Indiana deer season, 40 S&W handgun?

S

Shadow9mm

New member
Was going through our hunting guide, archery is open and firearms is fast approaching. Handgun is minimum 4in barrel, however they have allowed 40S&W. I really don't like the idea of someone deer hunting with a Glock 23.... I know there are good shots who can do it ethically, but the majority probably can't. I shot 40 and 9 a lot in the 22 and 17 full sized guns and would not be comfortable past 25yds for a clean shot with combat sights.

https://www.in.gov/dnr/fish-and-wildlife/hunting-and-trapping/hunting-trapping-guide/

Page 28.
 
Last edited:
A fine game animal like a deer deserves a better end than being shot with a .40 S&W when there are SO many other handgun cartridges that would be more effective.
 
With the same shot placement a 180 gr bullet from a 40 S&W is going to be more deadly than an arrow fired by an archer. The effective range is about the same.

As Dirty Harry said, "A mans got to know his limitations." If someone is good enough then I have no problem with it. If they aren't good enough then I have a problem with it.
 
True, but a compound bow has a lot longer sight radius than a 4in handgun. And a traditional bow aimed with the front and rear hand does as well.
 
Stephen Camp shot deer with a 9mm Browning HiPower. A .40 should have no problem. Plus, these days, it wouldn’t be too unusual to see a red dot sight on that .40.
With the right ammo, and handled like. .357, should be quite doable.
 
Last edited:
A sharp, quality broadhead, properly placed is going to do more damage than a .40 in my opinion. I would call it marginal out of a carbine but I wouldn't want to use it from a handgun unless I had to.
 
bullets & broadheads

A .40 S&W wound channel and a broadhead wound certainly would look different, as bullets and broadheads wound in different fashion. Arrows kill strictly via penetration and hemorrhage. While bullets do penetrate and cause blood loss, there is actual destruction of tissue with certain calibers due to velocity and bullet expansion. Some very large critters (elk as example) are routinely taken by archers and the lethality of a well placed broadhead cannot be dismissed. Arguing that the .40 might make an elk cartridge too would be foolish. Comparing bullet wounds to broadhead wounds is just not a useful comparison. But both can certainly be lethal.

I think taking a deer with a 9mm handgun is silly and such an act should be labeled a stunt. Is the .40 enough? There are some hot .40 loads, rivaling and even exceeding watered down 10mm Auto loads. Given the right load yielding sufficient penetration, and an ethical and competent hunter, the .40 might just be enough. Shots should be under 50yds and half that would be better at a broadside animal. In fact, a good comparison would be to hunt like a archer!
 
Respect the animal. I’m a decent shot and I used to be really good. .45 Ruger Only or .44 Magnum for me. You will never wonder if it’s enough. (I live in the north and 200 pound bucks are not particularly unusual.)

What I have learned over the years is that no matter how good I was at the range, in the woods, things rarely go as planned. Twigs, branches, wierd stuff… there is nothing like that sick feeling when your shot doesn’t go where you planned and you’re tracking a wounded animal. You’re gonna miss, so at least miss with something powerful.

I’ve sat in tree stands and seen does at 8 feet. A .22 would do it. But what if it’s 35 yards?

Archery is different. They use the best gear they can with the limits of their sport. Unless you want to be one of those guys jumping out of trees with a kabar knife…

For every Hunter that can use a .40, there will be at least 10 knuckleheads wounding and not recovering what they shot.
 
"Personal" hunting code of ethics

With the same shot placement a 180 gr bullet from a 40 S&W is going to be more deadly than an arrow fired by an archer. The effective range is about the same.
Click to expand...

We all have our own "Personal hunting "Code of Ethics"; the foundation should be to adhere to all state hunting laws .Then there are folks who feel that any and all hunting is unethical ..... :)

The .40 is legal, in your state and mine. If the hunter is ethical than I'm fine with this. Personally, a .40-S&W would be way down on my list of hunting ammo. ...... :)

Be Safe !!!
 
Last edited:
I’ve gotten many, many deer with a handgun. I’ve used mostly .357mag, 44mag, a few with a TC 30-30, and a few with a TC 7tcu. I own a couple of 40’s and in my opinion it’s a very poor choice to select this cartridge for deer hunting. If it’s legal it’s the hunter’s choice. In my opinion it borders on unethical. I have gotten around a hundred deer with the bow over the last sixty years of bow hunting, and using a handgun requires about the same hunting skills as using a handgun. Anyone who hunts deer with a 9mm is pulling off a stunt in my opinion. I can kill deer with a .22lr if I desired, but it’s simply not a good ethical thing to do.
 
I killed a couple deer with a 5" 9mm loaded with 158gr wnfp cast bullets at 1000 fps. Yes this was a very warm load and didn't reliably cycle but that's another story. Both does were about 100lbs each (field dressed) and both shots were complete passthroughs. Both deer died inside of 100 yards and I heard them crash within seconds.

Growing up I use to hunt a cedar thicket ony grandpa's farm with his 1911, .45 ACP. I used Hornaday xtp 230gr +P here and took 3 does with that. All bullets were recovered in the hide or ribs on the opposite side.

Now I'm not saying any of these combinations would be my 1st choice but if I had a whitetail broadside within 20 yards and a .40 S&W with a suitable loading in my hands I would be 100% confident that I would cleanly harvest that deer with a double lung shot.

Burn me if you will but I would rather see someone using a .40 cal 180gr or 200gr projectile within 25ish yards then someone using a 22 hornet or even a .223 at 100 yards. Both are legal and yes I've seen people use a 22 Hornet for deer here in KY. It's been my experience that most people who choose to take a handgun in the field over a long gun are usually well practiced with said handgun. The same defiantly isn't true for all the yahoo's I've came across using their AR platform 5.56/.223 in the woods. Like I said before, none of the above would be my 1st choice but ALL of the above are capable of a clean kill if used within the firearm's and, more so, the users capabilities.
 
I once killed a drunk Ruffed Grouse with a shovel that landed at my feet while in the garden , I still carry my shotgun when I want to kill them on purpose.
 
If the 9mm +P is a stunt, and the .357 somehow makes minimum, then I do not see how the .40 somehow doesn't. No one doubts the 10mm for deer, yet many of its factory loads are at .40 S&W levels.

We are REALLY splitting hairs here.

Killed one with a Nine once (Hi-Power) but that was once and not really on purpose. Hunted with my issued Glock 19 once, but I was only looking for a doe, and it was all I had with me at the time. Both times involved 124gr +P ammo. These are related anecdotes, not an endorsement of the 9mm for deer hunting.
 
To some extent it may also depend where you hunt.

We hunt in the Umatilla National Forest in the southeastern corner of WA close to the Oregon border. There are two recognized wolf packs in the Wenaha Wilderness area, and a recent article was noting the failure of the elk herd to recover due to over-predation since the hunting of cougars with dogs and the Spring bear hunts were outlawed.

One of my hunting partners was climbing out of the Wenaha and was followed by at least 3 wolves...they remained at least 50 yards behind him, but followed him for more than an hour.

Some states have issues that other states do not have.

Whatever handgun you choose to carry, remember it may not only be used for deer.
 
Late to the thread but I have to comment on this.

With the same shot placement a 180 gr bullet from a 40 S&W is going to be more deadly than an arrow fired by an archer.
Click to expand...

This is a load of crap. There is no dead++. There is no more dead than dead, period. The bullet may be more immediately effective, but it is NOT "more deadly".

Bullets and arrows work differently. But the end result is identical, dead is dead, the only difference is in what way and how fast you get there.
 
I don't see anyone mentioning their "wounded deer shot and deer got away" with a .40 or 9mm. I for one will not use those calibers. To me, it's unethical. I used a .357 mag for dear hunting one year and got such a guilty conscience that the following year I switched to a .44 mag handgun. I never did get a shot with either one, thank You.
 
The intended purpose for both 40s is 2 legged critters. The S&W persuasion does not offer bullets intended for game. My minimum for deer is a 41 Mag, 210JSP @ 1200+.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top