# hunting and killing animals



## GentleCheetah (Oct 17, 2005)

Speaking of tradition, how many AAAC members hunt and enjoy killing games? I am not a hunter right now, but will get into this fine pasttime soon.



The Gentle Cheetah


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I went on a Kodiak Brown Bear hunt, shot one moose and I was a passable wingshot before my eyes and a bad shoulder retired my Parker. Ironically, I have never killed, harvested, taken or in short blasted the lifeforce out of an animal for sport. I have used firearms in the wilderness to end animal's suffering, including a poor riding horse with two shattered legs. Have you ever seen people trying to stone a writhing horse to death[xx(]? My New Service was a godsend.Hunting is sadly on the decline. I think this reflects an overall shift in population rather than some new altuistic relationship with wild animals. When the last shot is fired the tally will be intresting. Firearm and ammunition taxes have gone far in preservation while some of our values have hurt wildlife, ie taking prime breeding males out of the gene pool. Yet the recent hopefull sighting of the 'extinct' Ivory billed Woodpecker happened only because that particular remnant of southern forest was vigorously fought for by hunters.


----------



## GentleCheetah (Oct 17, 2005)

Kav, the reason why I asked (and why I am interested in hunting) is because it is a traditional activity and that a gene for hunting is probably ingrained in our soul. In comparsion, regular sports are too man-made.

No, I don't view hunting as a sport. It'll be a form of recreation and part of life. I no longer like sports in general. Exercises such as swimming and x-country are fine.

I've found my professional life to be too limiting. So an activity in the wilderness, especially one against adversaries (the game, the terrain, and the weather), is particularly refreshing and personally enriching.

Furthermore, I'm of the opinion that modern sedatary work-life -- i.e., cubicles, programming jobs, desk jobs, couch potatoes, eat-outs, etc., etc. -- is slowing making slaves out of some of us.

Rural people have one thing going for them: They are free and staunchly independent. I admire them for this.

The Gentle Cheetah


----------



## GentleCheetah (Oct 17, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Kav_
> 
> I have used firearms in the wilderness to end animal's suffering, including a poor riding horse with two shattered legs. Have you ever seen people trying to stone a writhing horse to death[xx(]?


Why don't they just use a rifle or injection? My rifle instructor told me that in some states M-15 (AR-15) is not even allowed for hunting, as its bullets (7.65 mm) are not powerful enough to kill the game instantly (if the hunter misses the vital organ).

Perhaps once I try hunting a few times, I'll develop the same feeling you had when you encountered that bear in Alaska. It's entirely possible. We'll see.

The Gentle Cheetah


----------



## mpcsb (Jan 1, 2005)

Ducks and occasionally rabbits. My dad used to take me. I always thought the old 12 bore (sp?) was a bit much. Haven't gone hunting in over twenty years.


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by GentleCheetah_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


GC - I think that you are thinking of 5.56 mm ammo. and yes, that may not kill a deer outright, certainly not a large buck. just as important, the rounds will be in motion long after they are in effective killing range, creating a situation where you can be putting people out of your line of site at risk.

I would take up hunting again, if I had somebody I trusted to go with. I have nothing at all against harveting meat from wild annimals, and I think that the recreational aspect would be enjoyable. The only people I know, right now, who hunt, I wouldn't go outin the woods with.


----------



## Kinizsi (Aug 20, 2005)

I am quite an active hunter. Thanks to a long lasting family tradition of hunting, I am able to hunt in family own shoots, which spread in the Bavarian Alps and the Frankonian mountain regions. 
I am also fortunate to have friends in Hungary, Austria, Slovakia and Switzerland who are hunters and therefore I get invited to shoots/hunts/stalks in those countries quite regularly. 
When living in England I was given oportunities to take part in hunts. I couldn't quite rank the value of those great days back then but now the memories of those days spent on horseback in the countryside are highly cherished. 


Hunting in most European countries seems to be galaxies away from the way hunting is done in the US. I have a very hard time relating to US hunters who hunt in camouflage patterned anti-scent high tech gear, or those who are allowed to hunt even though they can barely hit a barn door from 10yds with their overequipped high tech rifles. (of course there are most terrible European hunters as well) 
Hunting in most European countries was always a "sport" of the upper class. It still remains it a bit in Germany or Austria etc. since it takes an enormeous ammount of time (a normal course is usually two evenings a week plus at least one full day of the weekend not including the range time which you need for the length of 6-12 months) and a rather large sum of money just to attain a hunting licence. With the absence of public shoots you need to buy yourself into a private or state owned shoot if you are lacking privately owned land. Prices for shoots are quite expensive and besides the paid money you will also need to do serious maintenance work in those shoots, like maintaining roads etc.
You also need to pay a yearly to validate your hunting licence. The high prices for firearms and ammunition add quite a burden as well. Plus strict regulations for firearm and ammunition storage will cost you some money as well. 
The snobbism of the hunters in Germany (found in other countries as well but I like blaming my own country much better) will also pose a noteworthy hurdle for newcomers (it could also be the death of hunting in Germany but that's another story). In case you want to be invited to driven hunts or excellent private owned shoots you often have to obey more less unwritten rules. Military clothing, camouflage hunting equipment etc. are often unwelcome. You will have to invest into the "traditional" hunting clothing of Germany. Loden is the way to go if you want to be without critique. Your firearm will also be subject of discrimination if you chose wrong. In many cases the invitations to private shoots have included the sentence "No automats please" or "Nothing from Hollywood", so pump action shotguns, semi automatic shotguns and rifles (regulated by capacity restrictions anyway) are also most unwelcome by a lot of hunters. 

P.S.:
I hope I did not offend any US hunters with what I have said. You can, by all means, hunt just like you want, wearing just what you want and with whatever firearm you want. I am not the one to impose anything onto anybody. My opinions originate from my narrow Eurocentric mind.


----------



## FlatSix (Feb 23, 2005)

Hunting is easier in the United States because we have so much more open land, and so much more game. Ohio hunters are knocking down something like a million deer per annum and deer numbers are still going up!

Conservation and management has become very important here in the Midwest. A lot of species are being reintroduced very successfully. When I was a child, there wasn't a Canadian goose in the sky; today they are omnipresent.

----------------------


"When you wear something like spats, I think you might as well wear your favorite players jersey bc what youre saying is I want to be powerful like the bear and Im wearing its hide to tap into its power." - Film Noir Buff

"First sense of what "normal" good clothes looked like came from my dad, of course, and from Babar books." - Concordia

" I have a related problem in that I often have to chase people. Leather soles are no good for this kind of work." - Patrick06790


----------



## Kinizsi (Aug 20, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by FlatSix_
> 
> Hunting is easier in the United States because we have so much more open land, and so much more game. Ohio hunters are knocking down something like a million deer per annum and deer numbers are still going up!
> 
> Conservation and management has become very important here in the Midwest. A lot of species are being reintroduced very successfully. When I was a child, there wasn't a Canadian goose in the sky; today they are omnipresent.


In Germany we have a literal wild pig plague and forest owners feed the overpopulated deer in winter to make sure that they don't eat the young trees. It is not that there isn't enough game, it is just hunting in the USA is far less regulated than it is in Germany. To me that's one key difference. You could also dramatically lower the number of US hunters if you were just introducing enough regulations. Even CCW courses in the US do not even nearly resemble the courses that you have to take to get a hunting or just a fishing licence in Germany. 
No matter how much open land you have, if the state only permits strictly licenced hunters to hunt on it, you will get rid of all the occasional or less devouted hunters.


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

I think that the big difference between europe and the US is the availability of land - in the US you can always find someplace to hunt, and, if I remember correctly from my hunter saftey class in middle school, you can hunt on somebody else's private property if it isn't marked. in most of Europe you need to basically buy the right to hunt on land.


----------



## n/a (Sep 4, 2002)

> quote:_Originally posted by cufflink44_
> 
> Hunting is something I just donâ€™t â€œget.â€
> 
> Maybe itâ€™s like eating raw oysters or listening to rap music: either you like it or you donâ€™t, and the ones that donâ€™t will never understand the feelings of the ones that do. If hunting is instinctual, GC, I guess Iâ€™m missing that gene.


Thank-you, cufflink44. You said what I was too timid to say. But I like raw oysters...

"When Britain first at Heaven's Command arose from out the azure main, this was the character of the land and guardian angels sung the strain: Rule Britannia! Britannia rule the waves! Britons shall _*never*_ be slaves."


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by cufflink44_
> 
> Hunting is something I just donâ€™t â€œget.â€
> 
> ...


to me there are a few parts

1. I think that it is important to understand where your food comes from, just like I pick fruit and vegetables a few times a year, and grow a few vegetables in my backyard. I think that this is a (mentaly) healthy attitude. and if you eat meat, you should have seen some of it alive at one point.

2. hunting isn't just about killing the animal. it gives you a challenge (ok, yes, it would be more challenging to be hunting with a small knife against a bear, but nvertheless a challenge) you need to use your head and body, get out into the woods etc.

3. I like wild meat - venison, wild pork, duck and goose. I also like the idea of a few hundred pounds of meat for the cost of a few shells.

2.


----------



## Mr. Di Liberti (Jan 24, 2006)

> quote:_Originally posted by GentleCheetah_
> AR-15 is not even allowed for hunting, as its bullets (7.65 mm) are not powerful enough to kill the game instantly.


The auto-loading AR-15, like it's selective fire counter part the M-16, fire .223 caliber projectiles (thats a .22).

.22's are banned for hunting big game because they lack the down range energy and destructive force to humanely kill anything much larger then a squirrel.

Short of missing completely, missing the vital organs (regardless of what your shooting) makes for a long day of tracking. Even a clean shot throught the heart and lungs doesn't ensure your prey is going to drop dead on the spot.

The 7.62mm NATO & .308 Winchester, are both .308 caliber, but the cartridges are not the same, nor should they be considered interchangeable despite apparently identical external dimensions.

30-06, .308 Winchester, .300 Winchester Magnum and 7.62mm NATO are all .308 caliber, and a fine choice for hunting game up to the size of an Elk.

I no longer hunt due to physical limitation's.

With the _exception_ of trophy and stand hunting, I believe hunting to be a fine endeavor, for both recreation and putting meat on the table.

One more thought on firearms chambered for .308.

At least here in the State's, .308 in the caliber of choise for tactical marksman, both Law Enforcement and Marine corps, for long range (beyond 600 yards), the latter uses .300 WinMag.

Opinionated as ever,

Anthony

Courtesy is as much a mark of a gentleman as courage ~ Theodore Roosevelt


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

My anecdote about the horse points out an ironic twist. I don't have a cellphone. I hate the things, usefull as they can be in urban emergencies. Yet there I was in wilderness where you would expect firearms as norm and they were not ( 5 useless cellphones out of service areas though.) The forum I moderate periodically erupts into discussions of weapons to defend against what I call " pagan biker gangs and homicidal bears." I always figure a quality sleeping bag is my #1 priority.Compared to a takedown survival rifle, romantic it is not: But I hate cold feet. Firearms for hunting, both fellow travelors and our own kind have always stirred passionate debate. Like all human activities, we have our shining moments and dark hours.There are a few well thought out and written books on hunting ethics. My brain is still rattled from my carwreck. Perhaps when Jan reads this he will know of what I speak and give reference. If you get The History Channel, watch the excellent series HISTORY OF THE GUN. I think Jan was in one episode firing a Howda pistol.


----------



## Coolidge24 (Mar 21, 2005)

I've got nothing against hunting. My grandfather went on some of the last big safaris to Africa in the late 50s early 60s when one could still kill things like elephants. I could never shoot an elephant even if it were legal though, I think they are magnificent. My father went on some of these safaris at about age 16 or so, and they also hunted pheasants and ducks (not many deer) here in Connecticut into the late 70s. Both had stopped hunting by the early 1980s. We had a sizeable collection of what became collectible Winchester rifles nearly all of which have now been sold. I used guns a little bit in Boy Scouts, and was decent as far as accuracy but could never get into it. I just don't have the heart to kill big game unless it's attacking me. After we had had U.S. History in high school and learned about TR, my friends used to jokingly call my parents' house "Sagamore Hill".
It's to be expected when you have lions, zebras and Thompson's gazelles hides strewn about, as rugs, on a chair, and walls. My mom is kind of appalled by some of it. Hence I get the rickety zebra-cushioned rocking chair as soon as I had an apartment of my own!!


----------



## FlatSix (Feb 23, 2005)

Allow me to disagree with you...



> quote:_Originally posted by Mr. Di Liberti_
> .22's are banned for hunting big game because they lack the down range energy and destructive force to humanely kill anything much larger then a squirrel.


The .223 Rem round is very different from a .22 Long Rifle, which is what most people think of as a ".22". The bullet is twice as heavy or heavier - there are deer-specific 69-grain loads of the .223. The muzzle energy is between ten and fourteen times greater, which makes a considerable difference. You could shoot a whitetail ten times with a .22 LR and he would wander off (to die later of blood poisoning or bleedout) but a lot of hunters report success with the .223, which has an energy rating at 100 yards not that far off from the old .30-30.



> quote:Short of missing completely, missing the vital organs (regardless of what your shooting) makes for a long day of tracking. Even a clean shot throught the heart and lungs doesn't ensure your prey is going to drop dead on the spot.


This is true of everything, though. Mammals react in strange ways to being shot, but the .223 Rem is not a piddly round.



> quote:The 7.62mm NATO & .308 Winchester, are both .308 caliber, but the cartridges are not the same, nor should they be considered interchangeable despite apparently identical external dimensions.


To the contrary, they are EXACTLY the same. You can purchase .308 loads which do not match the ballistic specs of 7.62 NATO, but the same is true for any military round. If you have a .308 deer rifle, you can use 7.62 NATO Lake City ammo all day. If you have an M-14, you can use any commercial .308 ammo without a lead tip.

It's worth noting in general that "caliber" only denotes size and a general load spec according to SAMMI. Within a designation such as 5.56x45mm there are a stack of specs, ranging from 69-grain deer loads to the current NATO SS109 (not all of which are exactly the same - if you fire Israeli ammo, S&B, and Winchester to that spec they will all clock differently) to the original 55-grain tumbler to lightweight 38-grain zippers.



> quote:One more thought on firearms chambered for .308.
> 
> At least here in the State's, .308 in the caliber of choise for tactical marksman, both Law Enforcement and Marine corps, for long range (beyond 600 yards), the latter uses .300 WinMag.


Yeah, but you can argue that a) .300WM doesn't cut it at that distance; and b) if you take a shot over 300 yards, you should be required to write a paper explaining your choice (apologies to Colonel Cooper).



----------------------

"When you wear something like spats, I think you might as well wear your favorite players jersey bc what youre saying is I want to be powerful like the bear and Im wearing its hide to tap into its power." - Film Noir Buff

"First sense of what "normal" good clothes looked like came from my dad, of course, and from Babar books." - Concordia

" I have a related problem in that I often have to chase people. Leather soles are no good for this kind of work." - Patrick06790


----------



## Kinizsi (Aug 20, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by cufflink44_
> 
> So help me understand: Where exactly does the pleasure lie in killing an animal? Iâ€™m trying to relate, but Iâ€™m left scratching my head.
> 
> Maybe itâ€™s like eating raw oysters or listening to rap music: either you like it or you donâ€™t, and the ones that donâ€™t will never understand the feelings of the ones that do. If hunting is instinctual, GC, I guess Iâ€™m missing that gene.


I don't think that you can fully explain hunting with absolute rational arguments but you can't do that with a lot of things. 
For my part, I never questioned hunting. Hunting was always part of my life. As soon as I could walk I was with my grandfathers and my father on hunts and stalks. I very much enjoyed it. It is just like mountain climbing. As soon as I could climb halfway safely I went into the mountains with my grandfather. 
However I must admit that I differentiate forms of hunting. I associate a only practical thing with hunting as it is most often done here. Building a stand, sitting on it until something comes your way, then shooting it. It has to be done, since there is a harmfull overpopulation of both wild pig and deer which was created by mankind by extincting the predators and now has to be regulated by mankind. 
To me that is like: going in the office and doing some dull and boring work. I find absolutely no pleasure in it. The good thing about the hunting situation in Germany is, that you find more than enough landless hunters who are willing to pay and to do work just to be able to sit on such stands and wait for something to shoot. I never understood those people but I surely won't question anyones intention who takes away uncomfortable duties from me and still pays for it with time and money.
The very same goes for driven hunts. I attend those because they are good for networking (if you invite the right persons and get invited by the right ones) and because it is a good form of regulating the overpopulations if done correctly. 
I only find real pleasure in stalks. Going out and stalking a specific animal for a day or two. Magnificent thing in mountainous terrain. It poses a very difficult challenge. Even if you are able to follow and to find the animal, the shot that you need to take might be a couple of times more difficult than the one you need to make in flat terrain when sitting on a stand. I often come back from stalks without any success. Often you just don't find anything which is worth any efforts. Or you lose track of the desired animal, or you just can't follow it anymore because of weather or because it escapes into areas of the mountains where you just can't follow it or couldn't retrieve the animal if shot. I think it is much more the whole process than the killing that brings the joy. At least for me.


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

[quote
The .223 Rem round is very different from a .22 Long Rifle, which is what most people think of as a ".22". The bullet is twice as heavy or heavier - there are deer-specific 69-grain loads of the .223. The muzzle energy is between ten and fourteen times greater, which makes a considerable difference. You could shoot a whitetail ten times with a .22 LR and he would wander off (to die later of blood poisoning or bleedout) but a lot of hunters report success with the .223, which has an energy rating at 100 yards not that far off from the old .30-30.



> basically I agree with you. I have never seen a deer hit with a 5.56 (or .223) but I would guess that sometimes it is enough, and sometimes it isn't enough. a 5.56 will tumble through a man and take him out of action, seldomly killing him outright with one round, but certainly enough so he won't be playing any golf later that day. the military 5.56 shells turn into a thin foil and do a lot of tissue damage without much crushing damage, I don't know, but I suspect, that civillian rounds of the same size do the same.
> 
> I, myself, would go for someting in the size of 7.62 - I guess that is .308. If that won't kill it cleanly, then I sure don't want it pissed off at me. what I would worry about with a 7.62, though, is backdrop. that can kill somebody at 400 or 500 yards easily. I believe that in the north east you need to hunt with a shotgun slug to avoid the round getting away from you. but I am not sure.


----------



## GentleCheetah (Oct 17, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by globetrotter_
> 
> [quote
> The .223 Rem round is very different from a .22 Long Rifle, which is what most people think of as a ".22". The bullet is twice as heavy or heavier - there are deer-specific 69-grain loads of the .223. The muzzle energy is between ten and fourteen times greater, which makes a considerable difference. You could shoot a whitetail ten times with a .22 LR and he would wander off (to die later of blood poisoning or bleedout) but a lot of hunters report success with the .223, which has an energy rating at 100 yards not that far off from the old .30-30.
> ...


----------



## Kinizsi (Aug 20, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by globetrotter_
> basically I agree with you. I have never seen a deer hit with a 5.56 (or .223) but I would guess that sometimes it is enough, and sometimes it isn't enough. a 5.56 will tumble through a man and take him out of action, seldomly killing him outright with one round, but certainly enough so he won't be playing any golf later that day. the military 5.56 shells turn into a thin foil and do a lot of tissue damage without much crushing damage, I don't know, but I suspect, that civillian rounds of the same size do the same.
> 
> I, myself, would go for someting in the size of 7.62 - I guess that is .308. If that won't kill it cleanly, then I sure don't want it pissed off at me. what I would worry about with a 7.62, though, is backdrop. that can kill somebody at 400 or 500 yards easily. I believe that in the north east you need to hunt with a shotgun slug to avoid the round getting away from you. but I am not sure.


I haven't encountered any problems with smaller calibers (even .222) on deer (of course given the adequate circumstances). The type of bullet you chose dramatically changes the results of your hunt. I like Nosler Ballistic Tip bullets very much. They have a tremendous wound-effect on deer even in smaller calibers and leave nothing to be desired if only used on deer. Nosler Partition are also great on deer, even in smaller calibers and they are a good bullet for larger game as well, though I prefer other bullet types for wild pigs.


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

> _Originally posted by GentleCheetah_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

Despite my position as the editor of a firearms magazine, I have been at best a very occasional hunter. It is difficult for me to get away for a hunt of any length. Living in an urban megalopolis, it is hard to find accessible local hunting, and I've never really had the dough for guided hunts and the like.

I tend to divide types of hunting insofar as the ethics of it go.

If, as most of us are, one is a leather-wearing carnivore, I can see no possible ethical objection to the law-abiding, sportsmanlike pursuit of abundant, readily renewable edible game--deer, wild pig, antelope, pheasant, quail, duck, etc.--at least as long as the quarry is put to good use, i.e., eaten. I would do so myself with much more frequency had I more opportunities.

As to "varmint shooting," I have more mixed feelings. If an animal is making a real pest of itself, I can see no objection to bumping it off. However, some of these fellows that will go out to prairie dog towns in the middle of nowhere to shoot hundreds or thousands of the little critters I have to wonder about. I count some men who enjoy this pastime as dear friends, great guys. Still and all, the whole endeavor strikes me as smacking to much of killing for the love of killing for me to find it altogether palatable. Another type of varmint shooting I dislike even more is the practice of varmint calling--going out into the middle of nowhere and using a dying rabbit call (typically) to lure in and kill foxes, bobcats and coyotes. If these animals are in fact depredating your livestock, that's fair. However, to go out into wild country just to kill these interesting, highly intelligent animals doing their part to maintain the balance of nature I find repugnant.

As for a lot of trophy hunting, I know the arguments--the license fees help game conservation; if many of these animals had no cash value, they would simply be perceived as dangerous, destructive vermin and wiped out by natives; hunting guides often protect against poachers. Still, killing something on the order of a leopard, a lion, an elephant, an Alaskan brown bear or some other magnificent creature for the thrill of it, so that you can say you have done so, so that you can mount a glassy eyed trophy on the wall...it all just seems too much like an act of vandalism against nature. Again, I have some very dear friends who enjoy that sort of thing, but it's not something I have ever wanted to do at least since I more or less "grew up."

Just my thoughts on the matter.


----------



## Mr. Di Liberti (Jan 24, 2006)

While the 7.62mm NATO cartridge has a maximum chamber pressure of approximately 50,000 pounds per square inch (psi), in the SAAMI book the .308 Winchester has a MAP (maximum average product) pressure of approximately 62,000 psi* (each by conformal transducer measurements, and therefore comparable). This is not to say that all .308 Winchester loads will develop such pressures, merely that they would be within manufacturing tolerances if they did so. Firing .308 Winchester ammunition in a firearm specifically chambered for the 7.62mm NATO risks damage to the firearm and injury to the shooter.

I've personaly seen 15 rounds of 55-grain .223 pumped into a ferral russian boar which was tied to a stake, after the last round, the animal was still squealing and writhing on the ground.

At the same demo, similar sized boar shot with both 1 ounce in 12 gauge and 168 grain .308 rifle slugs died within moments of being shot.

More record distance kills have been made by tactical marksmen shooting .300 WinMag then any other cartridge, including .50 BMG.

As to shots over 300 yrds, try hunting western soy feilds for deer.

Anthony

Courtesy is as much a mark of a gentleman as courage ~ Theodore Roosevelt


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by cufflink44_
> 
> Hunting is something I just donâ€™t â€œget.â€
> 
> ...


To me hunting is everything that happens before the actually killing. Just like fishing doesn't mean catching, hunting doesn't always include killing. That's just another step, followed by cleaning the animal and finally preparing the meal yourself.

Keeping our instincts in check might be a part of civilization. But what happens if you leave civilization? It's a nice feeling to know that you can prepare a meal without going to a grocery store (even if in a real survival situation you're much more likely to get meat from the water instead of the land).

And yes, there is a "kick" that people get. It is a huge adrenaline rush. On a stand or in a blind, you might be sitting motionless for hours with your eyes and ears straining to hear or see the slightest movement or rustle of the bushes. When you finally do see something, you're heart almost leaves your chest. If you're stalking game, then you're trying to move undected around animals who have hearing, sight, and smell that sometimes seems better than radar. And yet on a successful stalk you'll be able to move about without them detecting you.

Elephants are still legal to hunt in sevearal (maybe 9?) countries.

Also, the fact that hunting takes you away from all of civilization. Sometimes, to the far reaches of this country, continent, or the planet. We live in an incredible artificial enviroment. So much so that if even the power goes out for more than a few hours it's enough to make the local news and throw a wrench into things (think the blackouts in NY, or even Katrina). Hunting gets you out of your cube in the office and to the very edges of civilization.

In the case of dangerous game, part of the rush is the _real_ knowledge that you could be killed. Stalking a "problem" lion who has been killing the local villagers isn't like bungee jumping or rollercoasters (things that are pretty safe but people still do for a rush). There are no do-overs, no safe zone, no hospitals (unless you get on the satellite phone and wait on a chopper), and no law out there other than the law of the wild. One or both of you, the lion and the human, will end up wounded or dead. Unless the malaria gets you first.

---------------------

Beware of showroom sales-fever reasoning: i.e., "for $20 . . ." Once you're home, how little you paid is forgotten; how good you look in it is all that matters.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

I dunno...I mean, as a huge fan of cooking, I realise that meat doesnt start out in little styrofoam trays or in rosy slabs behind a glass counter...as has been stated previously...I deffinately dont see anything wrong with hunting an abundant group of animals for food, or even pelts or anything like that...as long as the end result is that the kill was put to good use (I can't lie, I've even participated int his kind of hunting aswell as fishing)...and as JLib mentioned...I can kind of see the purpose of "critter killing", my parents have a beautiful cabin in northern California, which at times can have a bit of a mountain lion problem, so, even though humans have encroached on their territory, it's still probably in the interest of the greater good to thin out the population of these (somewhat) dangerous animals...on the other hand...I really do think there is something kind of repulsive about killing an endangered species just for whatever weird visceral rush one may get from it...and besides, do you really want a rhino's head with marbles stuck in the eye sockets hanging above your fireplace...to me...that isnt exactly classy...

...if a person is really looking for a rush, then why dont they get into boxing or martial arts...seems to me it's alot more of a rush when your prey is able to fight back...

...

*****
[image]https://radio.weblogs.com/0119318/Screenshots/rose.jpg[/image]"See...What I'm gonna do is wear a shirt only once, and then give it right away to the laundry...eh?
A new shirt every day!!!"​


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

Though I come from what one might call a hunting family, it never 'took' with me. There are _bona fide _ reasons to kill sentient creatures, though I believe for many it is all too easy to insulate oneself from the ethical implications, and lapse into purely sport killing.

I particular enjoyed Thomas Harris' portrayal of Dr Lecter's punishment of a poacher, in the novel _Hannibal_.


----------



## Stuttjukken (Jan 14, 2006)

This winter IÂ´m learning shooting. Maybe I became a deerhunter one day........

Short and stout/heavyweight busdriver in Bergen, Norway. My favorite clothes are polywool trousers.


----------



## GentleCheetah (Oct 17, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Stuttjukken_
> 
> This winter IÂ´m learning shooting. Maybe I became a deerhunter one day........
> 
> Short and stout/heavyweight busdriver in Bergen, Norway. My favorite clothes are polywool trousers.


Hi Stutt, what kind of games do you find in Norway? I've been to Bergen. It has everything: a beautiful town, the hilltop up the street, the seaside, and the mountains nearby. The seafood market is awesome.

The Gentle Cheetah


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

It's ironic, I've owned, handled or fired everything from a .22 parlour pistol to a 5.5" naval cannon. But drop me in a better gunstore( and there are some real snake pits out there) and I gravitate to classic hunting rifles. I'm so wierd they have to be Mauser 98s and the caliber some expensive and difficult to locate european or british cartridge. There is something pleasing, showing up at a range with a 26" barrelled Westley- Richards in .318 and trying to choose between leaf sights, cocking piece peep or detachable early scope.Then I load 5 rounds that equal a good meal and take pleasure in still shooting a useable group with failing vision. Meanwhile the nimrod next to me has expended the better part of a gunshow case of South African .308 and looks like a waist gunner in a B17 trying not to slip on his brass. Yet I no longer have any desire to hunt.I have a SMLE with aussie made rhino 215 grain bullets if I get a job in the Yukon. Mosquitos and Moose bulls in Rut are extremely dangerous, though I may be misarmed vs the bugs. I suppose the best fun still is watching OUT OF AFRICA on video with my mauser in lap and pith helmet on head. I did the same with my Red Ryder and cowboy hat as a child with the Cisco Kid. That mexican never killed anyone, and I figured he needed backup. Nice bit about firearms is you can still have fun with them and never shoot anything more dangerous than a charging soda can. For that I recommend solids and a breaking shoulder shot. You may want to read THE SHORT AND HAPPY LIFE OF FRANCIS MICAWBER by Hemingway for inspiration first


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Kav_
> 
> It's ironic, I've owned, handled or fired everything from a .22 parlour pistol to a 5.5" naval cannon. But drop me in a better gunstore( and there are some real snake pits out there) and I gravitate to classic hunting rifles. I'm so wierd they have to be Mauser 98s and the caliber some expensive and difficult to locate european or british cartridge. There is something pleasing, showing up at a range with a 26" barrelled Westley- Richards in .318 and trying to choose between leaf sights, cocking piece peep or detachable early scope.Then I load 5 rounds that equal a good meal and take pleasure in still shooting a useable group with failing vision. Meanwhile the nimrod next to me has expended the better part of a gunshow case of South African .308 and looks like a waist gunner in a B17 trying not to slip on his brass. Yet I no longer have any desire to hunt.I have a SMLE with aussie made rhino 215 grain bullets if I get a job in the Yukon. Mosquitos and Moose bulls in Rut are extremely dangerous, though I may be misarmed vs the bugs. I suppose the best fun still is watching OUT OF AFRICA on video with my mauser in lap and pith helmet on head. I did the same with my Red Ryder and cowboy hat as a child with the Cisco Kid. That mexican never killed anyone, and I figured he needed backup. Nice bit about firearms is you can still have fun with them and never shoot anything more dangerous than a charging soda can. For that I recommend solids and a breaking shoulder shot. You may want to read THE SHORT AND HAPPY LIFE OF FRANCIS MICAWBER by Hemingway for inspiration first


now we are getting back into a whole different discussion, Kav.

if I were choosing to own a firearm for hunting, it would probrably be butt ugly - the ones that attrack me are the very light plastic ones with removable clips, bolt actions and external safties. I have been a few times in a gun store - seeing me there is like somebody with a hangover in a liquor store: just looking for what will do the job best and get out quickly without any browsing.


----------



## Kinizsi (Aug 20, 2005)

I am very much with Kav on the firearms topic.
I find the good old calibers and bullets to be the best, though I own some rifles with newly designed calibers (like the Blaser R93 in .45 Blaser) but there is something very appealing about an engraved side by side in 10,3x60 R or 8x56 Mannlicher-SchÃ¶nauer.
I also very much like my classical Swiss bolt action in 7,55x55 GP11 based on the K31.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

A few thoughts on some recent posts:

I happen to be sufficiently "retro" to take the view that having a beautiful, elegant firearm adds materially to the quality of the hunt. I realize that these stainless and synthetic rifles are very practical. They just leave me cold. However, I am both too poor and too frugal to enjoy firearms that break the bank when you shoot them. Give me common, widely distributed calibers like the .30-06 and .308.

As to the thrill and risks of hunting dangerous big game, considering some of the utterly contemptible wastes of human protoplasm I have known who have successfully shot lion, Cape buffalo or grizzly bear, I consider it no great feat of courage or masculine prowess. You are invariably backed up by an experienced guide with a heavy-caliber rifle. Every year, thousands of potentially dangerous game animals are killed by hunters. When one of them gets a hunter, it's usually pretty big news. Given that I am highly susceptible to acrophobia and motion sickness, I would much rather shoot a Cape buffalo than have to ride one of these super roller coasters!

That reminds of a conversation that I once had with a professional animal trainer who worked with big cats. She said that she believed there was a hunting ranch in Texas that would buy big cats that were absolutely unmanageable and incorrigibly aggressive so that sportsmen could shoot them there. I said that I had never heard of such an operation, but I thought that going alone into a fenced-in, heavily wooded quarter-section containing a highly aggressive African lion with no fear of humans so that it was just yourself and your rifle against the lion would be a pretty ballsy thing to do. I later asked noted big game hunter and adventurer Jack Lott what percentage of American hunters would be able to walk out of that situation. He replied, "Certainly no more than one in four."


----------



## FlatSix (Feb 23, 2005)

If Ross Seyfried is willing to shoot Cape buff with a Super Blackhawk, I'm willing to get mauled by a lion! Send me the address 

----------------------


"When you wear something like spats, I think you might as well wear your favorite players jersey bc what youre saying is I want to be powerful like the bear and Im wearing its hide to tap into its power." - Film Noir Buff

"First sense of what "normal" good clothes looked like came from my dad, of course, and from Babar books." - Concordia

" I have a related problem in that I often have to chase people. Leather soles are no good for this kind of work." - Patrick06790


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

There is a video online of a HeManWunderHunter going after a canned lion, probably in South Africa. You can see light poles in the background, they dont get in a hurry when he runs off, etc. 

They seem to forget though, that not only is the lion trapped inside, but so are they...

Once the lion attacks you can tell its never had to kill its own food.


----------



## TheSaint (Jun 28, 2005)

Interesting topic....I've always wanted to try hunting. I consider myself to be high on the carnivore chain. Mostly things like duck, pheasant, quail, dove, turkey etc etc. Almost did until I heard on news about that guy Chai Vang who was deer hunting and how he killed 5 hunters in the woods. Chang was supposedly some kind of sharpshooter/marksman in the national guard??? Don't really know the story in detail. I attached an article below. Of course the press tends to stretch the truth. Definitely caused me to change my mind.
For some of you veteran hunters, have any of you ever had any close calls out there? I assume that people like Chai are extremely rare?
Is that why most prefer to hunt on private property?


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Do you mean close calls vs a vs just other nimrods, or the usual suspects of marijuana growers,bootleggers, pothunters ( archaeological speak for cultural graverobbers)satanic cults, mafia hitmen disposing of louie the rat, toxic waste dumpers, poachers,off road enthusiasts bent on duplicating Rommel's drive into Egypt and blue haired Audoban Society member's? In some areas the hunter to game ratio is so thick no amount of orange will protect you, livestockmen paint 'COW' on their animals with whitewash and hope the idiots who left the gate open ( the one that said 'NO TRESPASSING') can read. I watched sadly as at least 8 shooters took potshots at a doe DOWN A STEEP CANYON my topo measured ( from a previous personal survey) of 600 feet incline. That one of them managed to break it's hip with a .45-70 Siamese mauser was about as impressive as watching them realise they would have to descend the ravine and pack out the animal. It was like the ape picking up the bone in 2001 seeing sentience return to their glazed eyes. I went pig hunting on one of our Channel Islands. In spite of it being a private hunt, the gunstore owner and island manager turned it into Dodge City on a saturday night. I finally dove for ground swearing while rounds whistled overhead. I realised somebody else had done sme a few yards away. I mumbled " this is %#@!&*!" and he grunted in agreement. When it subsided I slowly rose, as did my companion; who trotted away on all four pig feet.


----------



## Stuttjukken (Jan 14, 2006)

My games in Norway: Mountain hiking, of course. Take a look at my homepage: .

Short and stout/heavyweight busdriver in Bergen, Norway. My favorite clothes are polywool trousers.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Kav_
> 
> Do you mean close calls vs a vs just other nimrods, or the usual suspects of marijuana growers,bootleggers, pothunters ( archaeological speak for cultural graverobbers)satanic cults, mafia hitmen disposing of louie the rat, toxic waste dumpers, poachers,off road enthusiasts bent on duplicating Rommel's drive into Egypt and blue haired Audoban Society member's? In some areas the hunter to game ratio is so thick no amount of orange will protect you, livestockmen paint 'COW' on their animals with whitewash and hope the idiots who left the gate open ( the one that said 'NO TRESPASSING') can read. I watched sadly as at least 8 shooters took potshots at a doe DOWN A STEEP CANYON my topo measured ( from a previous personal survey) of 600 feet incline. That one of them managed to break it's hip with a .45-70 Siamese mauser was about as impressive as watching them realise they would have to descend the ravine and pack out the animal. It was like the ape picking up the bone in 2001 seeing sentience return to their glazed eyes. I went pig hunting on one of our Channel Islands. In spite of it being a private hunt, the gunstore owner and island manager turned it into Dodge City on a saturday night. I finally dove for ground swearing while rounds whistled overhead. I realised somebody else had done sme a few yards away. I mumbled " this is %#@!&*!" and he grunted in agreement. When it subsided I slowly rose, as did my companion; who trotted away on all four pig feet.


I used to hike the local mountains--mostly the San Gabriels, the Santa Monicas and San Bernardinos less frequently--a lot 20+ years ago. I honestly never encountered anyone more menacing than an occasional troop of Boy Scouts or Sierra Clubbers. It sounds as if things have gotten a lot more crowded in recent years!


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Kav_
> 
> Do you mean close calls vs a vs just other nimrods, or the usual suspects of marijuana growers,bootleggers, pothunters ( archaeological speak for cultural graverobbers)satanic cults, mafia hitmen disposing of louie the rat, toxic waste dumpers, poachers,off road enthusiasts bent on duplicating Rommel's drive into Egypt and blue haired Audoban Society member's? In some areas the hunter to game ratio is so thick no amount of orange will protect you, livestockmen paint 'COW' on their animals with whitewash and hope the idiots who left the gate open ( the one that said 'NO TRESPASSING') can read. I watched sadly as at least 8 shooters took potshots at a doe DOWN A STEEP CANYON my topo measured ( from a previous personal survey) of 600 feet incline. That one of them managed to break it's hip with a .45-70 Siamese mauser was about as impressive as watching them realise they would have to descend the ravine and pack out the animal. It was like the ape picking up the bone in 2001 seeing sentience return to their glazed eyes. I went pig hunting on one of our Channel Islands. In spite of it being a private hunt, the gunstore owner and island manager turned it into Dodge City on a saturday night. I finally dove for ground swearing while rounds whistled overhead. I realised somebody else had done sme a few yards away. I mumbled " this is %#@!&*!" and he grunted in agreement. When it subsided I slowly rose, as did my companion; who trotted away on all four pig feet.


1. this is what I was discussing in the gun thread

2. this is why I don't hunt right now


----------



## Murrah (Mar 28, 2005)

The reasons I hunt are:

1. I was raised a hunter by my father.
2. I enjoy being outdoors.
3. I like knowing that (if I really had to), I could feed my family.
4. I enjoy the test of skill (probably why I gravitate towards bird hunting than anything else.

In total, parts of my Anglo-Saxon cultural heritage are to own real property, own the means of self-defense, and be able to feed my family myself. Something I can't fully explain in a short essay compels me to hunt.


----------



## TheSaint (Jun 28, 2005)

Kav....I laughed so hard at what you wrote, I nearly fell out of my chair... Sadly, I am sure there is a ring of accuracy and truth in what you wrote....God forbid you get out there in the wilderness and a replay of Deliverance begins to unfold....

I guess there is always Falconry.....[^]


----------



## Sir Henry Billingsgate (Dec 14, 2005)

Speaking as a descendant of the sergeant falconer for Charles I, I am intrigued by falconry - though I must confess that I probably lack the patience actually to master it.


----------



## In Mufti (Jan 28, 2005)

br]


> quote:_Originally posted by GentleCheetah_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Cut open an old .303 service bullet sometime and tell me about The Hague Convention. It's ironic our assembled societies can show genius in warfare and such studied mediocrity in all the other arts of social stability.


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by In Mufti_
> 
> br]
> 
> ...


----------



## In Mufti (Jan 28, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Kav_
> 
> Cut open an old .303 service bullet sometime and tell me about The Hague Convention. It's ironic our assembled societies can show genius in warfare and such studied mediocrity in all the other arts of social stability.


Yes it is sad. Good, bad or indifferent, that is the world we live in. Would you like to be on the side that decided to cut corners in military science/technology/tactics? There is only one thing worse than making the effort to have a first rate military: not having a first rate military and losing a war. There is nothing worse for a people than losing a war.


----------



## In Mufti (Jan 28, 2005)

[/quote]

oh, right, yes yes of course, designing it that way would make it illigal, so of course it wasn't.

actually, I didn't say it wasn't lethal, it is very leathal, just not as fast to kill as other firearms that were being designed at the time. and, since I heard the story a good generation afer the design of the M-16, I may have heard it wrong, but I still believe it, it makes good sense, even though the part about carrying ammo is not a small issue, either.
[/quote]

No. We don't design weapons to "maim." If you don't want to believe it based on our adherence to international law; believe it because it would just be plain stupid to design a rifle that way. Wounded men are still a serious threat. If you don't think so, read some American award citations. Many men who were seriously wounded managed to keep fighting and turn the tide in a fight. A dead man will not heal up and come back to fight you next month. We design our weapons to kill--plain and simple. If the 5.56 were not effective at doing that, it wouldn't be used.

Regards,


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by In Mufti_


oh, right, yes yes of course, designing it that way would make it illigal, so of course it wasn't.

actually, I didn't say it wasn't lethal, it is very leathal, just not as fast to kill as other firearms that were being designed at the time. and, since I heard the story a good generation afer the design of the M-16, I may have heard it wrong, but I still believe it, it makes good sense, even though the part about carrying ammo is not a small issue, either.
[/quote]

No. We don't design weapons to "maim." If you don't want to believe it based on our adherence to international law; believe it because it would just be plain stupid to design a rifle that way. Wounded men are still a serious threat. If you don't think so, read some American award citations. Many men who were seriously wounded managed to keep fighting and turn the tide in a fight. A dead man will not heal up and come back to fight you next month. We design our weapons to kill--plain and simple. If the 5.56 were not effective at doing that, it wouldn't be used.

Regards,
[/quote]

sorry, having seen what happens to an M-14 round and an M-1 round when they hit a person, I can't believe that the M-16 round was designed with the same end result in mind. 
I guess that this is one of those places where we will have to agree to disagree:


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

Mufti, The stupidity is we are fighting 'won' wars. Why are we continuing to lay the keels for nuclear submarines? Most of the once grand Soviet fleet sits rusting away. The Raptor? Again, the only dedicated fighter that could match it and surpass our own present systems sits idle for lack of fuel.Meanwhile the Airforce still hates the Warthog which has proven so effective. We are fighting a (ass)ymetric series of wars against people who fly commercial airplanes into buildings while looking over our shoulder at Korea, Iran, Red China. I've actually been wounded by the famed kalsihnikov, and I've returned kind with the M-16.I think we both bled the same colour.The afghan mujahadeen were picking off russians with flintlocks and SMLEs with greater range. Personally, I miss the B.A.R.I got to play with. Give me that, all the heavy .30 AP I can carry and a pair of 1911's. [}]


----------



## globetrotter (Dec 30, 2004)

> quote:_Originally posted by Kav_
> 
> Personally, I miss the B.A.R.I got to play with. Give me that, all the heavy .30 AP I can carry and a pair of 1911's. [}]


thats a sailor talking[8D] if you had to carry it yourself you would be thinking differently.

I often used to carry a .30 chain fed MAAG - an excellent belgian weapon that used the same round as an M-14, but with a great rate of fire. some of the best days of my youth were spent cursing and sweating under the weight of the belts of .30 cal ammo.


----------



## In Mufti (Jan 28, 2005)

> quote:_Originally posted by Kav_
> 
> Mufti, The stupidity is we are fighting 'won' wars. Why are we continuing to lay the keels for nuclear submarines? Most of the once grand Soviet fleet sits rusting away. The Raptor? Again, the only dedicated fighter that could match it and surpass our own present systems sits idle for lack of fuel.Meanwhile the Airforce still hates the Warthog which has proven so effective. We are fighting a (ass)ymetric series of wars against people who fly commercial airplanes into buildings while looking over our shoulder at Korea, Iran, Red China. I've actually been wounded by the famed kalsihnikov, and I've returned kind with the M-16.I think we both bled the same colour.The afghan mujahadeen were picking off russians with flintlocks and SMLEs with greater range. Personally, I miss the B.A.R.I got to play with. Give me that, all the heavy .30 AP I can carry and a pair of 1911's. [}]


The problem with discontinuing submarine building is that if we stop, we will lose the skills necessary to do it. The people who know how to do that kind of welding and so on will have to go off and get other jobs...we wouldn't get them back when the current fleet wears out and needs to be replaced. I wouldn't want to go without submarines, particularly with China attempting to develop a blue-water capability, including ballistic submarines of their own. So, the bottom line is that we continue to build submarines at a vastly reduced rate or we will have to go without them all together--not a good idea.

I can't argue much over the frustration with the Air Force's reluctance to support the A-10 and to a much worse degree, the AC-130--which is probably the most superb aircraft for the current type of warfare. Many in DoD have the same opinion. The Air Force's rationale for continued supersonic fixed-wing development is that they don't want to fall behind--no one wants it ever to approach a fair fight in the air. I personally think we're so far ahead, we could probably ease up on some of that spending.

I would like to see more transportation emphasis from both the Navy and the Air Force.

The United States has traditionally dropped defense spending after most wars in the absurd belief that the last war was some kind of anomaly. It cost us the Philippines in 1942 and thousands of unnecessary casualties in North Africa. In 1950, GIs from Japan were trying to hold off the North Koreans while wearing their low-quarter dress shoes (They didn't bother to stock enough combat boots because they believed they would only have to be a ceremonial guard in Japan). In 1990, we were just about to get rid of many of our tanks because so many "smart" analysts would snicker that we would never see another tank war--a year later, we were in the biggest tank war since the Eastern Front in WWII. Should I mention the War of 1812?

We, as a country, can always economize on the military, but we always make up the difference in blood at the beginning of the next war. The Cold War was responsible for our power in 1990â€"not good planningâ€"it was just a coincidence.

If you think you know what the next war will beâ€¦think again. The Army went into Vietnam ready to fight the Russians on the European plains. During the 1980s, we prepared to fight in South and Central America and ended up in a massive conventional war in the desert.

I guess the point of all this is that we have to have capabilities at all levels of intensity. Or, of course, we can let some poor young guys serve as the â€œspeed bumpâ€ in the next war while we try to get our act together.

I guess thatâ€™s an OK solution as long as itâ€™s not your son or daughter.

And sadly, there will always be another warâ€¦


----------



## TheSaint (Jun 28, 2005)

Well,

What's the world coming to when you can't even hunt with the Vice President of The United Staes of America in safety.


----------



## Drinking and Drafting (Jun 23, 2005)

I hunt quail, deer, turkey, pheasant, duck, and have been once on a moose hunt and bear hunt. I was raised hunting quail, my father has trained several wonderful English Pointers. On some Friday evenings I go to the shooting club and shoot clays. I don't find it that big of a deal, most people I know also hunt, it is a very common thing in the South.

_ "Any man honored by both his enemies and his compatriots is a man worthy of our closest attentions - for in him you may be sure to find authenticity. After all, authenticity is the rarest of all human traits."_

- Samuel Johnson


----------

