Shot Placement

[roping_tom]

Came across a 2 point today hunched up in our field someone put the old head shot on him and blew off his jaw. Wandering how many hunters still believe this is a great shot to make?

[Bow Walker]

Only if you're able to actually make it. Not a lot are.

[Ruger4]

this topic has been beaten to death , the ethical shot is obvious (heart/lung) , very frustrating to hear about this scenario yet another time , and another wounded animal. :evil:

[roping_tom]

Ok but you have either a 2" target or a 20" and you would go for the 2"?

[115 or bust]

Came across a 2 point today hunched up in our field someone put the old head shot on him and blew off his jaw. Wandering how many hunters still believe this is a great shot to make?

Seen this waay too many times, no such thing as an ethical head shot. My mother in law had a 5pt starve to death in her back yard in comox because some dickwad thought a shotgun to the head was a good idea!Really helps me look good being the hunter in the family!

Boiler room every time, neck if only option, head never. I've taken approx 20+ Blacktails a couple mulies, half dozen whitetails, and maybe a dozen fallow deer and never touched the trigger on a deer I didn't get!

[Ron.C]

Boiler Room, always ! Doesn't matter how far the shot is, what big game animal I am shooting at, or if shooting a gun or bow.

Seems like a no brainer to me.

[roping_tom]

Well glad to hear really never understood the need to head shoot. Took a buddy out once was a new hunter his gf dad preached the neck shot well he just grazed the jugular that thing ran a long ways spraying blodd all over the trees. Was another day that i was less then pleased, that was my last outing with that guy.

[M.Dean]

It's a shame any animal has to die like that. You said your field, I knew of a Tom lived on a Ranch North of town, was real good with a rifle and a bull whip?

[todbartell]

I'd not be afraid to tag some bone along with the heart/lungs. 1/3 the way up from the bottom, going for the far side shoulder

http://i774.photobucket.com/albums/yy28/Omineca/deer-1.jpg

[Kody94]

I'd not be afraid to tag some bone along with the heart/lungs. 1/3 the way up from the bottom, going for the far side shoulder

'xactly! Couldn't have said it better myself.

[835]

Too many factors play into this one. I do take neck shots. I dont promote them. I have shot my rifle enough and killed enough animals to know when i am able to shoot the neck out. It is better for the meat. And i take them when it is right.

Disclaimer: It is far better policy to shoot the animal in the cheast behind the shoulder then in the head, neck or shoulders. Less can go wrong.

[Gateholio]

Although I have killed animals with head shots, it's not my first choice. I'd say it's a bad choice unless you have no alternative, actually.

I recently saw an animal die due to a cock shot, but that is not recommended, either.:-D

[Caveman]

Boiler room, only because a broadside stand does not present a "Texas Heart" shot............................:wink:

[Kirby]

I've show it before, and I'm sure I'll show it again
http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d72/Cr_mclean/Hunting/Dumbasshunters.jpg

Found by a non-hunter when feeding her horses, it was so weak it couldn't stand.

Head shots suck.

[roping_tom]

Not sure what factors you are talking about. My idea is no head shot is a good one i practise alot both close and far something so small has to change to make a head shot a bad shot.
Wow that is very close to what i shot.

[moosinaround]

Boiler room is the shot. If I am shooting at a dangerous animal like a bear I will do a shoulder shot, or a slightly higher shoulder/spine shot. My whitetail this year was facing me so I give him a boiler room shot on the heart side and took off the top of his heart. 3 bounces and he was skidding on his face dead! I don't like head shots myself! Moosin

[The Dawg]

Boiler room or spine. Thats it.

[ufishifish2]

After harvesting many deer with lung shots over the years, I got tired of wasting much of the meat of atleast 1 front shoulder. This year I switched to neck shots and had great success on a buck in October. Then a week ago I took a neck shot at a 4 point mule deer. I knocked him over, and in fact knocked him out. After 30 seconds to a minute he jumped up and ran over the ridge. The body print in the fresh snow showed no blood or fur, and after following him for 1.5 hours, I concluded that I must have hit him in the rack. I have now gone back to the trusted lung shot!

[fuzzybiscuit]

Kirby, showing that picture once was in bad taste, showing it a second time is just plain stupid and shows no common sense on your part.:confused:

Next, we will have someone posting pictures of a deer dragging 20 feet of intestines to prove that boiler room shots can also go bad. Just the kind of ammo the antis need.

Any shot has the potential to turn into a bad shot and this issue had been beaten to death already. A bad shot is a bad shot.

I think a better poll would be to see who is getting sick of all these polls.

[gwillim]

Although I have killed animals with head shots, it's not my first choice. I'd say it's a bad choice unless you have no alternative, actually.

I recently saw an animal die due to a cock shot, but that is not recommended, either.:-D

I would say even if you have no alternative, its still a bad choice. If we want to be adults out there, we have to be prepared to let an animal walk away rather than risking maiming something with a "hail mary" shot. This seems so basic that i can't believe I have to make the point, especially responding to a post from a site moderator.

[boothcreek]

Only deer I have ever killed was with a shot straight inbetween the eyes, dropped like a rock.
Admittedly I am use to doing headshots, raising Corsican(American Black bellied) and Mouflon sheep sometimes you can't get them confined and headshots from a distance is the only way to go when you want them in the freezer.
I would never attempt a headshot if the animal wasn't facing me straight on tho.
I agree, a bad shot is a bad shot no matter the placement. Been working at a butcher for 3 yrs now and I hate to say 50% of the deer coming in are shot to $&!# just by 1 shot thats been placed wrong(mainly boilerroom shots at a bad angle) and the hunter filling it with lead afterwards cause it wont die..... Seen my share of headshots gone bad too, but the good heashots outnumber the bad ones by far.

[Caveman]

Kirby, showing that picture once was in bad taste, showing it a second time is just plain stupid and shows no common sense on your part.:confused:

Next, we will have someone posting pictures of a deer dragging 20 feet of intestines to prove that boiler room shots can also go bad. Just the kind of ammo the antis need.

Any shot has the potential to turn into a bad shot and this issue had been beaten to death already. A bad shot is a bad shot.

I think a better poll would be to see who is getting sick of all these polls.

I disagree!! Kirby showing that put an exclamation point on the fact that a head shot is risky at best and not a good choice. As hunters it is our responsibility to take our prey as humanely and quickly as possible and the facy is that this is not the case with such a small margin of error. The poll also speaks to this as a mere 3% would attempt it. I would like to see that at less than 1% if any. I'm not disputing that a bad shot, where ever it is aimed at could have bad results, but by far the head shot is the worst choice. I hope all young up and coming hunters read this thread and make the right choice. I think the picture would help with that decision

[Caveman]

Only deer I have ever killed was with a shot straight inbetween the eyes, dropped like a rock.
Admittedly I am use to doing headshots, raising Corsican(American Black bellied) and Mouflon sheep sometimes you can't get them confined and headshots from a distance is the only way to go when you want them in the freezer.
I would never attempt a headshot if the animal wasn't facing me straight on tho.
I agree, a bad shot is a bad shot no matter the placement. Been working at a butcher for 3 yrs now and I hate to say 50% of the deer coming in are shot to $&!# just by 1 shot thats been placed wrong(mainly boilerroom shots at a bad angle) and the hunter filling it with lead afterwards cause it wont die..... Seen my share of headshots gone bad too, but the good heashots outnumber the bad ones by far.

Shot up game usually also comes from inexperience. A lung shot can result in an animal standing or walking as it struggles for life. The fact is that a well placed lung shot in it's self will kill quickly, but people panic thinking they either missed or made a bad shot and take the next one and so on. With the head shot you won't get a second chance, the prey will be lost to die a slow and painful death. I would also venture to guess your estimate of 50% is a little skewed as well as I've been in a lot of butcher shops and see maybe 10% - 20% with a busted up shoulder and such

The good headshots are the only ones you will generally see........the bad ones you won't get to, unless you're the one pulling the trigger

[Kirby]

Kirby, showing that picture once was in bad taste, showing it a second time is just plain stupid and shows no common sense on your part.:confused:

I disagree.


Seen my share of headshots gone bad too, but the good heashots outnumber the bad ones by far.

Thats cause bad head shots run off and live for days. Bad lung shots the run off and live for minutes...

[mod7rem]

I work with a guy that says he "always takes neck shots so it doesnt spoil to much meat, you either hit or clean miss". I think it sucks but I also know guys that dont hesitate to chuck lead at an animal no matter what its doing - standing, running, jumping, etc. They just empty as fast as they can. I think the results are the same.

[Caveman]

Here's an ethical/moral question for you?

How many of those that take the head shot at 100yds would take it again after they lost one and found it days later in the shape of the one in Kirby's picture?

I would hope none!

[Caveman]

I work with a guy that says he "always takes neck shots so it doesnt spoil to much meat, you either hit or clean miss". I think it sucks but I also know guys that dont hesitate to chuck lead at an animal no matter what its doing - standing, running, jumping, etc. They just empty as fast as they can. I think the results are the same.

If he either gets a hit or a clean miss, he needs to get out and practise as the neck of a deer is about 12-14inches across and that's not much of a group at 100yds

[BCBRAD]

Neck / head shots are way to iffy. Maybe some of these neck shots are actually a poor heart - lung shot.

[jrjonesy]

Although I have killed animals with head shots, it's not my first choice. I'd say it's a bad choice unless you have no alternative, actually


I'm not sure I understand how something that is a bad choice, becomes an acceptable choice just because there is no other alternative.

[Kody94]

I'm not sure I understand how something that is a bad choice, becomes an acceptable choice just because there is no other alternative.

Charging cape buffalo comes to mind. ;)

[358win]

Ok but you have either a 2" target or a 20" and you would go for the 2"?


This says it all plain & simple.
For the ethical hunter, question is done.

[Gateholio]

I would say even if you have no alternative, its still a bad choice. If we want to be adults out there, we have to be prepared to let an animal walk away rather than risking maiming something with a "hail mary" shot. This seems so basic that i can't believe I have to make the point, especially responding to a post from a site moderator.


If you can let the animal walk away, then you have an alternative.

Reading comprehension is a basic skill. I can't believe I have to make that point.

[BCBRAD]

Charging cape buffalo comes to mind. ;)


Then the head would fill the scope..........or you would be so close that you could smell your own feces.

[Gateholio]

I'm not sure I understand how something that is a bad choice, becomes an acceptable choice just because there is no other alternative.

If you have no other alternative, sometimes you have to do something that you wouldn't normally do.

[Casagrande]

Although I have killed animals with head shots, it's not my first choice. I'd say it's a bad choice unless you have no alternative, actually.

I recently saw an animal die due to a cock shot, but that is not recommended, either.:-D
Why the bullet chose that as an exit route is kind of like the Cadbury secret.:mrgreen:

[Brian011]

Every animal I've ever shot except this year was in the ribs just behind the shoulder. This year I took a neck shot at my buck only because just his shoulder and neck and head were exposed and I was very confident in my shot. I don't like shoulder shots because i think it can ruin too much meat.

[rocksteady]

Head shots are an acceptable "ETHICAL" shot, under certain circumstances, close range, good solid rest, knowing your gun/ammo/range/what distance your rifle is zeroed at, good trigger management, no other feasible option....

I have used and will continue to use head and/or neck shots, cause I know I can make the shot....

Those of you that can't ......Don't !!!!!

Don't criticize others who can drill a critter in the nugget 99 times out of 100.....

[Farmer]

Too many factors play into this one. I do take neck shots. I dont promote them. I have shot my rifle enough and killed enough animals to know when i am able to shoot the neck out. It is better for the meat. And i take them when it is right.

Disclaimer: It is far better policy to shoot the animal in the cheast behind the shoulder then in the head, neck or shoulders. Less can go wrong.

I agree with 835 on this. The only neck shots I have taken were at standing deer less than 30 yards away and I had a solid rest.
I used to shoot for the shoulder, but have changed to the chest with less meat lost.

[cainer]

http://i497.photobucket.com/albums/rr331/cainer1/780.jpg
no head shots here-makes for bad pictures :wink:. I like double lung, heart, spine. occasionally neck if thats all i got(if you hit it dead center head on-you'll get spine too!)

[fuzzybiscuit]

The way the OP worded the poll leaves only one logical answer and makes this poll completely useless.

Best Shot placement (You have a nice broadside shot 100yrds)

Head
Neck
Boiler Room
Spine
Shoulders


To now take the results from this poll and then say, "see, almost everyone agrees that head or neck shots should not be taken," is not just misleading, but plain wrong.

Standing broadside at a 100 yards the best shot placement would be in the boiler room and it is what I would vote for.

Standing face on at 30 feet in four foot high salal with only the neck and head showing, the best shot placement would obviously be in the head or neck, because nothing else is showing.

Any poll can be worded to get the results that are desired.

[Kody94]

Head shots are an acceptable "ETHICAL" shot, under certain circumstances, close range, good solid rest, knowing your gun/ammo/range/what distance your rifle is zeroed at, good trigger management, no other feasible option....

I have used and will continue to use head and/or neck shots, cause I know I can make the shot....

Those of you that can't ......Don't !!!!!

Don't criticize others who can drill a critter in the nugget 99 times out of 100.....


I think the issue is really that many (most) folks that CAN'T make the shot 99 times out of 100, do take that shot (head or neck), and in fact prefer it and promote it.

I talk to a lot of new hunters that take head shots because they think its the right thing to do (to save meat). Same with a lot more experienced guys than I would guess. Based on my anecdotal observations, I think much more than 3 percent of hunters really think its the preferred shot to take. And based on my anecdotal observations at the range, I HIGHLY doubt that 3 percent of hunters are capable of hitting a 2" target 99 times out of 100, under field shooting conditions, at 30 yards, let alone 50 or 100.

Shot placement is a personal choice. I just hope that when people make the choice, they do it educated to the consequences, and all the variables at play that could influence their ability to hit such a small target, which can move in less time than passes between when your brain decides to squeeze the trigger and when the bullet gets there.

[moose2]

I picked boiler room , however if I am shooting a grizzly or a goat I might include the shoulder as well.
MIKE

[GoatGuy]

Shoulder, through the boiler room. Rather have 95 lbs of meat on the ground than 100 walking away hurt.

[Sleep Robber]

Boiler Room for sure. I have taken neck shots to finish {second shot}animals off before, quite a few times. I have only shot one deer in the neck as the first shot, and he was bedded down staring at me 15 yards away, got him right in the throat patch, done like dinner. I have also shot one bear in the back of the neck, but he was standing, looking away from me, not even 30 yards away, and I felt very confident, he dropped dead immediately.

I wonder how many "HERO" neck/head shots there have been this year alone, where the guy thinks he's got it made, only to see the animal fast track into the woods, never to be seen again, not knowing if he wounded it or not, only to die later and never be found. ???

To me the vitals {heart, lungs} is the safest, most effective way of bagging an animal, hands down.

I may also add , that I have let more than a few animals live for another day, simply because I know my capabilities, and if I have any doubt at all, they get a pass.

[hunter1947]

For me boiler room all the way :wink:..

[roping_tom]

Well I believe that a head shot is not a option at any time. I practise i know my gun, ammo, zero, but there are too many variables that you have no control of.

[leadpillproductions]

I bust at least one shoulder if not both . A little meat damage is better than a wounded animal. They dont go far with two broke shoulders

[M.Dean]

I had a buck this year standing at the top of a side hill, I glassed it, it was 4 point, nothing special but my Daughter wanted me to shoot a deer with her, so! Any way this guy is facing me, lots of tree's and brush etc, I line up and the only shot is in the neck or chest. I waited a bit and he started to turn his head to look to the side so I fired, down he rolled! The shot hit him in the neck, it was roughly a 100 yard shot with a 243, 100 grn Hornady bullet. A risky, dumb shot??? For some yes,but I fire my guns as much as possible,I have them dead on at 100 yrds, not 2 inches high etc. Was there a chance of wounding the animal? No. I know the rifle, I know what I can and can't do, and I've taken lots of game. The point is if you think for even a second that you can't take the shot, don't! If you fire your gun just a couple times a year, worry about recoil and your hands are shaking, do not fire! I don't recommend a neck or head shot, not every one is capable of making a clean kill, but, for those people that do shoot lots and are good at it the shot kills fast and very humanely. It's horrible seeing a animal suffering like the one in the photo, it's clear who ever tried the shot failed and needs lots more time spent shooting there gun, but to condemn the head or neck shoot based on some fools mistake is unfair I think. I don't think a experienced hunter would even try a head shot if there was any doubt in his mind he couldn't make it, and yes it's sad to see a deer with it's jaw shot off, but I bet there's lots of animals each year wounded as severely that we don't see!

[Walksalot]

Take the shot you are most comfortable with. If a hunter spends the time at the range to hone his/her shooting skills then fill your boots. To post a picture of a deer with head trauma without knowing the history which lead to this happening is irresponsible. This could be a picture of an attempt a heart/lung shot at an animal which has went horribly wrong. Of the animals I have found dead, and I have found a few, from a bullet wound all were gut shot.

At the range I see most hunters sight their rifles in from a bench rest and then leave. I see very few practice off hand shooting which may very well account for the vast majority of shots taken in a hunting situation. Do not condemn a hunter who has logged his/her hours at the range to hone their shooting skills so they are able to make a shot which will plant the animal in it's tracks. If the animal is going to give it's all then I am going to do my best to utilize all of that animal. I cut up my own animals and I don't need anyone to tell me how much meat is wasted as a result of an animal shot though the front shoulders. The amount of meat wasted is, in my opinion, criminal.

I have talked to people who condemn head or neck shots who don't hesitate to shoot at an animal on the move justifying their action by the rationalization they are shooting for the heart and lung. Taking a shot at a running animal is, in my opinion, the highest risk to wound shot attempt in a hunting situation.

[horshur]

shit guys the head is on a friggin swivel...it moves independent of the animal.

it is not an option.

[rocksteady]

Even though I do not spend a tonne of time at the range shooting, I spend a lot of my spring days sitting in a farmers field, with my .22, complete with deer scope (not one of those .22 scopes that are like looking through a drinking straw) shooting gophers....

It is great practice for aiming, trigger control, etc that helps give me the confidence to take head/neck shots if the need arises....

SO, to get really proficient at shooting, you don't need to blast 1000 rounds out of your deer rifle, shoot 1000 rounds out of your .22 at small targets at long (for a .22) range and see how your abilities improve....

Shooting beer cans at 80 yards, off hand with a .22 will help you out immensely....

[nomad]

For those feeling we are beating up ethical questions here... Sorry, but these things obviously need to be gone over and over and over! Particularly for new hunters and as a reminder or refresher for older hunters. Some certainly are by far more capable of making the tough shots! Most aren't and willingly compromise their ethics. At the moment you're about to pull the trigger or release that arrow, have you considered your situation? Alot more questions pop into my mind than just shot position (that would be the first question answered)! Don't forget to ask yourself...... (place questions here). If you say 'shoot first questions later', that to me has no ethics behind it. An ethical hunter will know through education and/or experience weather or not he/she is ready to deal with the results of their next choice. Point here is we all make our choices out there, hopefully with threads as this 'beat to death' we will be reminded to keep making the good 'ethical' choices out there. Irresponsiblity in the field makes all of us look bad!
Happy hunting

Nomad

[sawmill]

I am in it for the meat....period.A bullet through the rib cage means I get to eat good.

[sawmill]

Been working real well for me for 40 years,why change.I had to buy another freezer this season.

[bforce750]

I don't feel it's a matter of ethics if you choose to shoot an animal in the neck or not . Either you are comfortable with these types of shots or your not. I free hand 100yrd or less neck shots on my deer and moose almost every time, and I am comfortable with it. I believe it is unethical if you don't know your rifle and where it's shooting, or you take a 300yrd poke at something and you havn't shot that distance before. What about the guys that taking boiler room shots on a deer and end up taking out both shoulders? Isn't that a waste? This happens more than every other kind of shot from what I"ve seen. All that blood shock,bone frags, half your deer is gone...meat hunters nightmare. I say if you are comfortable with it GO FOR IT!!!!

[len173]

I think showing that picture is a good thing Kirby. It drives home the point to new hunters, such as myself, to not let buck fever take over, and only take a good, clean shot.

I'd rather let 1000 spectacular bucks walk away then ever do that to even one deer.

[knockturnal]

You can call me what you want, but in my past 14 years of hunting, I've shot a lot of animals and only 6-7 have been heart/lung shots. 1 was a spine and all the rest have been head and neck shots. My hunting rifles all shoot under an inch at a hundred yards and I shoot a lot. I feel very comfortable shooting a deer in the head or neck at 100 yards. For the further shots, I'll shoot for the water pump or air bags. Typically, all my head shots have been well under 100 yards. My gf even shoots for the neck if the opportunity arises. I see absolutly nothing wrong with those shots.

[GoatGuy]

And based on my anecdotal observations at the range, I HIGHLY doubt that 3 percent of hunters are capable of hitting a 2" target 99 times out of 100, under field shooting conditions, at 30 yards, let alone 50 or 100.


Too true, I've been to the range with all kinds of guys who have shot moose at "250 yards in the neck" who leave groups that look like 7 1/2s shot out of a 12 gauge.

[Ambush]

Probably 80% of the hunters that hit an animal in the neck were shooting for "centre mass" and just had a lucky miss and hit the neck. But it just sounds way better to say "... at 425 yards I gave him one in the neck to put him down for good". Usually after several missed shots at closer range.

If you don't beleive me, then just go back and read a bunch of past "kill" posts on HBC.

[TPB]

2 shots 2 kills this year both double lung, one at 80-90 yards and the other at 150 yards. Im not planning for it to change next year.

[fuzzybiscuit]

Originally posted by Ambush

Probably 80% of the hunters that hit an animal in the neck were shooting for "centre mass" and just had a lucky miss and hit the neck. But it just sounds way better to say "... at 425 yards I gave him one in the neck to put him down for good". Usually after several missed shots at closer range.

If you don't beleive me, then just go back and read a bunch of past "kill" posts on HBC.



I agree 100% with this statement.

There are quite a few hunters in the field, and many on this site, who lack the necessary skills to be taking any shot, at any animal, at any distance.

I have taken many head/neck shots on deer at under 50 yards. Bang/flop and not one ever needed a second shot and none have ever walked away from a miss. Very little if any meat wasted and the deer was dead before it hit the ground. This doesn't make me think I'm a hero. I know my gun and practice shooting freehand regularly out to 100 yards. At 50 yards I feel that I could make this shot all day long and while practicing I do. With a good rest I feel that I can stretch a neck shot out to 100 yards with the right conditions. If I'm ever in doubt of a shot, I just don't take it. Many a deer has walked away because I didn't feel comfortable doing the 200 yard hail mary body shot on a moving target that is so common on here.

As Ambush stated, "just go back and read a bunch of past "kill" posts on HBC."

It's enough to make you cringe and most stories are followed by members congratulating the shooter.:confused:

I agree that there are higher percentage shots and that a boiler room shot is a higher percentage shot than a head/neck shot. At less than 50 yards on a stationary target I feel that I could hit the neck/head on a deer 100% of the time. Nothing would be gained by taking a body shot and the chance of meat being ruined by the bullet deflecting off a rib would be greatly increased. I never take a shoulder shot as I believe that the meat wasted doesn't warrant harvesting the animal.

In my opinion, for someone to claim that a head/neck shot is unethical and should never be taken is wrong. I have found that under the right conditions just the opposite is true. I firmly believe that a head/neck shot at under 50 yards is a way easier shot than a body shot at 300 on a moving animal.

Obviously my views are different from the views of most on this site, as most seem to believe that head/neck shots should never be taken and every second story of an animal being harvested describes the perfect off-hand, 250+ yard boiler room shot the shooter made.

As Srupp would say, "Hmmmm".

[Mikey Rafiki]

Last year took down 2 bucks with shots through the ribs right behind the shoulder. Did not hit the front quarters at all but the entire front ends of both deer were toasted, blood shot and mangled. Felt bad about having to throw out the front end of both deer. Just took down a little buck yesterday with a head shot from about 60 yards. Had a good rest and confidence in the gun, but any further than that I would have let him walk. Felt really good to be able to harvest the entire deer without letting any go to waste.

[whognu]

new HBC member; 35 years in

[whognu]

try that again.....

new HBC member; been lost in the bush for 35 years

regarding the ethical question of head shots, here are my 2bits

things i know (besides everyone has an opinion)

i have shot 32 deer; used approx 37 bullets (give or take one or two)

at least 25 were shot in that spot right between the ear and the eyeball

in my life i have shot at 2 deer that i did not get and after tracking both (luckily in the snow) and finding no blood nor fur, assume a clean miss......yet i agonize about the 'what if' to this day

deer can eat a lot of lead without showing any signs of being hit and as an aside, i bet one hell of alot more deer die a slow and agonizing death from 'shots other than headshots' than they ever do from head shots (attempts)

i have tracked several deer (for buddies) that should never have been shot (at)

i am not a particularly good shot; i shoot less than 10 rounds a year

i am very good at one thing and only one thing

- sneaking up real close and shooting them in the head before they see me

because i do not practice (neither the time nor interest) i have always self limited myself to head shots within 60 yds or i will shoot to a max 150 yds behind the front shoulder (prime example this year)

although most timber hunting is offhand, i ALWAYS look for a rest and ALWAYS use one if time permits

so, are head shots ethical; for me they are, yet each to his own

remember

i am killing an animal that does not want to die

i alone determine if the conditions exist to accomplish this as humamely as possible

good luck to all

[sawmill]

2 shots 2 kills this year both double lung, one at 80-90 yards and the other at 150 yards. Im not planning for it to change next year.
Good lad,you learned something.You shall always eat well.:mrgreen:

[sawmill]

try that again.....

new HBC member; been lost in the bush for 35 years

regarding the ethical question of head shots, here are my 2bits

things i know (besides everyone has an opinion)

i have shot 32 deer; used approx 37 bullets (give or take one or two)

at least 25 were shot in that spot right between the ear and the eyeball

in my life i have shot at 2 deer that i did not get and after tracking both (luckily in the snow) and finding no blood nor fur, assume a clean miss......yet i agonize about the 'what if' to this day

deer can eat a lot of lead without showing any signs of being hit and as an aside, i bet one hell of alot more deer die a slow and agonizing death from 'shots other than headshots' than they ever do from head shots (attempts)

i have tracked several deer (for buddies) that should never have been shot (at)

i am not a particularly good shot; i shoot less than 10 rounds a year

i am very good at one thing and only one thing

- sneaking up real close and shooting them in the head before they see me

because i do not practice (neither the time nor interest) i have always self limited myself to head shots within 60 yds or i will shoot to a max 150 yds behind the front shoulder (prime example this year)

although most timber hunting is offhand, i ALWAYS look for a rest and ALWAYS use one if time permits

so, are head shots ethical; for me they are, yet each to his own

remember

i am killing an animal that does not want to die

i alone determine if the conditions exist to accomplish this as humamely as possible

good luck to all

You are not a good shot and you don`t practice because you have "neither the time or the interest":confused:Hmmmm.....
Start hunting with a spear.:evil: