|
|
|
Author |
|
Message | |
|
Treacodactyl Downsizer Moderator
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 25795 Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism
|
|
|
|
|
jema Downsizer Moderator
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 28233 Location: escaped from Swindon
|
|
|
|
|
sean Downsizer Moderator
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 42219 Location: North Devon
|
|
|
|
|
sean Downsizer Moderator
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 42219 Location: North Devon
|
|
|
|
|
cab
Joined: 01 Nov 2004 Posts: 32429
|
|
|
|
|
deerstalker
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 589
|
|
|
|
|
Treacodactyl Downsizer Moderator
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 25795 Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism
|
|
|
|
|
sean Downsizer Moderator
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 42219 Location: North Devon
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
|
|
|
cab
Joined: 01 Nov 2004 Posts: 32429
|
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 04 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
Deerstalker wrote: |
How do you define "sport" in this context? People don't need to shoot to satisfy hunger, so why do people want to do it?
There is an element of "enjoyment" involved. Whether this is satisfying a deep seated primeval need to hunt, I cannot be sure.
|
If people didn't enjoy shooting they wouldn't do it; I have no problem with people enjoying what they do. I also have no problem with people shooting to control vermin or for the pot. It isn't to satify hunger as such, but if it supples meat for the pot then there's no obvious moral problem with it.
Quote: |
With regard to the clean kill concept, it is largly rubbish put forward by people who don't shoot.
|
I beg to differ. I know that an animal can be shot and survive, and I think it's important to reduce the likelyhood of that happening by shooting at a target that might realistically be killed with a single shot. To do otherwise seems rather irresponsible to me.
Quote: |
Every time you look down that scope, your heart is beating quickly, your mouth is dry (some people call it "buck fever"). You know there is a risk of wounding - and you know it will happen, as it has happened in the past.
All you can do is use your knowledge, experience and the right tools to minimise this risk. |
You mean, do your best to ensure a clean kill? |
|
|
|
|
Jonnyboy
Joined: 29 Oct 2004 Posts: 23956 Location: under some rain.
|
|
|
|
|
tahir
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 45668 Location: Essex
|
|
|
|
|
cab
Joined: 01 Nov 2004 Posts: 32429
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 04 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
I'm trying to be realistic about what shooting is like for those who, perhaps don't take part.
Walking the hedgerows or "rough shooting" as it's know is done with a shotgun.
A shotgun, by the nature of its design, is designed for shooting at moving targets. A lot of people think the shotgun is a humane weapon because you cannot miss. BIG mistake! The shotgun accounts for more wounded "runners" than any other firearm (other than perhaps the air rifle in the wrong hands).
The real problem with shotguns is the lack of exact ballistics. You don't know the exact range, to do not know the speed of your target, you cannot guarantee the spread or pattern of your shot and you don't know if any pellets will cause fatal damage.
This is not a criticism of shotguns (I use them myself), but every shot is a gamble, hit, miss or wound is in the lap of the gods - no guarantees.
With a rifle and scope, you know the ballistics. You zero the weapon at a given range, you know how your projectile will perform above and below your zeroed range. I know the exact range of the target (with the help of a lazer range finder). You even know how the bullet will deform on impact!
You still cannot guarantee a clean kill. You cannot control the variables - your quarry may move as you are pulling tha trigger, there may be a few blades of grass between you and the target (unseen through the scope) or you make shake a little at the last moment (rested, I can put three rounds in a one inch circle at a 100m - no problem. Firing from the the shoulder in the field at that range is a completely different ball game)!
To illustrate this point, I will use deer as an example.
Fallow deer are big heavy targets. I use a .270 rifle and 130g bullets to shoot them. This is a very fast, hard hitting round which deforms on impact to twice its size.
Bullet energy (E) is a function of both its mass (M) and velocity (V) thus (E=1/2 M. V squared). As no shots are taken at more than 100m, consider this:
Mass=130grains (8.4g), muzzle velocity 954m/s(3140f/s), energy=?
Or to put this in context, you have a fallow deer standing broadside on at 100m. Using the above weapon and round, where on the deer would you shoot to ensure an instant kill? |
|
|
|
|
deerstalker
Joined: 28 Oct 2004 Posts: 589
|
|
|
|
|
|
Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
|