Marlin Firearms Forum banner

41 - 44 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
Discussion Starter #41
Update: Sunday comes along and I ask my wife if she would like to get out and do a bit of shooting after church? She replies that she absolutely would. We load up the babies and head about 40 minutes away to a neighboring range. Ear up the little'uns, take out both the 30-30 and 357 to see what she can do. I must have adjusted the front sight just right (even the blind chicken gets a kernel of corn once in awhile) and turn her loose with the 30-30 at 25. Spot on. For gits and shiggles I point her out to a gong at roughly the 200 yard line. "Let's see you put one out there". Straight on elevation, just to the right. Hold on the left side a bit. Dead center..... "lucky shot. do it again!" Boom Whack. Switch off to the 357 and she does the same thing. The old "experts" that typically comment while sitting in their pickups couldn't believe this gal off hand hits the gong. Open sights and all! Our conclusion is that she can bring with both rifles, and if we get a chance to hit the draw by the hay yard she will take and use the 357 so long as I have a trusted backup rifle. Which might just be the triple 4. Where has that one been all my life?!?!? Thanks one and all for the input!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Zingger,

That's an awesome end to this chapter. I'm looking forward to your stories about her (and your) upcoming hunt.

Thanks for starting a great discussion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Let's go back to my original comments and key on this sentence. "Is the .357 a deer killer? Yes, in the right hands a close range under perfect circumstances, which essentially means perfect shot placement. Let's face reality with one of the examples of kills at Yellowstone which were part of a promotional hunt (that was used later in Smith & Wesson advertising). Killing a grizzly with .357 Magnum out of a revolver at a supposed 135 yards is a stunt. It's that simple. Is the .357 magnum capable of harvesting big game animals? Of course it is. So is a .22 long rifle. The question really is "Is it ethical?" With perfect shot placement being the key, the .357 is capable as I stated before. The shooting of a grizzly at 135 yards with a .357 does not qualify as being within the "performance envelope" of the .357. Stunt...yes. Ethical....no. Great for advertising and for selling revolvers by Smith & Wesson, and fun to look back on in firearms history, but not ethical. I go back to one of my original postings. This is very much like the discussion a while back about using .410 slugs for deer hunting. An awful lot of folks seem to have an uncle or a great aunt who used a .410 slug and "always" got a deer, but never seem to remember the deer that were missed or more importantly were wounded and never recovered. I think it was Jack O'Connor who wrote about the need to use a firearm/cartridge combo that would perform and quickly kill a game animal under less than ideal circumstances which would seem to be in the end a pretty good way of getting at one of the fundamentals involved in hunting ethics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,500 Posts
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Many bears and game were taken with a 36 cal. muzzle gun back in the day. Was it....unethical? No it was practical. Just as a .357 is with deer to 100 yards. I've used a .41 magnum pistol and rifle to smoke check many deer and hogs. None of them told me ha, ha ha haha not enough gun. You might say they were at a loss for words. took one at 133 range finded yards through both shoulders and that buck never knew what hit him. Is a 50 cal muzzle loader unethical at 150 yards? Nope killed'm through and through both lungs and only had 90 grains of Pyrodex. Hmm I should name my freezer unethical.
 
41 - 44 of 44 Posts
Top