.223 effective for humans but not deer
- Thread starter freezer filler
- Start date
i just want a rifle that i am allowed to target practice with and possibly varmint hunt with that is also a suitable rifle for deer woods if i do decide to go rifle deer... it isn't that hard to fathom someone wanting a caliber with more than one use is it?
Look at 7.62x39mm, cheap to shoot, a few different S/P choices, perfect for deer under 200y
i just want a rifle that i am allowed to target practice with and possibly varmint hunt with that is also a suitable rifle for deer woods if i do decide to go rifle deer... it isn't that hard to fathom someone wanting a caliber with more than one use is it?
I thought that you wanted an excuse to buy a mini-14.
Target practise and mini-14 are words that don't belong in the same sentence.
- Location
- big sky country
freezer filler
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Windsor, Ontario
unfortuneatly in the municipality which i live in , the bore size is restricted to
.260
freezer filler
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Windsor, Ontario
i realize this but i could use it for small game and plinking whereas if it is larger than .260, i cannot even discharge it...
beretta boy
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Orillia, Ontario
Um...not to get off topic...but you do realize that you can't hunt deer with a center fire rifle in Southern Ont./QUOTE]
Pretty broad statement... depends on whose definition of "southern" .... There are at least 20 WMU's that permit rifle hunting for deer south of the French River/Hwy 17/Ottawa River, and 8 of these are even classified by MNR as being in what they consider a Southern District.
Does your "municipality" really have a .260 bore restriction , or are you referring to the various Counties & Regions/Regional Municipalities/Districts set out in the Regulations where one may not use a rifle of greater caliber than .275 for small game ???
freezer filler
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Windsor, Ontario
check page 71 of the regs to see if it says anything about superseding municipal bylaws...i am referring to a municpal bylaw, not a federal or provincial hunting reg, in my specific municipality i was told it has been limited to .260... some municipalities do not allow u to discharge any rifle
Last edited:
freezer filler
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Windsor, Ontario
Um...not to get off topic...but you do realize that you can't hunt deer with a center fire rifle in Southern Ont.
Pretty broad statement... depends on whose definition of "southern" .... There are at least 20 WMU's that permit rifle hunting for deer south of the French River/Hwy 17/Ottawa River, and 8 of these are even classified by MNR as being in what they consider a Southern District.
Does your "municipality" really have a .260 bore restriction , or are you referring to the various Counties & Regions/Regional Municipalities/Districts set out in the Regulations where one may not use a rifle of greater caliber than .275 for small game ???
i was told by the local gunshop owner that for the town /municipality that i live, i may not discharge any rifle with a bore greater than .260
check page 71 of the regs to see if it says anything about superseding municipal bylaws...i am referring to a municpal bylaw, not a federal or provincial hunting reg, in my specific municipality i was told it has been limited to .260... some municipalities do not allow u to discharge any rifle
Ok, I wasn't aware of this municipal bylaw. I typically hunt in country woodlots with no such restrictions.
lejarretnoir
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- 162km from Connaught
.260 is a great cartridge! I'd go there for a good general purpose cartridge. It will be accurate for paper punching, take out varmints and deer with the right bullets.
Many hunters have taken deer with a .223 Mini-14, but once they've tried it they always go back for a more reliable round. It just doesn't inspire great confidence in getting the job done. Shot placement becomes more critical.
Many hunters have taken deer with a .223 Mini-14, but once they've tried it they always go back for a more reliable round. It just doesn't inspire great confidence in getting the job done. Shot placement becomes more critical.
freezer filler
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Windsor, Ontario
Ok, I wasn't aware of this municipal bylaw. I typically hunt in country woodlots with no such restrictions.
pretty ridiculous eh... i can't shoot a 30-30 or 7.62x39 but smaller bore magnums are ok
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
The .223 fails as both a big game and as a military round, despite having been used with some success in both roles.
The reason it fails as a big game round is because the hunter must accept that his round will produce a humane kill only if he avoids frontal and quartering shots. I will grudgingly admit that the TSX and other mono-metal bullets have changed the rules, but for shots that require deep penetration, the jury is still out. Headshots are tricky and seldom called for in hunting scenarios, and when they fail, they fail badly.
We all know that the .223 has been used as the primary combat rifle cartridge in Western countries since the mid '60s. Yes, a soldier can carry more rounds of 5.56 per weight than 7.62, but since its adoption, the number of rounds required to kill a single enemy combatant has increased dramatically; thus it appears that if you are armed with a .223, you will need that extra ammo. There are those who will argue that this is a result of the soldier having the ability to use full auto fire, but I believe that is only part of the story. As a rule, the bad guys don't want to get killed so they hide behind cover they hope will stop a bullet. When shooting at someone who is not in the open, and the bullet must defeat intervening obstacles such as brick and mortar, concrete, wood, glass, or sheet metal, the .22 is at a disadvantage compared to what we have come to recognize as major calibers. If we consider the big picture though, 80% of combat fatalities are the result of large weapons: missiles, rockets, bombs, artillery, etc, and while I don't believe that this makes the rifle cartridge irrelevant, from the war planner's point of view it is a place where he might be tempted to save money. A soldier can be trained more quickly on a .223 based weapon system, the .223 weapons systems allow a single type of weapon to be used for a greater number of roles (main battle rifle, submachine gun, squad automatic rifle, sniper rifle etc) which previously required different firearms chambered for different cartridges and created a logistical problem. But if the problem is to simply choose a round that will take an enemy out of action with a single center torso hit, any of the full powered rounds from 6.5 to 8mm are better than the poodle shooter.
The reason it fails as a big game round is because the hunter must accept that his round will produce a humane kill only if he avoids frontal and quartering shots. I will grudgingly admit that the TSX and other mono-metal bullets have changed the rules, but for shots that require deep penetration, the jury is still out. Headshots are tricky and seldom called for in hunting scenarios, and when they fail, they fail badly.
We all know that the .223 has been used as the primary combat rifle cartridge in Western countries since the mid '60s. Yes, a soldier can carry more rounds of 5.56 per weight than 7.62, but since its adoption, the number of rounds required to kill a single enemy combatant has increased dramatically; thus it appears that if you are armed with a .223, you will need that extra ammo. There are those who will argue that this is a result of the soldier having the ability to use full auto fire, but I believe that is only part of the story. As a rule, the bad guys don't want to get killed so they hide behind cover they hope will stop a bullet. When shooting at someone who is not in the open, and the bullet must defeat intervening obstacles such as brick and mortar, concrete, wood, glass, or sheet metal, the .22 is at a disadvantage compared to what we have come to recognize as major calibers. If we consider the big picture though, 80% of combat fatalities are the result of large weapons: missiles, rockets, bombs, artillery, etc, and while I don't believe that this makes the rifle cartridge irrelevant, from the war planner's point of view it is a place where he might be tempted to save money. A soldier can be trained more quickly on a .223 based weapon system, the .223 weapons systems allow a single type of weapon to be used for a greater number of roles (main battle rifle, submachine gun, squad automatic rifle, sniper rifle etc) which previously required different firearms chambered for different cartridges and created a logistical problem. But if the problem is to simply choose a round that will take an enemy out of action with a single center torso hit, any of the full powered rounds from 6.5 to 8mm are better than the poodle shooter.
Last edited:
beretta boy
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Orillia, Ontario
Many urban municipalities have "No discharge if Firearms" By-laws.
This is the first I've heard of a municipality restricting discharge of a
firearm of a particular class & bore size.
I would ascertain the specifics directly from your municipal Clerks Office.
