Poll, allow .223” diam. bullets for big game?

[KodiakHntr]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

I have enough real world experience to NOT hunt big game with a .223

So answer me this kurt. I have a nice little cz .17 hmr. It is a tack driver. I know it will cleanly take a whitetail at 100 yds. So why shouldn't I be able to?
A .22 mag is extremely effective on whitetails. Why not one of them?
Where's the line?

I have to admit, I've been reading this thread since it started, and some of you are really grasping at straws here *cough cough MountainTi cough*...

Are you seriously comparing a 20 gr varmint bullet (that means highly frangible - or to put it simply, they come apart easily....) at 2375fps muzzle velocity with 45-80 gr dedicated big game bullets at 2800-4000 fps that may retain 100% of its intitial mass? That's pretty silly, don't you think?



As to the rest of the nay sayers (for whatever their reasons may be) here in BC I could have legally hunted on my last grizzly draw with a 17 Hornet had I felt so inclined. I chose something different however, and it was wonderfully effective.

In Montana, there is no minimum for big game (as far as I'm aware of at this time at any rate) and while there are a couple of pictures floating around out there of some pretty big bull elk killed with 22 rimfires, not many people set out with a 10/22 hoping to bag an elk. There have however, been a JAG of big bulls killed with 22 CF's.
That said, not many people are going to run out to buy a 223 or a 22-250 or build a 224 TTH as their primary big game rifle.
And the folks that do choose to set up a kid or a spouse or themselves with a 22 CF are likely to choose an appropriate bullet, and an appropriate shot angle, and an appropriate distance. All the hand-wringing and wailing about people choosing gopher bullets on purpose for deer is likely for nothing. Why not worry about the bigger issues that impact hunters, like loss of opportunity, or hunts closing down?

We've always been able to hunt with any CF's in BC. It hasn't been an issue here. I promise.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by KodiakHntr

I have to admit, I've been reading this thread since it started, and some of you are really grasping at straws here *cough cough MountainTi cough*...

Are you seriously comparing a 20 gr varmint bullet (that means highly frangible - or to put it simply, they come apart easily....) at 2375fps muzzle velocity with 45-80 gr dedicated big game bullets at 2800-4000 fps that may retain 100% of its intitial mass? That's pretty silly, don't you think?



As to the rest of the nay sayers (for whatever their reasons may be) here in BC I could have legally hunted on my last grizzly draw with a 17 Hornet had I felt so inclined. I chose something different however, and it was wonderfully effective.

In Montana, there is no minimum for big game (as far as I'm aware of at this time at any rate) and while there are a couple of pictures floating around out there of some pretty big bull elk killed with 22 rimfires, not many people set out with a 10/22 hoping to bag an elk. There have however, been a JAG of big bulls killed with 22 CF's.
That said, not many people are going to run out to buy a 223 or a 22-250 or build a 224 TTH as their primary big game rifle.
And the folks that do choose to set up a kid or a spouse or themselves with a 22 CF are likely to choose an appropriate bullet, and an appropriate shot angle, and an appropriate distance. All the hand-wringing and wailing about people choosing gopher bullets on purpose for deer is likely for nothing. Why not worry about the bigger issues that impact hunters, like loss of opportunity, or hunts closing down?

We've always been able to hunt with any CF's in BC. It hasn't been an issue here. I promise.

Thank you for posting.

Another hunter with actual experience where a 223 is legal and saying exactly what I've been saying. Just because it's legal doesn't mean everyone is going to run out and buy one, and they don't seem to have a problem with wounded animals running all over the country side.

Slavee, marky, m-ti, xbolt, and Don, you all seem to think you're experts on hunting with a 223 and the guys who actually hunt with them are clueless......



And that about sums up this thread.

[brendan's dad]

For me it was a no for 2 reasons.

1. I believe that the 6mm and 243 provide an excellent rifle for both women and youth especially with reduced recoil ammunition.

and

2. Where does it end? If a manufacturer produced a .204 caliber bullet with enough weight and expansion abilities to match the .223, will we then allow .204. Why not the .17 then?

I think the minimum is currently at a good level and there is no need to change it. Still plenty of opportunity to hunt with a .223; coyotes, badgers, rabbits, and gophers for maximum effect.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by brendan's dad

For me it was a no for 2 reasons.

1. I believe that the 6mm and 243 provide an excellent rifle for both women and youth especially with reduced recoil ammunition.

and

2. Where does it end? If a manufacturer produced a .204 caliber bullet with enough weight and expansion abilities to match the .223, will we then allow .204. Why not the .17 then?

I think the minimum is currently at a good level and there is no need to change it. Still plenty of opportunity to hunt with a .223; coyotes, badgers, rabbits, and gophers for maximum effect.

That about sums up the .223 debate for me as well.

[Don_Parsons]

Sorry you read into my post the wrong way Kurt.

I never said that the 223 was not capable of killing Deer or other big game animals.

I voted unknown at first, then did my research of what works for me,,, and me only.

There are better diameter bullets and cartrages for hunting in my world, if other choose different, go gett'em.

My view should not reflect on how the poll votes, nor have any bearing on what folks choose.

I don't need a 223 for Harvesting critters since the iron I have has a proven track record in my hands as well as my freezer

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by KodiakHntr

As to the rest of the nay sayers (for whatever their reasons may be) here in BC I could have legally hunted on my last grizzly draw with a 17 Hornet had I felt so inclined. I chose something different however, and it was wonderfully effective.

.

So why didn't you use your .17 hornet on your grizz? Common sense maybe?

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

So why didn't you use your .17 hornet on your grizz? Common sense maybe?

It's been done and documented way back in the 70's with a 17 Ackley- on a bet mind you, and I certainly would not hunt Grizz with a small caliber rifle!
Cat