Re: Average hunter skills
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RUM Lover</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Good topic...
I define "Ethical" as taking a shot I know I can make. The situation will dictate my range. My longest shot while deer hunting was 836 paces, roughly 790 yards, with a 7mm Rem on a pipeline in north La. Most of my shots are between 10 and 300 yards, all of which are within a few inches with a 200y zero. The limitation is based on the distance I can see, the rest I can take, and the performace of me and my gear. Running shots past 200y I usually won't take, not for something as noble as ethics, but I simply haven't practiced running shots beyond that. Trotting shots I'm more likely to take, walking I'll definitely take, and standing is a gimmie. But again, that's all situation dependant. I may come down with an unexpected case of buck fever (or any of many other unexpected issues) and not be able to make the shot.
The difference between hunters is knowledge. Those that seek greater knowledge about their sport and gear will have the confidence to question what those that lack knowlege define as "Ethics". ---just look at the issue of hunting with a suppressor...
I chuckle every September when the guys start showing up with their deer rifles on the range. The guns haven't been cleaned since they bought them, they're using the same box of cheap ammo they bought several years ago, and they are happy with hitting a pie plate at 100y off a sand bag. The best thing those of us with greater knowledge can do IS TO SHARE THE KNOWLEDGE. If they figure out what they and their rifle are capable of, hopefully they will take the time to improve their skills. This issue goes beyond hunting, it is at the root of problems facing the shooting sports worldwide.
Had to come back to add something...
#1: For those in Europe who consider anything past 100m as unethical; is there rifle, caliber, visable distance, etc.. limitations on hunters there or is 100m an arbitrary distance created by past generations with lesser equipment and greater excuses? I ask because I see the same argument here in the States. It commonly comes from old guys who can't hit what they are aiming at with what we consider precision, much less any resemblance of accuracy.
<span style="font-style: italic">Rum lover, just had to get back in it, yes the idea of that beyond 120-150 meters the idea of ethical shooting is not possible does in part come for the older days.
The other part of it comes from a very good understanding of the average shooter/hunters ability in Sweden/Europe, in such a fact, that if the hunters associastions declare that this is the limit, then more hunters will keep the limits and less wounded game is the outcome, something we all hate to have happen.
Further more, hunters with weak personalities and poor skills are not to mocked or gouded in to taking shots with low percentage and high risks.
Even more compounding is the issues of the not insignificante group of target shooters/hunters in Sweden, we shoot field trials here, like an UKD shot for you guys, prone and kneeling, six rounds in 30-50 sec at ranges up to 650 meters. Those guys are god shots however there not always good hunters, and the fail to adress the issue of flight time and do sufffer a lot from buck fewer.
I practice at 300 meters, the full lenght of "my" range quite a lot however I have only taken one shot prone at a deer this year 134 meters I belive it was, the rest have been standing, sitting, kneeling shots and for those shots 300 meter is just to far.
As some guys have adressed it above train as you would shoot, that is what I do, one day I might feel confident of taking 300 meter shots to.
Sweden is a place with extreme spread in how the land looks, where I hunt 300 meters is not obtainable as a range, I have one spot that is 282 meters, the rest is much shorter. Other people have the same kind of beanfields that you guys have.
</span>
#2: Statistically speaking, do the women of Sweden, Norway, and Finland commonly have natural D Cup tits? Or is it just hype? I've been offered a NATO job out that way and wanted to clearly define the benefits.
<span style="font-style: italic"> For Swedish stats, yes there are a lot more natural D´s then one would imagine, and yes there are som absolutely stunning girls here not all blond though, remember Palles wife, the Danish guy here, his is a girl from Sri Lanka, not to my taste, but pretty as hell.
There are the artifical ones to should one desire that, especially here in Stockholm.
I have during my soon 34 years gone through a rash of blondes, took a few wrong turns with redheads and brunettes and now I have come full cirkle tvice and after passing the blonds again I am back with a natural blond dyed brown.
Remember now and beware, the Scandinavian women, talk softer but carry a bigger stick, they will take you out and bring you home, if not careful.
Last, don´t get in to a drinking contest with any one with heretage from Finland, they will send you in to a stupor and then they will have there way with you, you just better hope the person is a girl...
Best regards Chris</span>
</div></div>
