Jump to content

Very long shot .


Ultrastu
 Share

Recommended Posts

Next time anyone tries to make u feel guilty about  eating meat show them this picture .

Its in the south of Spain.and its where most your veg comes from. 

A country under plastic 

The environmental impact is massive .

IMG_20190714_182054.jpg

Shocking isnt it .? 

This is one of a few similar areas ..Imagine the explotation of migrant workers picking in the sun .

So we can eat strawberrys year round. 

Edited by Ultrastu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Having had a first nation step father we lived mostly by fishing and some hunting, this was a good 6-7 years of my child hood life living in this manner, killing is grim but so is hunger, we kill clean as we can because we are emotive creatures, nature is brutal we choose to be mainly less so, for me its a good shot and good eating, only in a society of ease do people start to debate the nature of such things.

Edited by Chaz25
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stu,

Well done with the shot.

Don't worry about the naysayers, as it has been raised before the average shotgun cartridge to kill ration in the UK is somewhere around 5:1, the top amateurs 10% manage 2:1 and the top professionsals 1.2:1.

Of the birds shot, some 20% are injured and not killed outright but this appears to be conveniently ignored by some.

Edited by Stonepark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stonepark said:

Don't worry about the naysayers, as it has been raised before the average shotgun cartridge to kill ration in the UK is somewhere around 5:1, the top amateurs 10% manage 2:1 and the top professionsals 1.2:1.

You cannot justify your own ethical failings by referencing other people's bad actions.

That is like saying don’t worry about me murdering a few of my neighbours - Pol Pot was far worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, wobbly bob 2 said:

That is like saying don’t worry about me murdering a few of my neighbours - Pol Pot was far worse

No its not! 

It's like saying 'Don't be doing those long shots, you might wound the animal' 

Even though you've done exactly that yourself 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chaz25 said:

Having had a first nation step father we lived mostly by fishing and some hunting, this was a good 6-7 years of my child hood life living in this manner, killing is grim but so is hunger, we kill clean as we can because we are emotive creatures, nature is brutal we choose to be mainly less so, for me its a good shot and good eating, only in a society of ease do people start to debate the nature of such things.

I love this post .its so accurate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, wobbly bob 2 said:

You cannot justify your own ethical failings by referencing other people's bad actions.

That is like saying don’t worry about me murdering a few of my neighbours - Pol Pot was far worse.

Bob,

All shooting is a combination of skill of the shooter and environment mixed with chance as we cannot measure and control everything but, which we seek to minimise any variablity and each person has their own boundary as to what is acceptable and not acceptable. 

I am merely pointing out that the shot Stu undertook was less of a risk than the general standard of shotgun shooting accepted across the board i.e. it is 50/50 that any bird is hit with a shotgun (which also has a much higher risk of injury rather than a clean miss such as with a pellet or bullet)

Stu had the advantage in that he was repeating a shot which he had previously practiced which is the key to accuracy and he was confident of hitting the target. In the above case the pellet was still within the lethal zone (given the power level of the pellet/slug) and therefore did it's job.

Like Stu, I also shoot long range pellet/bullet guns and  have had quite a few debates over the level of reliability/repeatability of any one shot.

Given the equipment (including  a wind speed monitor), chance/variability, I also according to traditional theory push the range of what I shoot, sub 12 .25 to 40 yards, sub 12 .22 to 50 yards, 22lr subsonic to 180yds, 223 to 600 yds, 308 800 to1000 yds but have yet to have any shot where I would question the fact I took it in the first place.

In many cases this means operating outside the comfort zone of a lot of shooters (a lot of whom are point and shoot i.e. operating under Mean Point Blank Range), but I do not and I am happy operating with drops of 39 inches in 22lr, 18ft with 308 etc but have yet to have any shot where I would question the fact I took it in the first place as tehrer is a clear choice between 'ckallenging' and 'fluky'.

Personally, I do not (and neither do I believe does Stu) take shots which rely on chance or fluke to kill but try to use what skill I have to ensure a clean shot.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Stonepark said:

Bob,

All shooting is a combination of skill of the shooter and environment mixed with chance as we cannot measure and control everything but, which we seek to minimise any variablity and each person has their own boundary as to what is acceptable and not acceptable. 

I am merely pointing out that the shot Stu undertook was less of a risk than the general standard of shotgun shooting accepted across the board i.e. it is 50/50 that any bird is hit with a shotgun (which also has a much higher risk of injury rather than a clean miss such as with a pellet or bullet)

Stu had the advantage in that he was repeating a shot which he had previously practiced which is the key to accuracy and he was confident of hitting the target. In the above case the pellet was still within the lethal zone (given the power level of the pellet/slug) and therefore did it's job.

Like Stu, I also shoot long range pellet/bullet guns and  have had quite a few debates over the level of reliability/repeatability of any one shot.

Given the equipment (including  a wind speed monitor), chance/variability, I also according to traditional theory push the range of what I shoot, sub 12 .25 to 40 yards, sub 12 .22 to 50 yards, 22lr subsonic to 180yds, 223 to 600 yds, 308 800 to1000 yds but have yet to have any shot where I would question the fact I took it in the first place.

In many cases this means operating outside the comfort zone of a lot of shooters (a lot of whom are point and shoot i.e. operating under Mean Point Blank Range), but I do not and I am happy operating with drops of 39 inches in 22lr, 18ft with 308 etc but have yet to have any shot where I would question the fact I took it in the first place as tehrer is a clear choice between 'ckallenging' and 'fluky'.

Personally, I do not (and neither do I believe does Stu) take shots which rely on chance or fluke to kill but try to use what skill I have to ensure a clean shot.

 

 

A well worded post by someone who understands long range shooting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Rewulf said:

No its not! 

It's like saying 'Don't be doing those long shots, you might wound the animal' 

Even though you've done exactly that yourself 😂

I never said I took long shots, or wounded. I said it didn’t die as quickly as I would have liked. Sometimes they move just as you squeeze. Nothing ever goes completely to plan does it?

But I plan for 100% not 50%. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Stonepark said:

Personally, I do not (and neither do I believe does Stu) take shots which rely on chance or fluke to kill but try to use what skill I have to ensure a clean shot.

Stonepark,

It’s nice to see an intelligent post, and a coherent argument put well, and I agree with much of what you say, but if you wish to test your long range skills why not use card ?

Obviously there is an element of skill, calculation, and equipment, but taking the shot at 50/50 is heavily relying on chance, and in today’s climate potting at live quarry on that basis is simply not on.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, wobbly bob 2 said:

I never said I took long shots, or wounded. I said it didn’t die as quickly as I would have liked. Sometimes they move just as you squeeze. Nothing ever goes completely to plan does it?

But I plan for 100% not 50%. 
 

I would argue we all hope for 100%. Planning for 100% isn't practical, as you have pointed out in your previous sentence. From what I have read on this thread I believe Stu had planned to be acceptably (his criteria) close to 100%  with the level of preparation he made and hoped for 100%- much like the vast majority of us shooting live quarry within our self imposed limits for their skill/ equipment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You knew before you pulled the trigger that at best you had a 50/50 chance of making a shot, you totally fluffed the wind, messing up the shot. I think your 50/50 estimate was overestimating your chances personally but even so you still squeezed the trigger. That in my opinion was an irresponsible decision. 

You then preface your post with "I'm not posting this to brag." That's bull. Of course you are, you are trying to feed your ego. Unfortunately it isn't a shot worth bragging about. You misread the wind, miss calculated how much to compensate, missed your target and the result was that randomly the pellet struck the rabbit in an ultimately fatal place. "Lucky" for you. 

Well done. 

Also well done for taking a photo and posting it on a social media site. 

This thread is nothing but you overestimating your level of skill and capabilities and subsequently making a series of very poorly thought out decisions. You try to justify it, other people try to justify your actions.

You can't.

 

Edited by ClemFandango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ClemFandango said:

You knew before you pulled the trigger that at best you had a 50/50 chance of making a shot, you totally fluffed the wind, messing up the shot. I think your 50/50 estimate was overestimating your chances personally but even so you still squeezed the trigger. That in my opinion was an irresponsible decision. 

You then preface your post with "I'm not posting this to brag." That's bull. Of course you are, you are trying to feed your ego. Unfortunately it isn't a shot worth bragging about. You misread the wind, miss calculated how much to compensate, missed your target and the result was that randomly the pellet struck the rabbit in an ultimately fatal place. "Lucky" for you. 

Well done. 

Also well done for taking a photo and posting it on a social media site. 

This thread is nothing but you overestimating your level of skill and capabilities and subsequently making a series of very poorly thought out decisions. You try to justify it, other people try to justify your actions.

You can't.

 

^^^^^^

And something that hasn't been pointed out yet,,,, 

If you draw a straight line between the 'aim point' [pink dot] and the (lucky) point of impact [yellow dot], if the wind had eased slightly the point of impact could easily have been the mouth/nose area. So a very poor choice of shot, and topic.

How anyone can back up and support this I can't really understand. There are so many flaws, as has been pointed out by a few, and how international environmental issues have been included in the OP's 'arguments' beggars belief !!!

In my opinion this is just a self ingratiating egotistical 'aren't I good' [NO!!!] thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People trying to emulate military sniper’s long range kills should stick to gongs or paper. If the military boys wound their target it doesn’t matter, in fact it is an advantage as more enemy are needed to tend the wounded. There is no justification for trying it on animals of any make. OP is an idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is a 45 yd shot on a rabbit with a sub 12 .177 pcp an idiotic shot ? 

No ? 

Well 20 yrs ago with a underleaver springer you would have been called an idiot .as they would have said you cant take shots beyond 30 yds .

20 years before that and some one taking a 30 yd shot would have been equally called an idiot. As old bsa cadets would have only been accurate /powerful enough to around 15 / 20 yds. What your  spectacularly failing to grasp is the advancements in airgun technology and the consequent ability of them to go beyond that which we previously thought possible .

Go get your self a high power fx .see for your self .and then come back to me with more credibility behind your opinions.

Over and out .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ultrastu said:

Is a 45 yd shot on a rabbit with a sub 12 .177 pcp an idiotic shot ? 

No ? 

Well 20 yrs ago with a underleaver springer you would have been called an idiot .as they would have said you cant take shots beyond 30 yds .

20 years before that and some one taking a 30 yd shot would have been equally called an idiot. As old bsa cadets would have only been accurate /powerful enough to around 15 / 20 yds. What your  spectacularly failing to grasp is the advancements in airgun technology and the consequent ability of them to go beyond that which we previously thought possible .

Go get your self a high power fx .see for your self .and then come back to me with more credibility behind your opinions.

Over and out .

Don't try to make yourself out to be some sort of pioneering visionary. 

You overestimate yourself and your equipment and as a result take irresponsible shots you even admit that you know before you even squeeze the trigger you have a low chance of making a humane kill. 

The irony of you posting about credibility is amazing. 

You should be ashamed. 

Over and out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Ultrastu said:

Is a 45 yd shot on a rabbit with a sub 12 .177 pcp an idiotic shot ? 

No ? 

Well 20 yrs ago with a underleaver springer you would have been called an idiot .as they would have said you cant take shots beyond 30 yds .

20 years before that and some one taking a 30 yd shot would have been equally called an idiot. As old bsa cadets would have only been accurate /powerful enough to around 15 / 20 yds. What your  spectacularly failing to grasp is the advancements in airgun technology and the consequent ability of them to go beyond that which we previously thought possible .

Go get your self a high power fx .see for your self .and then come back to me with more credibility behind your opinions.

Over and out .

You seriously are in a world of your own,,,, take a breath and take a serious look at yourself,,,, and your abilities 😏

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JKD said:

You seriously are in a world of your own,,,, take a breath and take a serious look at yourself,,,, and your abilities 😏

NO 

Im in a world of airguns.(and not alone - far from it, its very well populated im pleased to say ) 

And im pioneering  nothing .im only following what others have done before me .trying to catch up .

There will always be people who try to drag others back down their own  level .its based in fear .

I

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...