5.56/.223 for hunting?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, gunrunner has a point, in that the deer can be killed with the 223. But I have found, over the decades, that (given equally good shot placement) they typically die a bit faster when shot with larger Calibers. That means they can't make it to their sanctuary area, like huge briar patches. And that is a good thing.

And that is why, when hunting pigs, I went from 100 gr bullets in my 260 to 120 gr bullets. The 120's definitely drop them faster. So...it's gonna take a lot of convincing to make me believe that a 55 gr 223 bullet will work as well. Over the years I have shot a number of deer with my 220 Swift and the 55 gr bullet, but I lost an unacceptable percentage of deer, so I quit using it on deer.

Being a reloader, if I just had to shoot deer with my 223, I'd use either the 60 gr Partition, the 65 gr Sierra GK, or the Nosler 64 gr BSB. I wouldn't go hungry but I'd probably be back in the briar patch tracking deer from time to time.
 
As this list pointed out, in colorado we need to use calibers .24 and up to chase big game.

My AR is 7.62x39 when I chase deer in dark timber.
 
Aguila Blanca said:
If it's so unimaginably deadly, why is it that fourteen states think it's too small to hunt animals as light as deer?
Click to expand...

The flaw I see in your logic is the assumption that there is some logic behind the decision to make the .223/5.56 legal or illegal in each individual state.

Maybe in some cases there's logic, but in most cases these decisions are made by some mixture of elected and unelected bureaucrats, many of whom have never hunted anything nor even handled a gun of any kind.

Some of these laws probably originated before there WAS such a thing as a .223/5.56, maybe before there was ANY .22 centerfire.
 
You can hunt here in ok with a 223. I prefer something a lot bigger though, it's kind of Handy though for the grandkids
 
I would think the more states it is legal to use as a hunting cartridge the harder it would be to ever ban them. Just because you can drive a nail with your $5000 TV doesn't mean it should be done. The problem isn't the cartridge, it's the fact that many of us always try to push the limits. My son has killed a couple of deer with his 223 but his shots are very short. I make his use heavy soft bullets also.
 
Here in Florida the deer are not as big so the 223 is adequate, shot placement, as with any round, is key

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
 
I don't know the exact count but I have looked at MOST of the state regulations because I have seen a lot of uninformed people claim that MOST states do not allow the 223/5.56 for hunting. I believe that the count I was at when I stopped, 28 allowing such and only 5 banning it.

with that said, most of said states ban it on grounds that it can't cleanly be used to kill game, however I have seen much more anemic rounds take game in the past. I've seen several deer taken cleanly with the 223 and I've taken them with much less. the 223 is extremely effective when used against predators and varmints as most are smaller than your average deer and many of the states that ban it from being used on medium game will still allow it's use for varminting and predator hunting.
 
Is the 30 Carbine popular?
Click to expand...
Must be. Otherwise I haven't a clue why such a mediocre cartridge was considered. Besides.
A 30 Carbine isn't all that bad as a deer cartridge. Just have to get use too shooting all yer Big Game animals numerous times is all.
 
My older brother's first couple of deer were shot with a .222 in PA and they pretty much didn't run any further than ones that I have seen shot with such cartridges as the .243 although I feel a lot more comfortable with something a bit more powerful than the .243 personally for deer. The 243 is a great cartridge however and very flexible.

The state requirements on caliber/cartridge/power were usually created based on killing power for deer. For example the 218 Bee was not legal in PA, but the .222 was. So, the .223 is just fine if you pay attention to your bullet selection and shots. Now states such as TN have just regulated it to "center fire only" I think to include some of the military calibers and to potentially allow more people to hunt deer. Deer populations have been increasing and the number of hunters decreasing. My problem is making deer hunting or access to lands to hunt deer into a business takes a lot of the joy out of it.
 
ANY center fire rifle cartridge is legal for deer in PA, and has been since I have been hunting. The .17 Remington is legal. I hunt WV every year and a rimfire of .25 caliber or larger is legal for deer. How is that for underpowered?
 
Gentlemen, this thread leaves me feeling very depressed about the future of gun rights in the United States. I thought my initial post spelled out pretty clearly the reason for my question -- and it has nothing to do with whether or not the .223 is adequate for taking deer, it concerns ONLY the fact that the media invariably portray the .223 is immensely deadly, and yet a number of states don't even allow it for hunting "small big game" like deer.

All I wanted was a count of how many states allow the .223 for hunting deer and how many do not. It took nine posts before someone answered the question. That was back on June 26. Even after the question was fully answered, the thread continued on its merry way, arguing about whether or not the round is or isn't "adequate" for deer.

Gentlemen, that was NOT the question! The issue is getting statistics to refute the media lie that the .223 round is somehow incomprehensibly deadly. That's it -- nothing more, nothing less.

I noted in my initial post that I'm not an annual hunter. I have my license, but in my state it's difficult to find a place to hunt, and the tracts on state land are assigned by lottery. And I've never won a lottery. But I am active in my state's 2A advocacy group. I keep reading about the divide between hunters and other recreational shooters. Seeing the direction this thread has taken makes me believe that not only is this divide real, it's actually much worse than I ever imagined. How else could what should have been an easy question to answer, based purely on the laws and regulations of each state, have gone so far astray and gotten so bogged down in arguments of what is or isn't "adequate" for taking deer?

Taylorce1, thanks for the answer to the question. I don't know what to say to the other participants in this discussion -- do you even understand the issue? Do you CARE?
 
While I can't hunt any big game in CO with it, I have hunted coyote and other smaller game. I especially enjoy whacking a coyote with my match grade AR.
 
a good list was posted already so I’m probably a little late but if it helps to elaborate...
here in Oregon its legal to hunt deer, black bear, pronghorn, cougar, feral swine and coyote with .223/556 (note its illegal to hunt deer with any FMJ regardless of caliber). It is not legal to hunt elk, bighorn sheep or mt goat. For hunting we have a mag limit of 5rds for semi auto rifles.

http://www.eregulations.com/oregon/big-game-hunting/

yes, there is a huge divide between hunters and other shooters.
 
Why do we need AR15s.

"Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense". - John Adams

"A free people ought to be armed". - George Washington

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms". - James Madison

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun". - Patrick Henry

"Militias, when properly formed, are in fact, the people themselves and include all men capable of bearing arms. To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them" - Richard Henry Lee,

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops" - Noah Webster

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government" - Thomas Jefferson

“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense”. - Alexander Hamilton

“The ultimate authority resides in the people, and that if the federal government got too powerful and overstepped its authority, then the people would develop plans of resistance and resort to arms.” — James Madison

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it.” — Abraham Lincoln

“If you have given up your militia, and Congress shall refuse to arm them, you have lost everything. Your existence will be precarious, because you depend on others, whose interests are not affected by your infelicity." — Patrick Henry

“A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” — George Washington

You will notice that hunting isn't mentioned, nor is the phrase "Suitable for sporting use".
 
Gunplummer said:
and no, I do not care.
Click to expand...
And that's the crux of the problem. The hunters don't care if the gun grabbers go after the handgunners, the target shooters, and the self defense carriers. The target shooters don't care if the gun grabbers go after the practical shooting competitors, the self defense carriers, and the hunters. And so on.

They're all "guns," and the anti-gun movement won't be satisfied until they have eventually taken away ALL our guns. Frankly, shame on you for not caring. Maybe there's something wrong with me, but when the media conspires to demonize a cartridge that 14 states don't even allow to be used for hunting deer as a "high powered" cartridge only suitable for killing humans, I think we all need to care. I think we all need to call them out on the lie.

[/rant]
 
what’s ironc about hunters that don’t care about the Second Amendment rights is that virtually most all hunting rifles are military design.
 
Aguila

It seems to me many anti-gun people, and some that are still deciding, are mostly concerned or wondering, about capacity and available firing rate, not caliber. They don't see why the traditional bolt actions are not adequate for hunting. They are not enamored with the modular design or any other feature of an AR style, and it's not what Dad had. They see what an AR style can do from news accounts. It doesn't help that few bolts have been used for attacks recently, not that anything should be.

I don't think a caliber discussion with them would help. They don't hunt and don't particularly care if anyone does, especially if it's with something that might cause them grief. That's the crux of the problem. IMHO
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top