.223 good for human but not deer?

[X-Rap]

My question would be why not if. I can think of no good reason for the 223 or any other .22 for that matter unless it is held to medium handgun ranges and the shot is very thoughtful. The notion that many are pleased with 5&6" groups with their 223 and are willing to take 200 yd shots is quite obsene. A good Contender or other quality SS pistol will shoot MOA or very close as will most good bolts.
If we are in the SHTF then etical standards as well as self preservation overide and you hunt with what you have or is quiet.

 

[jimmyraythomason]

Sure you do Armedbear,they are hiding under their blaze orange!

 

[Leaky Waders]

Krochus...for you I stand by "There are calibers much better for deer hunting than the .223. Ignoring them is just stubborness on the hunters part."

 

[R.W.Dale]

Krochus...for you I stand by "There are calibers much better for deer hunting than the .223. Ignoring them is just stubborness on the hunters part."

And I stand by my belief that if you shoot something bigger so you can gutshoot more you have no right to cast stones at others. Whats stubborn is shooting deer anyway when you know the shot is bad before you pull the trigger.

Anyone who can hunt with a bow can use a .223 just fine. And bow hunting is getting increasingly popular

 

[Phone Guy]

I have shot Whitetail in Nebraska with a .223. One shot kills. Use what you want, just sight the thing in and shoot to kill. I have shot many deer, some with a bow, .223, 30/06, .243, and 7mm Remington Mag.. They all died and they all taste good. Anybody that says you shouldn't use a .223 is inexperienced and probably shouldn't hunt deer anyway.

 

[ArmedBear]

Sure you do Armedbear,they are hiding under their blaze orange!

Our mountains are steep. 450 lb. people have a hard time running around.

Deer, however, have no trouble.

Seriously, I work with a woman who shot a doe a couple years ago, just up the hill from here. The MEAT from it weighed over 300 lbs. She used a 7mm-08 at about 400 yards. A warden was watching her shoot it, because he probably thought she'd wound it and walk away. It dropped, and he smiled and left.

If a 7mm-08 will drop a 400 lb. deer at 400 yards, then I'm sure .223 will work fine on a 100 lb. deer at 100 yards.

The problem arises when a young new AR owner decides to go deer hunting and has no idea what the gun's limitations, or his, are. That's not a problem with the cartridge itself, in the hands of an ethical hunter on small game. 100 lbs. isn't really big game, is it?

 

[hirundo82]

Humans pay dearly the fact of having the most sophisticated nervous system (and a sophisticated brain)....an animal doesn't "understand" what means being shot...they run away till they have no blood left or if they are physically impaired to do so (spine shot/broke nbones, etc...)

I'd agree with this. Humans have the mental capacity to consider the consequences of a situation. We think, "Oh no, I've been shot! I need to stop and take care of myself or I'll die."

The deer, on the other hand, is simply scared and all it thinks is, "Run! Run! Run!"

Another disadvantage that humans have is conditioning. We fall down when we realize are shot even if it is not an incapacitating wound because that is what we think is supposed to happen.

The average deer watches much less TV than the average human, so they don't know they are supposed to stay down after being shot.

 

[LEVRLOVR]

Caliber size and power will not make up for poor shooting.

A .223 is a fine choice for moderate range using proper bullets.

 

[stiab]

It seems to me that many if not most of the .223 proponents for deer are younger and less experienced hunters, as evidenced by the contents of their posts. Take for example the OP, who is so naive as to believe (and have us believe) that a human is as tough as a deer, when it comes to responding to being shot. It is that lack of understanding/knowledge among many of the .223 deer hunters that makes their case hard to argue in a convincing manner.

 

[Lou McGopher]

Personally I'm much more offended by the "Have 30-06 will shoot deer up the axehole" attitude

Is this not an effective shot?

 

[Leaky Waders]

Also the .223 proponents...Krochus et al...propose that all .223 shooters are deadly accurate one shot one kill snipers. But, everyone else not using a .22 caliber bullet are the worse shot on earth only shooting hindquarters of animals.

In Krochus's signature is a deer shot broadside at 30 yards with the .223..."even though my first shot was kinda poor it's placement did a great job of showing what this bullet can do. It went through one leg, shoulder, ribcage on both sides and ended up somewhere greater than the depth of 3/4 of my index finger but less than exiting into the off shoulder."

The result in Krochus's sig was a dead deer...after another 30 yards shot - a neck shot.

Not every shot is perfect, and that's ok.

Comparing arrows to the .223 isn't a valid argument. Most bow hunters strive to have their arrows pass through the whole deer at 30 yards.

Again, when people pass on input by people like H&H hunter then they are going to have to learn on their own what's the best round for their big game experience.

I never said not to hunt deer with a .223. I just listed the reasons why young folks get stuck with using a .223. Like most others agree, there are lots better rounds to use, but in the end you'll use what you have. If you only have a .223 then that's what you'll use. Trying to justify it as the best round to use is just silly.

 

[schlockinz]

Will it kill a deer, yes. Would I personally use it for deer hunting, no. I'd use at least a 22-250 on deer, and have killed many with a .243 (which my magnum friends consider too small). Now, if I were in the woods, stalking, looking at short ranges, then sure, I'd consider the .223. But, if I were to be hunting fields where I take longer shots, I'll stick with my 30.06, and I do consider that gun overkill on deer. It can tear up a lot of meat like many of the faster cartridges, but I can shoot it accurately out past 300yds in field conditions.

As for the bow argument, a bow works quite differently from a gun. Gun is blunt force trauma, basically knock enough crap out of the way and hopefully you bleed the animal out or take out an organ. With a bow, the mechanics are much simpler and more eloquent. Your average 125gr broadhead will slice every vessel that it touches on its way through a deer. Its objective is to bleed the deer out, maybe puncture the lungs. I've had bow shots that'll kill deer that left heart and lungs intact, I just nailed a large vessel. Lastly, most bow hunters that I've known practice much more with their bows than rifle hunters usually practice with a rifle. When I lived in NY I could hit a 3" circle reliably at 60yds with a bow, but that was shooting 50 arrows a day 5 days a week, right now I probably couldn't do that at 30yds. Proficiency is the bow hunters mantra, because being truly proficient can allow you to reach that extra 10yds to kill the buck of your dreams.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Not legal here, but where it IS legal to use a .223/5.56 I'd be thinking about bullet design. My AR is acccurate enough to hunt with, but I've hunted a lot. Winchesters 55 gr soft point is a pretty accurate round and doesn't 'blow up' like some of the other 'expanding' bullets which are actually varmint rounds. Heavier is better when it comes to the .223/5.56 and I'd want the heaviest soft point with a bonded jacket I could find.

 

[H&Hhunter]

H&Hunter

by your if your logic were applied to everyone then nobody would engauge in bow or handgun hunting.

krochus

Actually if you go back and reread my post sans emotion you'll find quite the opposite. I didn't say not to hunt with it I said if you have to ask the answer is no. If you have the confidence and experience and skill and discipline you wouldn't have to ask the question. If the bow and handgun hunters you refer to have the same level of competence and discipline and are willing to limit themselves as using a bow, a handgun or a sub caliber center fire requires then by all means if it blows your skirt up go for it.

I choose not to under 99.9% of the type of hunting that I do because a .223 is simply to limiting. That doesn't mean that I am going to go out and corn hole deer with a heavier caliber. It simply means that my range is increased and my shot opportunities are increased due to more flexible shot angle allowance due to deeper and more reliable straight line penetration.

I have popped spikes and does from a stand with a .223 on several occasions I've also culled cow elk with one. You just have to be very careful but it works just fine within it's range of capabilities which is more narrow than a larger calibers firing a heavier bullet. There is simply no arguing that fact.

 

[R.W.Dale]

The result in Krochus's sig was a dead deer...after another 30 yards shot - a neck shot.

not 30yds at all

the deer in question didn't make it 15' from the first shot before implanting itself in the creek. That's one benifet to shooting a cartridge that doesn't recoil so much you lose the entire sight picture.

I learned long ago (shooting bigger cartridges no less) to shoot a deer again if at all possible if it tries to get up.


H&Hunter I didn't quite get the angle you were driving at before. Apoun clarification I do agree.


I'm not accusing others of being poor shots, but when they repeat over and over thr more room for error mantra well what's a person to believe

 

[Nicodemus38]

the people who sing the praise of the 223/5.56 are the ones who use 20+ inch barrel bolt action rifles, use a low weight hollowpoint or jsp and take headshot on deer that have a hard time breaking the scales past 130lbs.

the people stuck using fmj in 223/5.56 do not like it.

personally if i HAD to use a .223 diameter bullet i would grow a pair as my drill sergeant said, and use a 22-250 or a .240

 

[ReadyontheRight]

I'd agree with this. Humans have the mental capacity to consider the consequences of a situation. We think, "Oh no, I've been shot! I need to stop and take care of myself or I'll die."

The deer, on the other hand, is simply scared and all it thinks is, "Run! Run! Run!"

Another disadvantage that humans have is conditioning. We fall down when we realize are shot even if it is not an incapacitating wound because that is what we think is supposed to happen.

The average deer watches much less TV than the average human, so they don't know they are supposed to stay down after being shot.
__________________

Best answer. I think you should use more gun than a .223 - which has proven to be minimally acceptable on human targets. A military wants to "incapacitate" and stop, not necessarily "kill".

When hunting, you want to KILL your game quickly so it does not suffer.

The strategy and objectives of military/war and hunting are very different. It saddens me to think that either one should be judged by the other.

 

[PT1911]

The deer, on the other hand, is simply scared and all it thinks is, "Run! Run! Run!"

much like the French!!!!...



I kid I kid....

but you hit the nail on the head.. humans work off of thought and logic, animals work off of instinct. Therefore, while we are trying to figure out what to do next, the injured animal is running even though it cannot breath.

If you hunt with a .223, make the shot a good one... that is what it comes down to. I would never feel as though I had an inadequate gun if I carried my AR into the woods, but I am more likely to choose others in that place....30-30, 257 rbts, 270, 357mag, 44mag, or shotgun... If those werent possible, I would go with the AR (speaking of deer or larger game...)

hogs are a different story... I would be more apt to take a head shot on a hog than a deer... not sure why but I cannot bring myself to take a shot anywhere but behind the front shoulder on a deer....With hog hunting, I would also like the extra capacity provided with the AR.

 

[Big Bill]

I like a .270, .30-06, .308, or .25-06 for hunting Mulies here in Idaho. The fact of the matter is that it's a combination of longer distances and tougher game animals that precludes the .223 for me. It's just not enough gun. And, I've never been interested in a .243; because IMO a .270 or .25-06 is a better choice.

 

[Fremmer]

Anybody that says you shouldn't use a .223 is inexperienced and probably shouldn't hunt deer anyway.

The rest of us who hunt in Nebraska actually obey the law and hunt with the minimum .243 caliber or larger. But then again, we're not as experienced as you are. Yeah. Experienced. Sure.

 

[imabballer]

It seems to me that many if not most of the .223 proponents for deer are younger and less experienced hunters, as evidenced by the contents of their posts. Take for example the OP, who is so naive as to believe (and have us believe) that a human is as tough as a deer, when it comes to responding to being shot. It is that lack of understanding/knowledge among many of the .223 deer hunters that makes their case hard to argue in a convincing manner.

Thank you for your insult. I am very impressed that you were able to discern that I am both a young inexperienced hunter and naive all from the question I posed.

Perhaps for some background, I am a bow hunter first and foremost. I might rifle hunt once or twice a year at best when my daughter decides to tag along. I have personally never been interested in hunting with a .223.

The reason I made the post I made, is to have a purely academic discussion that reconciles the competing arguments for and against the use of this round on deer sized game vs. humans. I apologize if I have ruffled anyone's feathers, that was not my intention. I also completely understand the logic stated by many on this forum and appreciate the informative and respectful answers I have received.

I agree that a .223 is not in any way an interchangeable substitute for a larger and/or more powerful caliber for hunting deer. However, much like us bow hunters know that a good and well placed shot is what will give us the best chance to retrieve our game, I believe that a .223 could be used ethically in much the same manner, as long as the hunter knows it's strict limitations. As far as humans being as tough as deer, I do not believe I intimated that in my original post. I do believe that a deer shot through the heart or lungs will not die any slower or run any farther from a .223 wound than it will from one of my 100 grain muzzy broadheads.

Is it ethical to take all the same shots with a .223 as you could with say a .270, .308, etc.? Absolutely not. Is it ethical to take all the same shots with a .223 as you could a bow? I don't see why not.

 

[Leaky Waders]

Krochus, the 30 yards i inferred from your sig "223rem 55grn sierra gameking SPBT loaded over a max charge of H-335 range was no more than 30yds, two shots were fired my placement on the first shot for whatever reason wasn't too great striking high and farther forward than I would have liked."

Imabballer, most of these questions concerning a minimalist and/or military cartridge in a 3-5 moa steel sighted communist block are from non-hunters who bought a 'cool' looking firearm and now want to hunt bears, or deer, or whatever. The majority have little or no hunting experience.

How many times on the shotgun boards do you see people extollling the virtues of bird shot as a 'manstopper'? Have these people even shot flushed and shot a quail before?

On the handgun board right now there's some chap posting about how many shots it took him to kill an armadillo after gut shooting it with a .45 acp. He should've used an f-150, but still...

And, on nearly every board with anything to do about guns, there are a large number of posts from inexperienced people asking about and defending the .223 as a good choice for hunting. It is indeed a choice, just not the best one.

Again, the military has chosen the .223 as a flat shooting cartridge where the individual can carry lots of ammo for their combat load. The 9mm is also carried and would be considered a weak deer cartridge as well. What's weird is...the sniper rifles are not .223's...they are 308's (good for deer) and 50 cal's (good for long range elephants?). In other words, the military has one shot one kill rifles for deer sized targets, but the .223 enthusiast continues to ignore these over a .223. I guess the black rifle has more appeal to some than a bolt action.

Most people who advocate the .223 are not limiting the round to bow shots i.e. 30-45 yards. They advocate 200 yard shots.

Again, someone asks a question...honest feedback is given...most will be ignored and a similar thread will rise like an ugly phoenix 2 weeks from now.

 

[stiab]

As far as humans being as tough as deer, I do not believe I intimated that in my original post.

This was your statement...

I guess the thing I really don't understand, is how they supposedly work great on 200lb men but are far too little for the 150lb deer.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Leaky waders please don't carry your emotional baggage from other threads to this one. Please cite examples where the participants in this thread say 223 is thr best deer cartridge or should be used at 200 yds.


Now as to you calling everyone else in this thread who doesn't agree with your "the world is flat" view of deer hunting. I cite your shotgun SD vs quail hunting comparison. If you can't realize the diffrence in how shot behaves at SD ranges vs hunting ranges you have no base on which to stand calling others inexperienced

The sniper rifle comment just makes no sense at all in this context. Every year thousands of deer are killed with cartridges much less suited to sniping than .223


As to my shot placment on my deer. The diffrence between me and always gotta pull the trigger deer hunters like you is the shot I wasn't really that pleased with was still a 100% fatal double lung shot through the vitals.

I don't shoot deer.....I shoot at places on deer

 

[indoorsoccerfrea]

I think everyone is getting a little too personal with this...

In my opinion, as long as you respect the limitations of the cartridge, then .223 will work fine. Range, bullet construction, and shot placement are important with any cartridge. If it is legal to hunt with .223 where you hunt, and you are capable of getting the shot on target, then go for it. No caliber should permit you to gutshot a deer or graze it. Practice with what you hunt with until you can hit a quarter at your preferred range. If the deer is outside of your range or at a bad angle, pass on it. Only shoot at what you know you can humanely kill.