kyska Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Rather apt there is a article in one of the shooting mags this month about a rifle for 'everything' from rabbit to red and they recommend a 6.5mm. They explain as long as you can afford the ammo, who's place is it to tell you its wrong? They go as far as saying that even from a police point of view, if you have the conditions, 'its none of their damn business'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyska Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 Frenchie, I really have to say, what does it matter? Really, if someone shoots a mole with that gun, what does it really matter? I frankly can't see how it'd upset the anti fraternity anymore than any other shooting 'episode'. I'm not going to fault you or start throwing any insults about this, all I will do is leave you with a question: Do you think that this is the wisest of things to put on an internet forum where you stand the chance of getting responsible shooters seen as a bunch of trigger happy shoot anything that moves type of people? Surely we have enough to contend with without giving the "antis" any more ammunition! This might well be "legal" but is it something that we want to be "broadcasting" or "bragging about"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Galore! Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 and anyhow... it's only a bloody mole! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanj Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 I had a bit of a giggle tonight. Went out to my stalking ground after Deer and took the .338 again. Well there were no Deer about so I started the long walk back up the hill to the truck. As I got to the top of the hill I noticed some movement to my left about 20 feet away. A mole hill was moving. Well as I had a round chambered it made sense to have a go. Result - a very dead mole and a very big hole where his hill was. I'm well chuffed, another species taken by the not so common calibre. Hope its specified on your FAC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanj Posted August 8, 2011 Report Share Posted August 8, 2011 I'm not going to fault you or start throwing any insults about this, all I will do is leave you with a question: Do you think that this is the wisest of things to put on an internet forum where you stand the chance of getting responsible shooters seen as a bunch of trigger happy shoot anything that moves type of people? Surely we have enough to contend with without giving the "antis" any more ammunition! This might well be "legal" but is it something that we want to be "broadcasting" or "bragging about"? This point has already been made ! I'm sure the OP was taking a light hearted view but as he already stated so long as the bullet ends safely in the ground wheres the problem ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Logic Posted August 9, 2011 Report Share Posted August 9, 2011 To anyone who moans about hitting a mole with a cannon... there really is no issue. Leave the lad alone. It's not irresponsible, just rather funny! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highseas Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 To anyone who moans about hitting a mole with a cannon... there really is no issue. Leave the lad alone. It's not irresponsible, just rather funny! you sir nailed it in one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Gentlemen, considering this is a public forum, don't you regard the title as 'excessive' and the content as rather 'offensive'? If you do not, then the final banning of all firearms will be a surprise to you. Sleep well in the knowledge that you have willingly contributed to s****** eveyone else's enjoyment and passion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highseas Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Gentlemen, considering this is a public forum, don't you regard the title as 'excessive' and the content as rather 'offensive'? If you do not, then the final banning of all firearms will be a surprise to you. Sleep well in the knowledge that you have willingly contributed to s****** eveyone else's enjoyment and passion. oh sorry i forgot we must never use too much gun useing a cf for any thing smaller than fox is bad useing any thing smaller that 243 for roe is bad useing any thing that goes boom for moles is bad for **** sake its a mole!! its dead no one was killed no one was even in danger the mole was dead very very fast whats the ******* problem get grip! the anties will have a **** fit about a mole getting traped so who give a **** if they flip out about one getting shot!?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Highseas, I've seen your other posts and you are obviously a countryman. Another quarry for 'a big gun' sounds like rednecks - we dont do that, we also dont kill small things with howitzers thats for ar** holes. Use the right gun, as a countryman you DO KNOW thats no more and no less than correct. With respect, Kes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted August 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 I think there will always be some people that get the hump over this sort of thing. It's not traditional and lets face it, it's going to upset anyone who thinks that all fluffy animals should be cuddled not killed. I think as a shooting community, some of you are perhaps making a mountain out of a molehill (haha, get it?!) I shot and killed a pest species with a calibre that was authorised to do so. I did so safely and humanely. Do you really think that when some mad man has just murdered nearly 100 people with his legally held firearms, that my post about Moles is going to be the end of our sport? Anyone who matters has bigger fish to fry and anyone other than that - well they don't matter! Perhaps you don't all see this as funny but let's face it, it's not the end of the world is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 (edited) Are we seriously making any comparison with Braevik? As I said, if you dont see the title is offensive, you should - it is. Braevik is a world of logic and many lost lives away and should remain so - never in the same breath. We just need to be, whats that unpleasant phrase, - seen to be responsible. Edited August 10, 2011 by Kes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Logic Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Kes, get a grip. Shooting a mole with a 338 is funny to some, but it is not inherently evil or anything. The animal is a pest species, it died (very) humanely. Just what is there to complain about. Any notion of using too much gun is ridiculous - an animal, when instantly killed, really doesn't csre how many pieces it's in. The idea that because an animal is mangled the shooting is abhorrent is a human construct, and one I fail to identify with. Personally, if someone wants to use a challenger tank to shoot rabbits, I don't see an issue. I only see cost issues, and the look of the landscape afterward... I once shot a rabbit with a 308, 178gr amax. The bits of bunny were over a 6-feet or more circle. Needless to say she died instantly. How does this have any bearing with antis? Don't think it does - it wasn't a school pet rabbit or anything!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted August 10, 2011 Report Share Posted August 10, 2011 Mr logic, there is some logic in what you say but one has to be a shooter to see it. As an example, killing a member of the taliban by driving a steam roller over his head would kill him instantly but would offend some people to whom his demise by bullet would have been 'acceptable' I dont accept your 'Human construct argument' as we all, including (and especially) anti's are also human, 'we' dont like 'blown to bits' whether instantly dead or not. Hence my comments. Accepting death is part of shooting is one thing, feeling Ok with 'blowing things to pieces' I suggest goes a little too far for most 'humans'. Its a free country (for the next few weeks) so think what you think - leave me free to think what I think. P Watch should not and does not try to 'convert' people - rather to involve and draw in those of moderate sensibility who can align themselves with shooters. Blowing moles to pieces with a .338 may be a calibre or two too far for those people to see things 'our way'. Hence my comments (again). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Logic Posted August 14, 2011 Report Share Posted August 14, 2011 Find me an anti who is happy with the idea of shooting an animal but not happy with the idea that the animal exploded. Seriously, find one and get them to post. Antis hate death, and they hate guns - those are the two types I find. Neither sect would necessarily be happy with the idea of killing an animal with a pea shooter, but not happy with using a cannon. I accept some people will find splattered guts and brain abhorrent - "we don't respect our quarry". This is a HUMAN point of view though. It's not really an argument - so long as it dies instantly, an animal CANNOT care. Therefore, objecting to the use of a larger round is something created by human morals and ethics, which are human constructs. A wild animal doesn't care about pain and suffering of its quarry, even! To me, there really is no difference to the idea of killing something, and the idea of annihilating it. If I want to eat the animal, then obviously I must care, but I do so because of edible meat yield, not because I care about blood and guts. Really - dead is dead. If you find it a bit icky, then that's your point of view and I totally respect that you are entitled to it. However, I do not accept the argument that because you think it's a bit icky, then ergo it's wrong for anyone else to do it, or talk about it. I find the 'red mist' approach to be sensible and utterly humane unless you want to eat the animal. Ultimately, if I shoot a rabbit with a 50 cal, or a 22LR, there's a lot more margin for error with the 50 cal and being humane. Surely, if you're the rabbit, you'd prefer to go instantly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted August 17, 2011 Report Share Posted August 17, 2011 Ha ha, so one camp historically (not necessarily in this thread) suggest no such thing as overkill, and another camp suggest there is. Rimfire is no good for fox and centrefire is no good for anything smaller! I can't help thinking we have heard it all before!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha Mule Posted August 17, 2011 Report Share Posted August 17, 2011 I occasionally get a bit of work putting up fences, with my mate who wonrks on the next farm over. We don't muck around with mallets and drivers and suchlike, we use 'the big yellow hammer' One tap and most poles are well and truely in. I think the 'hammer' has JCB written on th eside of it. It is most definately OTT, but by George it does the job properly. Using a pellet gun of low power to top Moley might bother me, but using a .338 - not in the slightest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.