Thread: 223 on deer

Fuck! I might be too old and cynical but with the animal numbers that are roaming the countryside theses days if you can’t get an animal with open sights maybe you should find another hobby. If you can’t identify what you’re aiming at with your naked eye you probably shouldn’t be taking the shot. I know there are a lot of heroes out there that go for mid to long range shots but you only hear about the good results. The reality is that most animals are taken under 200 metre range, often under 100 m. And there’s still more animals been taken with open sight 303’s, 222’s, 270’s etc than get taken per annum with all the flash shit we have available these days. I may be wrong but there’s probably a few ‘old timers’ out there thinking the same. Bye the bye, I’m only a young whipper-snapper at 63.

Originally Posted by woods223

Fuck! I might be too old and cynical but with the animal numbers that are roaming the countryside theses days if you can’t get an animal with open sights maybe you should find another hobby. If you can’t identify what you’re aiming at with your naked eye you probably shouldn’t be taking the shot. I know there are a lot of heroes out there that go for mid to long range shots but you only hear about the good results. The reality is that most animals are taken under 200 metre range, often under 100 m. And there’s still more animals been taken with open sight 303’s, 222’s, 270’s etc than get taken per annum with all the flash shit we have available these days. I may be wrong but there’s probably a few ‘old timers’ out there thinking the same. Bye the bye, I’m only a young whipper-snapper at 63.

Mmm nah, seethe same argument from people discounting the power of a thermal spotter. The more you can see, the better. Blaming a new tool for the user being incompetent is not it.

How many deer/rabbit shaped rocks/tree stumps were shot up in the 'good old days'?

As always the story gets bigger with every re-telling too, 'back in my day...!'