22-250 and 223 for deer

[bearkilr]

So 6 out of 12

Thanks for posting your hunting regs.

So what are your arguments going to be in favor of the 22 cals? Be sure to bring pics and posts from CGN of successful hunters.

 

[hillmanr2]

So what are your arguments going to be in favor of the 22 cals? Be sure to bring pics and posts from CGN of successful hunters.

I wouldn't use pictures or posts from CGN being it is a public site.

 

[bearkilr]

I wouldn't use pictures or posts from CGN being it is a public site.

OK, but you still need to have reasons why they should be allowed.

 

[Onagoth]

Aside from the absurd analogy, yes. I am perfectly willing to make laws due to the ignorance of a few. That's what ALL laws are about. I want a law that forces the stupid to drive sober. Any civilized society will have to have restrictions on everyone because of the ignorance of a few. I want it to be illegal for me to murder you, so it's illegal for you to murder me. I'm not an anarchist.

The particular analogy of licensing and registration is a really bad one, because neither of those restrictions does anything to protect anyone from harm cause by the "ignorance of a few". That's why the gun lobby arguments against licensing and registration are correct. They are wrong precisely because they do nothing about the stupid or the criminal.

Try not to argue the ridiculous, because ridiculous arguments about "freedom" do nothing to ensure essential freedoms; they just make us look ridiculous.

Yes, the analogy was a bit of a stretch...now that I go back and read that.

I still have a couple problems with this caliber restriction though.

1) Who decides what caliber to set the restriction at? Many provinces seem to have 0.23. And you mention this is good to stop the idiot masses (or ignorance of a few) from taking wild shots with a gun thats too small. Could it not be that perhaps those same idiots will make the same stupid shots with a .243? At what point does a larger caliber completely offset the "ignorance of a few"? I would argue it doesn't matter how big the rifle is, idiot hunters will end up wounding game rather than killing. So it makes no sense to set some arbitrary rule against .22 centerfires.

2) Rather than ban certain items, or actions in this case, I always prefer a principal based system. With enforcement to follow. One of the guiding principals in any provincial hunting reg is that animals should be taking cleanly and ethically at all times (I'm not sure to what end this is actually included in other provinces). This should also provide for penalties that are actually enforced when some idiot isn't hunting ethically because he made a wild shot with a .22 caliber rifle. Rather than prohibit or restrict the actual weapon, why not punish the idiot behind it? Chances are, even if he adhered to a .22 cal restriction (and used a .270), he probably still runs a good chance of wounding an animal without killing it.

3) In most cases, the argument against .22 caliber rifles for big game is heresay. Is there any numbers supporting this argument? Is there anything at all supporting the argument that those who hunt deer with a .22 are unethical about it? The whole regulation is simply a feel good regulation, without any support of its effectiveness. How many times has a deer been wounder with a .223 vs killed? Does anyone know or is it all simply conjecture?

While the intial argument I made was a stretch, I do see parallels between hunting regulations and say registration. And the parallel isn't just isolate to firearms. In my opinion, its a very common reaction to ban or prohibit something (as the result of a few idiots) rather than just enforce existing regulations or punish those who committed the offense in the first place. A cell phone driving ban is a good example. Careless driving is a charge that can be laid to talking on a cell phone....but why do that when we can just ban all people from talking on cell phones in car...so much easier.

Same goes for hunting, why pursue those who hunt unethically, when we can just make everyone use bigger guns and reduce the chances? Although, number 3 is my biggest point. I truly think that no one actually knows anything about the frequency or occurance of 1) those using .223 on deer, and 2) those who do so carelessly.

 

[bearkilr]

Yes, the analogy was a bit of a stretch...now that I go back and read that.

I still have a couple problems with this caliber restriction though.

1) Who decides what caliber to set the restriction at? Many provinces seem to have 0.23. And you mention this is good to stop the idiot masses (or ignorance of a few) from taking wild shots with a gun thats too small. Could it not be that perhaps those same idiots will make the same stupid shots with a .243? At what point does a larger caliber completely offset the "ignorance of a few"? I would argue it doesn't matter how big the rifle is, idiot hunters will end up wounding game rather than killing. So it makes no sense to set some arbitrary rule against .22 centerfires.

2) Rather than ban certain items, or actions in this case, I always prefer a principal based system. With enforcement to follow. One of the guiding principals in any provincial hunting reg is that animals should be taking cleanly and ethically at all times (I'm not sure to what end this is actually included in other provinces). This should also provide for penalties that are actually enforced when some idiot isn't hunting ethically because he made a wild shot with a .22 caliber rifle.

3) In most cases, the argument against .22 caliber rifles for big game is heresay. Is there any numbers supporting this argument? Is there anything at all supporting the argument that those who hunt deer with a .22 are unethical about it? The whole regulation is simply a feel good regulation, without any support of its effectiveness.

So what are the arguments in favor of a 22 cal for big game?

 

[1899]

Nope she dead. Sorta like credibility, once you lose it with people in positions to change things, gone forever.

Ouch.

 

[Onagoth]

So what are the arguments in favor of a 22 cal for big game?

I'll answer a question with a question....what are the arguments of using a .243 cal rifle?

Does it kill the animal better? How much better precisely?

What about a .308? Exactly how much less accurate do you have to shoot with a .308 to still acheive the same result as a well placed .22 shot....

Does hunting with a .308 cure the actions of an idiot hunter? Will they all the sudden stop shooting at running deer at 300 yards? Exactly how much less likely are they to wound an animal with a .308 compared to a .22?

Can anyone answer these questions definitively? With actual research data? Or is it simply personal opinion and fairy tales of wounded game?

 

[Onagoth]

So what are the arguments in favor of a 22 cal for big game?

Also, for the sake of argument

One argument in favor of a 22 cal for big game is that a 22 cal can kill big game.

Nearly any rifle in this chambering is capable of killing large animals.

 

[bearkilr]

I'll answer a question with a question....what are the arguments of using a .243 cal rifle?

Does it kill the animal better? How much better precisely?

What about a .308? Exactly how much less accurate do you have to shoot with a .308 to still acheive the same result as a well placed .22 shot....

Does hunting with a .308 cure the actions of an idiot hunter? Will they all the sudden stop shooting at running deer at 300 yards? Exactly how much less likely are they to wound an animal with a .308 compared to a .22?

Can anyone answer these questions definitively? With actual research data? Or is it simply personal opinion and fairy tales of wounded game?

OK, I'll answer your questions with a question;
Are you a politician?

The question is why a 22 cal should be allowed on big game in those provinces where it is currently prohibited,not a discussion on the calibers which are allowed.

 

[bearkilr]

Also, for the sake of argument

One argument in favor of a 22 cal for big game is that a 22 cal can kill big game.

Nearly any rifle in this chambering is capable of killing large animals.

So will a 22 rimfire. Should it be allowed as well?

 

[Onagoth]

So will a 22 rimfire. Should it be allowed as well?

Is a .22 rimfire capable of killing a deer? An elk?

If it's not, then no, it should not be allowed.

 

[Raton57]

there are no regulations for caliber for deer on PEI.no deer there.

Deer don't like potatoes most likely is the reason.

 

[bearkilr]

Is a .22 rimfire capable of killing a deer? An elk?

If it's not, then no, it should not be allowed.

I think you know the answer to that one.

Perhaps we need to have maximum distance and minimum energy regulations if we allow everything. More regulations are always good.

I'm still looking for sound arguments in favor of 22 cal for big game.

 

[Onagoth]

I think you know the answer to that one.

Perhaps we need to have maximum distance and minimum energy regulations if we allow everything. More regulations are always good.

I'm still looking for sound arguments in favor of 22 cal for big game.

I already told you....a 223 or 22-250 is capable of killing big game. That is the only argument needed.

 

[bearkilr]

I already told you....a 223 or 22-250 is capable of killing big game. That is the only argument needed.

Evidently it's not a strong enough argument as there are still many provinces and states which restrict their use.

For those wishing to change a law and convince non-hunting bureaucrats and politicians, you'd better come up with something a little more eloquent and plausible.

 

[Onagoth]

Evidently it's not a strong enough argument as there are still many provinces and states which restrict their use.

For those wishing to change a law and convince non-hunting bureaucrats and politicians, you'd better come up with something a little more eloquent and plausible.

Well... I might agree with you there...but its not like provinces have solid foundations for their hunting regulations. Often enough, certain regulations make no sense at all.

In SW Ontario, you can use a .270 to shoot a coyote, but you can't use it to shoot a deer. At the end of day, all you can do is make rational arguments for your case and hope that they listen.

In the OPs case, at least in my opinion, 223 and 22-250s can kill big there, therefore, they ought to be legal hunting calibers on big game.

 

[bearkilr]

Well... I might agree with you there...but its not like provinces have solid foundations for their hunting regulations. Often enough, certain regulations make no sense at all.

In SW Ontario, you can use a .270 to shoot a coyote, but you can't use it to shoot a deer. At the end of day, all you can do is make rational arguments for your case and hope that they listen.

In the OPs case, at least in my opinion, 223 and 22-250s can kill big there, therefore, they ought to be legal hunting calibers on big game.

Yes there are a lot of assinine regulations in all provinces.

My worry is the fact many hunters these days have little actual field experience but lots of "cyber-experience". They see figures of a 220 Swift or 22-250 which is 1.5" high at 100 and dead on 300 and figure they're good to go on moose out to 600 yards.
While a bad shot on any animal is just that regardless of caliber, I do believe there is a bit more cushion for penetration and energy on bigger calibers at all ranges.

While I don't like added regulations either, I do like this one.

 

[joe-nwt]

I think you know the answer to that one.

Perhaps we need to have maximum distance and minimum energy regulations if we allow everything. More regulations are always good.

I'm still looking for sound arguments in favor of 22 cal for big game.

I know you are being sarcastic but, how would something like that even be enforceable?

We also have to keep in mind that many of the minimum requirement rules were put in place many years ago before the advent of barnes x, etc and most .22 cal bullets were constructed for varmints. There are many bullets suitable for big game now, but most are still lightly constructed. It's probably easier to ensure the proper bullet is used by forcing hunters to use a larger caliber rather than dictating bullet construction. This is just a general statement, so don't start telling me about .243 varmint bullets.

I personally prefer larger calibers but don't have a problem with a capable hunter using a properly constructed .22. Unfortunately most rules of this type are not made for capable hunters.

 

[rem338win]

Ahh the .223 users are better hunters than the rest of us thread returns.
They are the shot placement, use of extra special judgement and restraint wizzards!! So much more skilled, disciplined and knowledgeable than us 100grain plus boys!!

Any centrefire in Ontario, but these threads have shown me there are enough tards using sub deer cartridges that we should consider another freakin law.

Because in reality, if you don't have the judgement and common sense to choose a humane calibre before the season, what kind of decisions you gonna be making in the deer woods??

I consider them borderline poachers.

Thats why it takes 2 to 3 rounds to drop a person with. 223 with good shot placement. . most people can only get a genral torso shot on a standing deer at 200 and rely on the sheer kenetic energy and cavitation of the larger rounds to mess up the vital orgins... Now imagine having to hit the heart dead on to drop the animal instantly. A basic lung shot won't drop a deer with 223 it will run... And god forbid you hit a rib or a gut shot shooting at 200 you will end up traking for hours
I think allowing hunting large game with a round that small is cruel

I'm guessing your young yet

Heart shooter. Impressive.

Man there are a lot of ignorant people on here spewing what they "think" they know. I have seen deer shot and killed very cleanly by First Nation friends with a .223 using the 60gr Hornady spirepoints I loaded for them. I also have a myself killed a few deer with a .243 and 85gr Sierras. All died very quickly and without any anomaly to report. Actually I recall one of the deer I personally shot with this sub-par setup was a 200lb mule doe at 420yds. She DRT'd on the spot with a lung/heart shot. Dang, if I hadn't field dressed her maybe she could've been revived.
I will guarantee that none of the above people have any first hand experiences with any of said cartridges on animals, mostly because the are so self righteously convinced of their ability to forsee outcomes.
Douchebaggery at its finest.
I'll be in BC next season...I guess I'm going to kill a few deer with the 22-250 and some 53gr TSX's to prove the few wrong....

 

[bearkilr]

I know you are being sarcastic but, how would something like that even be enforceable?

We also have to keep in mind that many of the minimum requirement rules were put in place many years ago before the advent of barnes x, etc and most .22 cal bullets were constructed for varmints. There are many bullets suitable for big game now, but most are still lightly constructed. It's probably easier to ensure the proper bullet is used by forcing hunters to use a larger caliber rather than dictating bullet construction. This is just a general statement, so don't start telling me about .243 varmint bullets.

I personally prefer larger calibers but don't have a problem with a capable hunter using a properly constructed .22. Unfortunately most rules of this type are not made for capable hunters.

They aren't enforcable, the very reason there is a blanket law in many areas preventing the use of under 23 cal.
I think you'll find that the vast majority of "capable hunters" won't ever use a 22 cal on deer or other big game, even if legal.