Deer hunting with a .223

[Gman]

Fight the man.

[Irving]

I'm not sure what kind of responses you're expecting here. First, I'm not surprised that people aren't forming a line to talk about bad shots on animals.

Second, if it weren't for the strict hunting regulations we have now, we wouldn't even have animals to hunt. Let's not forget that unregulated hunting is what drove most of our megafauna to the brink of extinction in the first place.

[spqrzilla]

Fight the man.

Represent

[buffalobo]

Well, I have come to the conclusion that defending the .223 for deer hunting is pretty much a lost cause. So far nobody has answered my original question. Where are the facts? Who hunted deer with a .223, took an ethical shot, and watched the deer jump up and run off with a .223 bullet in it. Deer is deer in Texas or Colorado or Maine or New York and they will fall to a .223 just as sure as a .243. I say that as with any firearm the distance, placement, the proper bullet, ethics, and accepting responsibility are all key factors in making a humane shot - but for some reason the majority will acquiesce to the makers of the laws no matter how unreasonable or how old, or how lacking in facts the law is. And, they will give away rights and freedoms rather than argue because there is the assumption that studies and data are foolproof, if, and that is a BIG IF, they were even considered. And therein is the problem. People will just go with the flow until we no longer have any freedoms left. To my knowledge nobody with reason and ethics can leave the camp and engage a deer and NOT know that they are incapable of making the shot. The same shame would apply to a .243, 308., 30-06, or 338. Don't take the shot if you can't be sure of making it. Because there are people who have no ethics, because there are outlaws, because there are just plain stupid people in the woods is not a reason to outlaw a gun or a caliber which science says is more than adequate. The End.

An easy phone call to folks who get paid to talk to you is all it takes to get the info you're asking for. Yet you have spent couple days jousting with us and now want to lecture us, take us to task for being cowards?

[sniper7]

Well, I have come to the conclusion that defending the .223 for deer hunting is pretty much a lost cause. So far nobody has answered my original question. Where are the facts? Who hunted deer with a .223, took an ethical shot, and watched the deer jump up and run off with a .223 bullet in it. Deer is deer in Texas or Colorado or Maine or New York and they will fall to a .223 just as sure as a .243. I say that as with any firearm the distance, placement, the proper bullet, ethics, and accepting responsibility are all key factors in making a humane shot - but for some reason the majority will acquiesce to the makers of the laws no matter how unreasonable or how old, or how lacking in facts the law is. And, they will give away rights and freedoms rather than argue because there is the assumption that studies and data are foolproof, if, and that is a BIG IF, they were even considered. And therein is the problem. People will just go with the flow until we no longer have any freedoms left. To my knowledge nobody with reason and ethics can leave the camp and engage a deer and NOT know that they are incapable of making the shot. The same shame would apply to a .243, 308., 30-06, or 338. Don't take the shot if you can't be sure of making it. Because there are people who have no ethics, because there are outlaws, because there are just plain stupid people in the woods is not a reason to outlaw a gun or a caliber which science says is more than adequate. The End.

First it is the regulations that dictate caliber size. That is colorado law. If you don’t own anything bigger than a .223 then this gives you justification to go buy a new rifle.

Yes deer can easily be killed by a .223. But Colorado likes to generalize what is big game vs small game. Even turkey is considered big game for most purposes other that you can hunt them with a .22 rifle in the fall if desired.

They recently even upped the required size for muzzleloaders in big game. But still no scopes on a muzzleloader.

But these are the regulations you moved into. Factual data won’t come into play for the .223 and whining about it on a gun forum won’t change the minds of those running the DOW especially now they have been infiltrated by the parks system.
BTW deer are quite a bit larger here in Colorado (not everything is bigger in Texas....just go ask Alaska!), we also have much more public use lands vs the high fence and leased lands of Texas. Due to that they wanted a larger caliber to possibly ensure greater probability of a lethal shot. Now we all know a 87 grain .243 vs a 75 grain .223 isn’t much difference but that is the line they drew and Personally I’m fine with that.
So go get ya a new rifle and enjoy all the public lands with some of the best and biggest big game the lower 48 has to offer.

[eddiememphis]

... turkey is considered big game for most purposes other that you can hunt them with a .22 rifle in the fall if desired.

That too, has restrictions. Minimum of 17 grain bullet carrying 110 ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards. This rules out most .22 LR rounds. Number one reason I am looking for a .22 WMR lever action.

[Irving]

That too, has restrictions. Minimum of 17 grain bullet carrying 110 ft/lbs of energy at 100 yards. This rules out most .22 LR rounds. Number one reason I am looking for a .22 WMR lever action.

Where are you seeing that? I've looked and asked CPW and they just said I could hunt fall Turkey with whatever I had with me, which I thought was a weird answer.

[marineimaging]

I don't think I am whining or lecturing, and I probably should have not said Texas because I don't hold to that garbage that everything is bigger in Texas. I also have mule deer, elk, and moose in my back yard so I know the difference in size and bulk. Yes, they are bigger. I also lived in Alaska and other states and upon moving here (again, I lived in the mountains and front range for 10 years in the 80's) I was surprised to find the prohibition against .223 for at least white tail. The fact is I joined an AR-15/Colorado forum which typically means .223/5.56 caliber uses in Colorado and thought, hey, I'll ask here under the "HUNTING" forum to see if anybody knows why Colorado has chosen to reject the .223 caliber for hunting deer. I have tried to offer at least half a dozen reasons we should force the issue of permitting at least white tail deer harvesting with .223 but like I said, it is pretty much a lost cause.

[Irving]

If we're going to challenge a hunting regulation, it seems like there are much better things to go after than minimum caliber for deer. We could fight to defend against predator hunting being banned. We've got a nasty point creep issue that is hurting both residents and non-residents alike. Not to mention that it's difficult enough for new hunters to try and figure out the ropes as it is. Further complicating the regulations won't help Hunter retention or new Hunter numbers.

[TFOGGER]

I think the original reason that the minimum was set where it is, is that when the regulation was written, the only commercially available .22 bullets were either 55 grain and lighter FMJs or "varmint" hollowpoints, neither of which are ideal for deer sized game. Granted, heavier bullets are now available, but there has been no real reason for CPW to revisit the regs.