No, worst case is you take off the lower jaw. Very little bleeding so unless someone gets to it first the animal starves.
The only time I would take a head shot is if the animal is already wounded and its the only shot available.
Thank you.
No, worst case is you take off the lower jaw. Very little bleeding so unless someone gets to it first the animal starves.
The only time I would take a head shot is if the animal is already wounded and its the only shot available.
Well Mike I respect you and everyone here, In my time a field I've seen more gut shots than anything in 50+ years of hunting.Well you have 10 years of age on me…..
Headshots seem to be a "badge of honor" here in Texas and I've seen more than I care for in the situation I mentioned. I've never done it and don't intend to because I've seen the worst outcome from it.
And as long as everyone has that attitude, we all stay friends, no matter if we have differing opinions.Well Mike I respect you and everyone here,
Well if one can't put a bullet in that area you need more time on the range, I'm not saying things can't happen, But as I stated in this post I've seen a way higher percentage of gut shots than a bad headshot. So I wouldn't tell you or anyone else not to take a vital shot, because the argument can be presented against gut shots more than headshotsView attachment 476542
Roughly the area that will guarantee a 100 percent DRT. I've seen several walking around missing the entire bottom jaw. I've saw 2 missing everything (top and bottom jaw) from just in front of the tear gland, still walking. Not a pretty sight.
I do take head shots from time to time, and I'm not telling anyone not to. Just be very aware of the risks.
To each their own, but the only headshots I will take is on varmints, squirrels and pigs. I really don't like shooting moving targets, if I can help it. Heads seem to bob and weave far more than the core vitals.
Thank you againNo, worst case is you take off the lower jaw. Very little bleeding so unless someone gets to it first the animal starves.
The only time I would take a head shot is if the animal is already wounded and its the only shot available.
Why do people like you come in and start this kind of BS, just move along if you don't like the topic, I did not ask you directly to leave your input.
It's a simple wuestion.
You Actually did. So here it is. Head shots are fine. Vitals fine too. High shoulder is actually my preferred. They all work great when properly executed. They can all have less than ideal outcomes when poorly executed. This topic just always ends up with a pile of folks talking about faceless deer walking to starvation after days of suffering. My apologies if I offended you with my opinion.What say you.????
Snipers don't take vital shots.But, but,... most likely we're not all that crack shot like the OP who can put a cold bore inside 2 inches at 700. I know I can't, inside a minute maybe.
I'd probably be banned if I gave my whole, unfiltered opinion on the topic.
The target is smaller and more likely to move. The head isn't a kill zone, the brain is. Yes, it's a quick kill of you get it right, but it's easy to screw up. A well placed heart/lung shot with a good bullet is a quick kill, gives you a bigger target, and is less likely to move as you break the shot. Deer don't bob their heart and lungs up and down like they do with their head.
I've wasted tags on malnourished deer that lost a jaw to a botched headshot. Anyone who says "a miss is the worst that can happen" is ignorant of the slow death they're likely to cause if they miss the brain but hit the deer. It's easy to mistake a jaw hit with a clean miss since there's little blood or hair loss.