Agree to disagree on the ethics threads?


February 17, 2012, 11:07 AM
I'm pretty sure we are all going to stick with our opinions. Let's "agree to disagree"'s kind of a touchy subject for most of us and we would be better off arguing about 9mm vs. 45acp.

Possibly to the delight of some, I am making a vow not to post any more comments under ethics threads! :D So what's better, .270 or .308? Don't answer that.

Oops, that second answer should start with "yes." Sorry!

If you enjoyed reading about "Agree to disagree on the ethics threads?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
February 17, 2012, 12:59 PM
Hey, how about this? If you want to argue ethics click on those threads that deal with ethics. If not, don't.


February 17, 2012, 02:59 PM
So what's better, .270 or .308?
Funny guy!! That's not even a debate, .270 wipes the floor with the 308. :evil:

February 17, 2012, 03:45 PM
Let's "agree to disagree" hereHunting ethics is a broad subject. But there are instances of black-and-white. If someone says it is ethical to poach (as long as the hunter feels like it), ethical to be unconcerned about wounding and losing animals--or just says that ethics doesn't apply to hunting?

Hunting has enemies, and I am happy to defend it against them--but I can't defend the type of hunting (or hunter) that doesn't care about the laws or the animal. To the extent that someone insists that "that's what hunting is," I will insist that it is NOT at all what I call hunting.

February 17, 2012, 06:12 PM
.308 is better because it will never shrink. :D

February 17, 2012, 06:20 PM
I vote No #2...

February 17, 2012, 11:58 PM
MCgunner wrote:

.308 is better because it will never shrink

Plus it didnít need someone like Jack O'Connor to pump it up. ;)

The 270 is a decent roundÖ.but it didnít hang the moon and stars IMO.

Art Eatman
February 18, 2012, 05:42 PM
All I really care about is that folks don't get all emotional in their posts--regardless of how strong their feelings are. :)

February 18, 2012, 10:23 PM
.270 of course.

February 19, 2012, 02:20 PM
Do you mean subjects, like those "snipers" that are too lazy to stalk up to an ethical range to shoot at big game??? lol


The Termite
February 19, 2012, 03:20 PM
You forgot to include "magical brownies" as an option......:D

February 19, 2012, 03:33 PM
C. all the above

February 19, 2012, 03:36 PM
The 308. After all the 270 is just an adequate coyote gun.

February 19, 2012, 03:44 PM

February 20, 2012, 04:32 AM
I'm on the fence. You have to know when to quit is the thing. I've actually changed or modified my opinions from discussions here, there are a lot of good points of view brought up during discussion. However, sometimes it's obvious nobody is gonna budge and at that point "agree to disagree" is the best you're gonna do.

As far as 270 vs 308... I guess I gotta go with the 270. It'll do anything the 308 will do but is flatter shooting. I mean, why go 308 over 30-06?

I don't shoot either, but they'll both get the job done.

February 20, 2012, 09:11 AM
I'll take either one. To tell you the truth, at the ranges the .270's slightly flatter trajectory comes into play I doubt I'd take the shot unless I had a good rest. My ethics wouldn't allow it;).


February 20, 2012, 09:45 AM
.270 vs. .308? Nothing short of a belted magnum can be trusted to make ethical kills on game squirrel size and up.

There, now I've successfully meshed ethics with a caliber war. My work here is done.

Art Eatman
February 20, 2012, 09:52 AM
Is it ethical to use the dreaded Sharp Stick?

February 20, 2012, 11:18 AM
if this vote passes can we outlaw 22lr carry threads!!!! lol

February 20, 2012, 11:42 AM
All I really care about is that folks don't get all emotional in their posts--regardless of how strong their feelings are. :)

I say: :fire: :fire: :fire:

I mean: :D :D :D

What I really mean is: :eek: :uhoh: :eek:

Oh, what the heck: :evil: :p :)

February 20, 2012, 08:04 PM
What caliber for what caliber, best rifle,.223 for_______big game and ethics threads?

February 21, 2012, 07:36 AM
You guys are ALL missing the real point here: real men carry .45 ACP; 9mm is for granola crunchers.

There's an xkcd cartoon about this... oh, my 'google-fu' is strong this morning: (

mods: don't need to sweat this one... "Note: You are welcome to reprint occasional comics pretty much anywhere (presentations, papers, blogs with ads, etc). If you're not outright merchandizing, you're probably fine. Just be sure to attribute the comic to"

February 21, 2012, 06:45 PM
According to the poll at the time of this posting, half of us want to disagree about agreeing to disagree. That means that we will argue more to the point that no one agrees with each other, even those who want to agree on the one aspect of disagreeing....

February 21, 2012, 09:02 PM
^^^ I agree that we disagree but I disagree that we can't agree.

February 21, 2012, 09:54 PM
9mm vs. 45acp.
9mm is obviously superior to 45ACP. I voted to agree to disagree. I was shocked to find the poll results to be nearly 50/50.

Good find, carfarmer. XKCD is awesome.

February 21, 2012, 10:11 PM
Is it ethical to use the dreaded Sharp Stick?

Yes it is.

Other than that .270 is the better choice IMHO

February 22, 2012, 12:18 AM
What about the .391 WSSM Skyripper? Short powder column, diameter matched to the earths rotational forces and blessed by the Dali Lama. I read about it in gun mag and can you believe it? It GOT outstanding reviews from a gun writer who was paid $500 and sent on a free Greater Siberian Niwot hunt with the express instructions that he was to give this new miracle caliber an outstanding review no matter what!

February 22, 2012, 08:32 AM

The .391 WSSM skyripper in orange jello testing using pineapple chunk wetpack. Showed only 5X caliber expansion and a mere 9 feet of penetration. It would be alright for light skinned game. It doesn't display effective ballistics to be used as a SD round. Glock has declined chambering it in the next model 64 for this reason. According to Wikipedia:D

So the .270 win is still the better round sorry.

February 22, 2012, 12:53 PM
OK but what about the .391 Skyripper WSSM Aptly Improved version? It got 9'& 1/4" penetration making it FAR superior to the non improved version. AND it has 43 times the powder capacity of a .270 with less recoil!

Also if you reload you can get the cost of each shot down to only $54.39. I can't see how you could possibly argue that a .270 was better after all it's old and obsolete.

Once you add in the auto range finding, laser guided, trajectory correcting 18X63x88 scope by Trashco you can shoot Niowts at over 3674 yards. I know a guy who did it, off hand.

.270's are mostly worthless now.

February 22, 2012, 11:13 PM
I am going to order the Victorinox 24 function upper in .391 aptly improved for my shrubmeister. Ethics won't even come into question with such a round.

Thanks for the heads up.

Art Eatman
February 23, 2012, 09:15 AM
Seems to me that this ethics thing has been pretty much been beaten to death, these last several months. Poor old horse has more scar tissue than hair...

If you enjoyed reading about "Agree to disagree on the ethics threads?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!