Many people say that 5...

Many people say that 5.56x45mm is insufficient for hunting 125 pound deer while saying it's fine for killing adult human men 50 pounds heavier with profiles that make it difficult to hit both lungs with one bullet. It seems like one of those two statements has to be wrong.

Attached: main-qimg-6ceefcd6b4812f2059f716914f98b9b7-c.jpg (450x430, 36K)

Quickly and Humanely are the key words in caliber hunting debates. Technically any bullet can kill any wild animal eventually. But yes you can hunt durr with 5.56 high grain. People do it all the time.

You can kill a deer with .22lr if you wanted to.

I understand that you'r pretending to be retarded OP but for people who actually think this makes sense, a single lung hit is able to take down a deer but it isn't quick or humane
of course this doesn't matter when you're shooting at people because you're usually shooting to disable a target rather than give them a quick, suffer free end

I lung shot a deer last year with 55gr sp it went all of 15ft, no exit wound no recovered bullet. First lung was gone, second had a fist sized hole. It's more about shot placement with smaller, less powerful rounds.

Will the kill be quicker and cleaner if you shoot a human than if you shoot a deer? Or is the idea that quick clean kills matter when shooting deer but not when shooting humans?

>quick clean kills matter when shooting deer but not when shooting humans?
Bingo.

the deer wasnt doing anything wrong

Who are these people? Shot placement is super easy to get right with most platforms for 5.56 and shot placement is all that matters while deer hunting, regardless of caliber or weapon used. If I shoot a deer in the ass with my 70 lb draw compound bow, it might die of blood loss or infection later, but chances are it's going to go far the fuck away with an arrow lodged in it's back hip, or maybe it will break the hip, a lot of variables, or I could just shoot it in the same spot I always shoot them and watch it be completely dead moments later. People really over complicate deer hunting, it's usually all with the goal of a perfect hunting strategy in mind, but they let their autism take it too far. 5.56 will easily kill a deer.

DESIGNED

TO

WOUND

Why though? Let's not talk about the suffering of the person you shot (which might be a theoretical concern in some cases but probably not in most)-- isn't it preferable for them to be dead as quickly as possible? Mortally wounded people can still shoot back, or even keep running at you.

He dindu nuffin he wuz a gud boi. In this case yes the deer didn't do anything but be made of delicious meat.

Ohboyherewego.jpg

Animals don't have any concept of morality. They also don't have to be doing anything wrong to die. Nature consists of a large number of predator/prey relationships where prey just get fucked and such is life. Deer have delicious and nutritious meat on them, humans have hunted them since waaaay back in the day because of that. Quit muddying the waters with your human concepts.

>Mortally wounded people can still shoot back, or even keep running at you.
That's true of deer too. That's why you try and surprise them. With humans you just want to at least disable them from attacking you as quickly and easily as you can. Outright killing, generally isn't the priority.

Deer also naturally die shitty deaths. Starvation, predation, infection, freezing, natural death for a deer suuuuucks.

Yeah If I were a deer, I'd choose some sharpshooter redneck with an AR over starvation any day.

>starvation
For sure. When a bear or wolves kill a deer they just start eating it while it's still alive. Big cats kill first. But I'd rather take a bullet to the lung and barely even know something was wrong any day.

> insufficient for 125lbs deer
Kills them just fine, but if your bullet comes apart before it makes it through the far side, your blood trail tends to suck. The OTM bullets have jacket seperation, which doesn't help there either, along with putting a bunch of metal bits in your sausage. The bonded and all-copper bullets are more expensive, but they tend to keep most of their weight and even make it through both shoulders if you like the high shoulder shot.

There's reasons:
>plain old fuddery
>some people think all there is to 5.56mm ballistics is M855 from a 14.5" barrel at 300yds
>deer will vary in size from place to place, some people will not think of this and will only think about deer from their local context, where 5.56mm actually might be a bit too small, but be ignorant of smaller deer, where 5.56mm will be perfectly adequate

Use a rifle with a 18" or 20" barrel, use some real good ammo, and try to keep it at 100yds maximum.

Also this.

Which is why we insist on affording them a fairly quick death with as little suffering we can, it's kind of a courtesy thing.
Sucks, Bambi, but a guy's gotta eat, and in this world something needs to perish so that something else may live, be that a plant, fungus, or animate animal.

Remember the majority of a deer's weight is in the torso, while in humans its distributed. 125lb deer has a torso about the same volume as a 175 lb man.

And double tapping a human is way easier. You fuck a shot on Bambi, he springs for the bush and might run for an hour.

Jamal though just curls up at the first crack, so you put a second round in him.

I killed my first deer last season with my AR. Died in probably 15 second after shot. Hit it through the lungs and a fragment scraped its heart. Just make sure you select your ammo properly and don't take "maybe" shots.

>Many people say that 5.56x45mm is insufficient for hunting 125 pound deer

Boomer fudds will be boomer fudds.

Where did this meme come from anyway?

fpbp
/thread

1000 ft lbs.

>Dont take "maybe" shots.
This is true. And rarely discussed.
Its better to miss out, then wound a deer and it suffers

Fudds and battle rifle obsessives.

um no sweetie

Attached: this kills the deer.jpg (474x282, 21K)

If you kill a soldier his buddies won't have to tend to him Because he is already dead. If you just wound him they will have to tend to him, effectively taking more people out of the fight.

>soldiers magically know how seriously wounded their fallen comrades are without having to stop what they're doing to examine them
Wow, that's better than most actual medical professionals. I'm impressed.

5.56 is designed to wound. you don't leave the wounded on the battlefield, you carry them back and you have 2-3 people tied up(including the 1 wounded).

if you die, you're left on the battlefield.

You could probably kill a raging rhino or a fully grown African bull elephant with a .22 if you aimed right

>a fully grown African bull elephant
There's a cluster of nerves or lymph nodes or something behind the forelegs that'll make him drop like a rock if you hit it, even with a .22, but it's only accessible while the elephant's leg is forward.

What was the purpose of this?
You think they just sit there and look at them and tell them "tough shit buddy"

>fine for killing adult human men 50 pounds heavier

He fell for the "5.56 was meant to kill" meme

It's cheaper, you can carry more volumetrically and it costs exponentially more to care for a wounded combatant than stick him in the ground

You can shoot a human multiple times and carry 30 round mags. There is no sporting to it.

The first one. People hunt whitetail with .223 all the time.