring a good bleed out and a better meat carcass overall with less chance of spoilage.
I have shot a moose in the head (between the eyes) once and he went down in a flash indicating a good solid head shot and an instant kill. When I cut his throat there was very little blood - opened him up and still very little blood - It had all gone in the meat. We took it in to be butchered and I'm sure they hated us for it for having to cut up blood soaked meat.
My advice is stick to the heart lung area - You don't waste very much meat at all. As they say you can practically eat right up the the bullet hole/exit.
 
fiddler said:
If its close, I take a neck shot. If its far, then I shoot for heart and lungs. I've never taken a head shot.
Click to expand...

I used to think this way but last year it turned out bad for me.

I shot a mule deer through the neck and dropped it where it stood. No jump, no stager, just flop.

It was on the other side of a large ravine. It took quite a while to get over to it, maybe 5-10 mins. When I got there, it jumped up and took off. Shocked the hell out of me. I tracked it a few hundred yards and hit it again in the lungs.

Checked out the neck and the bullet had not really damaged anything, clean pass though. I'm sure it was fatally wounded and would have died eventually and the initial shock of a neck hit knocked it out.

So, there is nothing certain about neck shots, head shots or body shots. All can turn out bad. But the head is much bigger than the brain. Personally, I don't do it. Now I shoot bodies.
 
Why don't you refer to experts on killing, say law enforcement ,sharp shooters, snipers, infantry.........

What do they shoot for ?? Isn't it center mass??
When they shoot , they shoot to kill/immobilize, hence the center of the chest shot, they don't wanna take risks. Why should we.

besides, if you really want that animal in front of you shouldn't we try for the highest possible chance of a kill shot? if you were a trophy hunter and wounded one and couldn't recover it from a neck/head misplaced shot, I bet any money you would be saying that you should of took the boiler room!!

p.s. one of my buddies has trail cam pictures of a small deer with no lower front jaw , the tongue just flops around there, doubt the winter will be kind to this one.
 
Kelly Timoffee said:
What do they shoot for ?? Isn't it center mass??
Click to expand...

Yes and no. If a sniper needs to put a target down 100% without the risk of said target living long enough to shoot hostages for example they will go for headshots. Generally they will take center mass shots but even a center mass shot on a human won't put them down immediately.
 
debate this all you want.there is no place in the hunting world for head shots.a small target which is usually in constant motion.take the chance and lose the whole animal and hundreds of pounds of meats or take a base of neck/shoulder/lungs shot ruin some meat but at least you recover most of it. you/we owe the animals we hunt more respect than that.
 
Kelly: That last statement is not 100 percent correct. In the military, we are taught to shoot for center of mass, Police Marksman are taught to shoot for the Medulla Oblongata to in hostage situations to drop a hostage taker/weapon wielding target for non-reactionary kill. This shot is only justified by the risk of letting the target react.

That being said I am totally against head shots. Unless you are within 10m in a pen executing a stock animal or finishing off an animal, it is a very risky proposition. The trade off is too great. The risk of severely injuring an animal for the gratification of a quick bang-flop is not worth it. Vital Organ shots are more just more ethical.
 
stubblejumper said:
That does not remove the risk of a wounded animal,a bullet can still damage an eye,pierce an ear or rip a piece out of the scalp with no fatal wound being delivered.
Click to expand...

How can you damage an eye without killing the animal when shooting at the head of something that is facing directly toward you? Almost impossible. A hole through the ear, or a nick in the scalp, I'm not worried. The animal will recover and life will go on. That's no worse than nicking the top of the back when trying for a lung shot and missing a bit high.

Surface flesh wounds happen, no matter what part of the animal one shoots at. What worries me is a wound that is not immediately fatal, but one that will kill the animal slowly, or cause immense suffering before death. A hole through the ear is no worse, IMO, than a grazing hit that cuts the skin on the bottom or the top of the chest.
 
Each one of us needs to honestly assess his marksmanship abilities, and make the decision based on that assessment. If you're not 99% confident you can put a bullet in the brain on a frontal or facing-away shot, then don't try. If you are the kind of guy that shoots thousands of rounds a year, hitting targets out to 1000 yards or a mile, with consistency, then hitting the head of a deer at 300 yards is easier than a chip shot. Go ahead if it seems best to you.

All I know is that I always shoot for heart/lungs/shoulder/spine, unless the animal is at the edge of a property line next to a property I don't have access to, or a moose at the edge of a swamp, or.... Then I'll take a head shot if I'm 99% confident of shot placement, BASED ON PREVIOUS SHOOTING EXPERIENCE AND HOURS LOGGED AT THE RANGE. That last bit is essential. If you don't have those two things, then you have no business shooting at a living game animal, IMO of course.
 
So, unless the deer is wielding a glock while holding a local stawberry farmer hostage we shouldn't take the head shot? ;)

But Yes, on animals there is not much evidence to justify a head shot. Maybe it is bragging rights a person wants when they head shoot the animal?


Glock4ever said:
Kelly: That last statement is not 100 percent correct. In the military, we are taught to shoot for center of mass, Police Marksman are taught to shoot for the Medulla Oblongata to in hostage situations to drop a hostage taker/weapon wielding target for non-reactionary kill. This shot is only justified by the risk of letting the target react.

That being said I am totally against head shots. Unless you are within 10m in a pen executing a stock animal or finishing off an animal, it is a very risky proposition. The trade off is too great. The risk of severely injuring an animal for the gratification of a quick bang-flop is not worth it. Vital Organ shots are more just more ethical.
Click to expand...
 
I've taken a total of one head shot and that was because the head was the only part I could see. The brain was gone. about 40 yards, win. 94. 30-30 and i'm not planning on trying any more unless its head shot or no shot, under otherwise ideal conditions.
 
How can you damage an eye without killing the animal when shooting at the head of something that is facing directly toward you? Almost impossible.
Click to expand...

Look very closely at a deer or elk facing you head on,the eyes are to the outside of the skull,with the eyeball itself protruding slightly from the socket.It would be quite possible for the bullet to damage an eye and yet not enter the skull.
 
even the most practiced marksman can not be 100%-99% positive of a well placed bullet on a deers head.i can shoot sub MOA groups all day at the range,off a bench with sand bags.but that paper target doesn't move. pretty sure with a good rest i can consistatly place a bullet into the base of neck or boiler room 99-100% of the time.target shooting and hunting live animals are two totally different things.if you make a bad shot on a paper target it doesn't run off and starve to death.i also have shot deer that after putting a bullet thru the boiler room on one had my brother shoot the other deer that was with the one i shot.my bullet after passing thru my deer took the right eye out of the one my brother shot shaved the hair off its head between the eye and ear where it went thru base of ear and that deer was still going 50 yards away when my brother shot it.it would have survived but would have been blind on one side.
 
stubblejumper said:
Look very closely at a deer or elk facing you head on,the eyes are to the outside of the skull,with the eyeball itself protruding slightly from the socket.It would be quite possible for the bullet to damage an eye and yet not enter the skull.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying, and it is true, but it seems about as likely to me as sending the bullet 1" behind the diaphragm instead of 1" in front...

I suppose I could rephrase by saying that taking a head shot on an animal facing head-on or directly away significantly minimizes the probability of seriously wounding the animal, without causing immediate death, to roughly the same as the probability of hitting the guts rather than the lungs on a behind-the-shoulder shot.

On a head-on or directly away head shot, it's either hit or miss 99% of the time, with very little chance of wounding.
 
deadeyes40 said:
i can shoot sub MOA groups all day at the range,off a bench with sand bags.
Click to expand...

Not to be rude, but that's your problem right there. Shooting off the bench with sang bags will not give a guy the experience, nor the confidence, that he needs to be able to accurately place his bullet under field conditions. If one wants to gain some confidence in his rifle in the field, he could use a bipod, and practice off the bipod at the range. Things will be the same in the field as when he was practicing. Give me a solid rest (like a bipod), ideal conditions, an accurate range reading, and I know within 1" where my bullet will hit out to at least a few hundred yards.

When a person has enough experience watching and hunting game, they get a feel for when the animal is about to move, or when it is going to sit still for a few seconds. We need to time our shots accordingly. It's just like chest shooting. If you want to shoot at a stationary target, you wait for the animal to give you the appropriate signs indicating that it will hold still for a second.

I'm sure you know all this already, but it's worth bringing up.
 
I understand what you're saying, and it is true, but it seems about as likely to me as sending the bullet 1" behind the diaphragm instead of 1" in front...
Click to expand...

Not at all as likely.If I am aiming at the heart,I would have to miss by more than six inches to make a gut shot.To take out an eye when aiming for the brain,I would only have to miss the center of the brain by a couple of inches.The larger the target,the lower the odds of missing the target,and the lungs are several times the size of the brain.

Below is a quote from a previous post that demonstrates that a straight on head shot can cause a crippling wound without being fatal,

my bullet after passing thru my deer took the right eye out of the one my brother shot shaved the hair off its head between the eye and ear where it went thru base of ear and that deer was still going 50 yards away when my brother shot it.it would have survived but would have been blind on one side.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom