5.56/.223 for hunting?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have to agree the AR style is a poor argument to call it a hunting rifle or more covertly "Modern Sporting Rifle". The few that do hunt deer with them are really a minority overall. The AR was originally designed for military use and wasn’t modified for civilian use until well after it was adopted by the US military.

I’m not against the rifle in fact I fully support the right to own one, I’m just saying its a moot argument to call it a hunting rifle.
 
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.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I don't understand why you're "very depressed" about the future of gun rights in the US based on this thread. Threads wander and you got your answer in post #9. Or would you have rather gotten 50 posts from people in 50 states saying what is legal in their state?

Our President calls "assault rifles" (read modern semi-automatic rifles) as instruments of war. The calibers chosen for war are deadly. I'm afraid that I don't understand why the media would portray the 223/5.56 as "incomphensively deadly" since it actually is one of the lower powered center fire rifle cartridges/calibers in common use today. It is pretty easy walking around a night club shooting people lying on the floor at close range and killing them. One needs to reflect on our own likely reaction in such a situation.

Thanks for the reminder by one of the posters that "any centerfire" is legal for hunting deer in PA now. It was not like that when I lived there.
 
I have to agree the AR style is a poor argument to call it a hunting rifle or more covertly "Modern Sporting Rifle". The few that do hunt deer with them are really a minority overall. The AR was originally designed for military use and wasn’t modified for civilian use until well after it was adopted by the US military.


I think the AR15 is one of the most versatile rifles ever designed. There is a reason that 25% of all rifles sold is an AR type. It is extremely reliable, accurate, and can be built or repaired easily by the shade tree gunsmith. It can be had in a variety of calibers, some capable of taking the largest game in North America. While those who hunt deer with it maybe be a minority, it is the rifle of choice for hog hunters. It is also an excellent choice for youth hunters. Colt began selling the AR15 to the general public in 1963. The M16A1 officially replaced the M14 in 1969.

Almost every rifle in existence can trace it's design roots back to a rifle that was designed for the military. The 2nd Amendment isn't about hunting and if we let the gun haters frame it that way, we will eventually lose everything, but single shots.
 
gunrunner1

I think in reality, you have given the best reasons. Many of the general public may not give those reasons their due value.

Perhaps there are shooting organizations for AR styles that I am not aware of. If there were greater participation in AR shooting, with skills structured for those ( similar to CAS events) which would increase the sporting aspect....then maybe support would not fall primarily to hunting.

The most reasonable hunting senario I think of, might be wild pigs from the ground, where you might be charged by more than one. And I don't know if that happens.

I am thinking in terms of better acceptance by those who are not shooters, ie general public.
 
Last edited:
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.
Click to expand...

Well, Sir, the M16 came out in 1964.

During the Vietnamese War, somewhere between 800K and 3.1 million enemy warriors were killed between 1964 and 1973.

How many were attributed to the 5.56, is anyone's guess. I know they do kill things including people.

Therefore, I would say they are deadly.

In looking at statics of the American Civil War, I would say that muzzle loaders are just as deadly.

Good luck with the media. Somehow, I don't think they care.

The one thing that frosts my cookies is how everyone ignores the fact that more people die from alcohol related incidents than firearms.
 
When someone talks about how powerful the .223/5.56, its pretty simple to set out a .30-06, a .308, a 7.62x39, a .45 ACP, a 12 ga, and a .223, of course then you run the risk of the clueless media types jumping all over how overpowered American weapons and ammunition is, simply it is a no-win situation. Now if they really want to do a little research and find some videos showing how powerful and deadly the .223/5.56 is compared to those others, I doubt it would be difficult to find a video of someone shooting a melon with an old AP .30-06 round, then shooting it with a hot frangible like Zombie ammo or something that would really splatter it all over the place.
 
Aguila Blanca, you are correct. There is something wrong with you. I happen to hunt with a semi-auto sometimes. That has nothing to do with anything. Take a good look at gunrunner1's post. That is what semi-autos are all about. If you can't use that in your arguments, you are in over your head. The hunting stance is just stupid. You don't "Need" a semi-auto to hunt. There is no using that excuse with people that don't hunt.
 
^^^

This thread, and my question, has nothing to do with semi-automatic vs. bolt action vs. [whatever]. This is about the media claims that the .223 cartridge is a super-lethal round that's suitable only for killing humans -- yet multiple states don't even allow it for hunting deer.

All I wanted and all I asked for was information to refute the media claim.

Entiende?
 
This is about the media claims that the .223 cartridge is a super-lethal round that's suitable only for killing humans -- yet multiple states don't even allow it for hunting deer.
Click to expand...
Aguila, think carefully before you try to use that argument... its really a moot point. About as moot as saying the AR15 is a modern "sporting rifle" so we should be able to keep them, cause hunting...

The argument is focusing on the gun not the problem... the antis don’t care about hunting, the 223 is a super-lethal round and the AR15 is super efficient at dispensing them. If I were you I would counter the point that the AR15 is not the most popular weapon used in mass shootings and that prohibition would only lead to a black market, for criminals. I would show that the AR15 is a safe option for home and self defense in a ever changing world. Any of these mass shooters could be using a mini 14, lever gun, sniper rifle but we know one thing if the AR15 is banned that’s the weapon we wont have to defend ourselves against someone who will seek one out illegally, like the current events in Europe. After defending the rifle in that manner, I would then argue why the antis don’t do anything to stop straw purchases or create stiffer penalties for keeping violent offenders off the streets. etc. etc.

forgive me for butting in, I don’t really know everything your preparing for but I know that the AR15 isn’t the most popular rifle in America because its ineffective at something, including deer hunting.
 
Some very good points made here. I don't remember the media ever once mentioning the .223 caliber as being a deadly round. They mostly focus on the weapon, not the caliber. No one is calling for a ban on .223 caliber weapons. It just happens that most AR 15 style rifles are .223/5.56.

Their argument is that you don't need a 30 round magazine full of ammo to hunt deer. But they go further and say no one needs a 30 round mag full of ammo for home defense or self defense.

The anti's are not understanding the major premise of the 2nd amendment. To allow the people freedom from oppression by a tyrannical government, which the British Monarchy was at the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top