Why couldn't I use 303 British for hunting?

Callee said:
...I called that Canadian Tire store to ask them... it rang and rang and rang and no one answered... customer service at this Canadian Tire doesn't seem to be all that...
Click to expand...
Their website might be able to help you.

You can search their inventory by the particular item, and the particular store, and then you can narrow it down to 'in stock in my store'.
 
iron cat said:
I couldn't find it anywhere in the Ontario regulations about bullet construction, so it is probably covered under the Wildlife act.
Our regulations in Alberta however very clearly state that non expanding bullets are illegal
Cat
Click to expand...
It’s not, in Ontario
 
Wendell said:
Their website might be able to help you.

You can search their inventory by the particular item, and the particular store, and then you can narrow it down to 'in stock in my store'.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I did try that before, but didn't have a lot of luck. Despite including 303 in ny search terms, the crappy tire website seems determined to still show me all different calibres of ammunition. You'd think they'd have a simple filter to search by calibre, but if they do, i couldn't find it.
 
Update: you guys guessed correctly!

I finally got through to a person at the Canadian Tire store and question. This Clerk seemed a bit more knowledgeable and forthcoming. He said they had in fact four brands of 303 in stock, and before I could even ask, he said he had two kinds of FMJ for target shooting, and two other brands for hunting.
So, seems pretty clear to me, the distinction they're making for hunting or not is the FMJ.

Makes sense now, thanks.
 
Licensed to kill said:
Well, IMO, head shots and/or neck shots are themselves unethical in hunting and I was not aware that we were talking about trappers.
Click to expand...
who decides what is ethical?
I've seen many a head and neck shot kill a deer or moose dead as a doornail...... and less meat loss than a "ethical" boilerroom shot.
So if a guy wastes less meat by taking a successful head or neck shot ..... is that not "more" ethical?

Funny how people virtue signal thier own dogmas on others.
I personally don't take head shots except on grouse and bunnies but I have been pondering doing so. I treestand hunt one area where the shots are usually measured under 20 yards. I even killed one with the muzzle of my rifle not even a foot from his ear as it walked past the douglas fir tree that I was standing behind..... the only one I've head shot in that spot.
Meat loss is an important factor when the deer only yield 40 to 70 pounds of meat so you will have to excuse me but I will probably be taking more head shots in the future if the shots are up close and personal like they typically are from the treestand.

to each his own, within thier skill set..... "ethics" have nothing to do with it.
 
45ACPKING said:
who decides what is ethical?
I've seen many a head and neck shot kill a deer or moose dead as a doornail...... and less meat loss than a "ethical" boilerroom shot.
So if a guy wastes less meat by taking a successful head or neck shot ..... is that not "more" ethical?

Funny how people virtue signal thier own dogmas on others.
I personally don't take head shots except on grouse and bunnies but I have been pondering doing so. I treestand hunt one area where the shots are usually measured under 20 yards. I even killed one with the muzzle of my rifle not even a foot from his ear as it walked past the douglas fir tree that I was standing behind..... the only one I've head shot in that spot.
Meat loss is an important factor when the deer only yield 40 to 70 pounds of meat so you will have to excuse me but I will probably be taking more head shots in the future if the shots are up close and personal like they typically are from the treestand.

to each his own, within thier skill set..... "ethics" have nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...
The reason head/neck shots are unethical on big game is because the kill zone is small and anything outside that kill zone is a wound that is most likely fatal but does not hinder the animals ability to run so they will run and never be found and be subject to a lingering death. I’ve personally seen where a missed head shot takes the nose, jaw off an animal. A neck shot that missed the spine is just as devastating for the animal and unlikely to be found by the hunter. Of course there are exceptions but generally, a misplaced head/neck shot will result in a lost animal that will die a lingering death. The heart/lung is a 4-5 times bigger target and if the shot hits outside this relatively large kill zone, the animal will usually bed due to the pain of running and has a MUCH better chance of being put out of its misery and retrieved. IMO, anything that increases the chance of losing a wounded, suffering animal is unethical. Apparently, some don’t care about such things.
 
Licensed to kill said:
Well, IMO, head shots and/or neck shots are themselves unethical in hunting and I was not aware that we were talking about trappers.
Click to expand...
As trappers we often use FMJ's for hunting fur , not just shooting them in snares .
Up north of the tree line you often run into FMJ ammo hunting as well .
When I was on my remote line if the opportunity presented itself, a head shot on a moose was effective as well as wolves .
As I stated , ethics are based on emotion not science ,just looked at thd differences in the hunting regulations across Canada
As far as wounding goes I have seen lots of lousy shots by people on everything from.birds to moose ,regardless , and they weren't aiming for the head theyvwete just lousy shots .
What's next, mandating where we can shoot an animal?
Cat
 
Somewhere in my Library I have an Book written by a Game or Fish Warden in the 60ties which mentioned they Filed the tip of FMJ .303 British to expose the Lead so it would Mushroom during impact and used this ammo for Bear protection because it was the cheapest ammo available.
I trust a Bullet modified in this fashion would no longer be considered FMJ and therefore legal to hunt where FMJ Bullets are prohibited.

Cheers
 
If you file the tip off an Issue Mk. VII bullet, you won't expose lead. Either aluminum or fiber. The lead core is further back. You will also turn the jacket into a tube, with the risk that the core will squirt through and leave the jacket in the bore as an obstruction.
 
The question of 'ethics' can be resolved IF the Hunter is "capable" of actually 'making the shot'. I often see shooters at the range that can't hit 4" at 100 yds, they should stay home.
 
That's very true BUCK! For me, I admit hitting a milk jug doesn't seem like too much. But when you break it down, it's fairly close to a head sized target. 100-300m it's a without a doubt shot, but as I showed (in my 6.5 thread) beyond that I would of missed. High yes, but if it was torso /shoulder area shot I would of still connected.
 
I shot this offhand group at 200 meters on Sunday.
I don't consider it good enough accuracywise for a head shot on a deer
Or a moose at 200 meters but i know some who brag that they do nothing but head shots at that distance . These are also the guys I have never seen shoot any style but off a bench at the range!
We are drifting WAY off course on this thread though! LOL
Cat
 

Attachments

  • 20241222_103446.jpg
    20241222_103446.jpg
    38.7 KB · Views: 17
Last edited:
The several different hunting and gun safety courses I took or was made to take all dealt with FMJ ammo and exposed lead etc. ammo for hunting. Took 57 posts to get to the same thing.
 
I mentioned that thought here a while back (2-3 years) and it was pointed out to me that many FMJ bullets have an open lead base, Not 'really' Full Metal. As Tiriac said, The lead core could get 'blown out' the filed 'HP Tip', leaving some or all of the copper jacket in the bore. Pull a bullet sample to verify you have a copper based bullet b4 you file away.
I then started buying SP bullets or 'all lead'.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom