Might have been better if you would have killed the deer quickly.
Maybe insted of jumping around like a couple of jackazzes cussin you could have been reloading and taking another shot to provide a CLEAN KILL.
I thought this was THE HIGH ROAD. not the lets shoot out of our effective range and wound an animal then get all happy and cuss.
+1
Many of you who posted on this thread are NUTS... the percentage of DRT is very low no matter what you are shooting.
DRT is not the standard of ethical hunting. Doing
everything you can to make a clean kill is. Taking a long shot just for the sake of taking it does not meet that standard, no matter how one wants to spin it.
Have I killed animals that DRT? Yes. Have I wounded animals despite my best efforts to kill them cleanly? Yes, but rather than jump around like an idiot, cussing up a storm in celebration of wounding an animal, because I'm an inarticulate twit, (although one that is very ashamed of my language despite posting it for the whole world to see and then drawing attention to it) I dispatched of said animal as quickly as possible.
For me it is not an issue of the results. I know of similar results from high powered center fire rifles at ranges that were a fraction of the range of the shot being discussed. The issues, for me, are the effort to make a clean kill and the respect shown to the game animal. That is an impressive shot, not an impressive display of hunting.
Finally some real HUNTERS chime in lol.
So now a real hunter is someone who condones unethical shots and pushing the limits of equipment and skill on game animals. Interesting. Or is a real hunter simply someone who is congratulatory in response to your video? In any case, my concern is with being an ethical hunter not meeting an arbitrary definition of real hunter.
I never posted this to brag
Really?
I just thought it would be interesting to a lot of you and something a little different for ya to watch.
I suppose different is an apt adjective.
Overall you guys took a deer at a great distance, and what makes it even greater is you did it with a blackpowder rifle.
Do people even bother to read the posts? Seriously there are a several posts pointing out that it was a smokeless muzzle loader, not a black powder weapon. Are you aware of the difference?
smithandwesson, don't mean to hijack your thread but the comments here about your hunting style are pretty dang hypocritical unless these guys are pure vegans.
I suggest you look up the term false dichotomy. That is what the glaring flaw in your argument is called (one of them anyways). There are multiple positions between pure vegan and eating meat from a factory farm. People who eat free range meet, eggs, etc. come to mind.
Further, your argument presumes that those people eating factory farm meat were aware of the conditions of the animals, in as much as the point at issue is the fact that it is unethical to not do what one knows is possible to mitigate an animals suffering. If you contend that knowledge is not requisite then your argument is resting on a gross equivocation of two unequal actions.
Lastly, even hypocrisy by the accuser is not a real defense for unethical action. The ethics of that shot must be judged on its own merits. If I stand up from my computer and go torture a kitten I might be worse than the OP, but it in no way negates the legitimacy of my contention that his shot doesn't meet the common standards of ethical hunting.
Keep trying to rationalize but remember they are just that rational lies (well in the case of many of these posts, they really are not even rational).
Good shooting, very poor hunting.
