using scope as observation tool hunting

Status
Not open for further replies.
What I am doing is responding to a question asked earlier.
Click to expand...
I realize that. I just asked you a couple more questions.

You justified pointing a loaded rifle at someone by equating them with the targets you were presented during police operations. I asked for clarification to determine if you really believe a potentially hostile target encountered in a drug raid is really the same as a hunter who may be trespassing.

You justified pointing a loaded rifle at someone by equating that action with sweeping yourself with a holstered carry gun. I asked for clarification to determine if you really believe that pointing a loaded rifle at someone was really the same as sweeping yourself with a holstered carry gun.

I see you neglected to respond to either one.
What people committing crimes want is really the least of my worries.
Click to expand...
I don't know your location, but in some areas, pointing a loaded gun at someone is a crime. That would put you in exactly the same category as the trespasser.
I can with a very high degree of certainty eliminate beyond any reasonable probability that a target is a human using the naked eye. If the target demonstrates a high probability to disappear quickly, I usually make final identification of it with the scope. I have enough confidence in my ability to identity with the naked eye and with my equipment that I see the risk of harming a trespasser as near impossible.
Click to expand...
I'm sure you believe that is true. However, people are shot by accident while hunting every year, many even after they have been observed through a scope.

The safety rules are there for all of us, not just other people. Not just for those who aren't trained as well as we are. Not just for those who aren't as experienced or aren't as confident of their own capabilities as we are.

It's precisely when we start thinking that we're too well trained, too smart, to experienced, to have to follow the rules--when we begin to be so confident in our own abilities that we don't need to adhere to the safety rules that tragedies happen. And your bluster notwithstanding, shooting someone for trespassing would be a tragedy.
 
John, keep in mind that I have never mis-identified a human being and looked at them in a scope in a hunting situation. The point I am making is that I am confident enough when hunting on private land to go straight to scope most of the time. The worst I have mis identified a moving target with the naked eye was when I mis identified a fox as a Coyotee. Scope revealed the mistake.
When I look at a buck, I want to be looking at him with mill dots.
 
Are yall talking about using the scope as a monoculour and scanning for targets?
I totally disagree with that. I don't think that one must go to binos before rifle scope in most situations.
 
Still hunting is not lost, it's just misunderstood. Last two bucks I shot stillhunting were less than 30 yards away when I pulled the trigger. I assure you jimbob, I did not need to use binos to spot them. Actually, at that distance from a mature buck, the movement made by lowering my gun and raising a pair of binos, then lowering the binos outta the way while raising the gun again, more'n likely would made for a lost opportunity.
Click to expand...

If you had used the binos and more patience in scanning with them, you may have seen them long before they were close enough that you could not lower the binos and raise the gun .......
 
Anyone using a scope for a optical aid to locate game is stupid, irresponsible and dangerous. Scopes are not intended for that purpose, that is what binos are for.

I was probably in my teens when my uncle took a man's rifle from him, unloaded it and smashed the scope and gun against a disc harrow on a tractor because the guy pulled it out to look at a deer running across a field between him and some standers. The guy was PO'd but what are you going to do with 250lbs of raging 6'4" Marine that served 2 tours in Nam.
 
Originally posted by jimbob86:

If you had used the binos and more patience in scanning with them, you may have seen them long before they were close enough that you could not lower the binos and raise the gun .......
Click to expand...

I appreciate you trying to make me a better hunter Jimbo, but without knowing the terrain I hunt and the way I hunt I don't think you have a clue. Using iron sighted handguns with a range of 80 yards or less in terrain where visibility is less than 50 yards, a pair of binos around my neck is more of a burden than an asset. Sometimes after hunting deer for 50 years, one gets set in their ways and just enjoys doing it their way and not how someone else does it in a totally different scenario. But then this is not the subject of the thread and altho we do not agree about whether or not I should hunt your way instead of mine, we do agree that using your scope as a means of scanning a horizon for game is not practical or safe.
 
I will not observe a human through a rifle scope. I've had it done to me and I did not like it. In that instance, I found out later that the hunter scoping me was a trespasser. Wish I'd have know that at the time. I'd have called the landowner.

As for using the rifle scope to observe wildlife, I often use it at max power to check out antlers, if I can't get a good enough look with the binocs. And when hunting narrow lanes in thick cover, quite often if you take the time to have a look with the binocs, you'll not have time for a shot. Doing that (binocs first) cost me a shot at the biggest buck of my entire life. I had known that buck was in that end of the woods, and I'd been waiting for a shot at that monster for 2 years. And there he was...in my view through the binocs...and then he was gone before I could get the rifle up.
 
If you are talking about using a scope to scan for game such as sitting in a stand or still hunting through the woods, then I would say its a bad idea. If you are using the scope to take a closer look at a deer to see if it meets a point restriction rule, I don't see a problem. I don't see a scope as an "Identification" tool, but for more detailed inspection I have no problems with it. Every situation is different, the key is in knowing YOUR situation and applying a little common sense and caution to the mix.
 
Heh. Panfisher has the thread back on track. The deal is about the advisability of scanning countryside with one's scope instead of binoculars.

Aside from any inherent safety issues--such as Diddly Dumbbutt having his finger on the trigger--there are some folks who if they see a rifle pointed at them, will at least sling a warning shot toward the "surveyor". Bummer.

Sitting and scanning isn't the same thing as focussing on a known brief-instant trail crossing, as with reynolds357's example.

And if nothing else, scanning with binoculars allows you to remain out of sight of critters, with less betraying motion. Binoculars are lighter, allowing you to scan for longer periods. All that little stuff...
 
As with so many rules of life, there are Generalities that do not universally hold true. The "don not universally hold true" are the very definition of Exceptions That Prove the Rule.

For example, I often see deer that I will more accurately identify through my scope... not dangerous. Been discussed.

I will also scan a woodchuck field with my scope. No reason not to, I can see that there's no people out there, I just can't necessarily tell if there's a little bitty woodchuck head sticking out of a hole.... not dangerous and easier and cheaper than trying to scan with a spotting scope.

"Hey, is that a guy over there?", don't look with your scope, that's dangerous.
 
In my not so humble opinion, I feel using my scope to glass is limited to spotting treed squirrels and doing a scan of a deer before the shot...

Much more than that and I fall into the camp that you never point a gun at the unknown target and you know what lies beyond....

Brian put it well enuff and we are beginning to beat a dead horse while going in circles as we preach to our respective choirs....

So I think it will be okay to close this up now...

Thanks for everyone keeping, pretty much, cool heads.... We will do it again some day soon I am sure...

Brent
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top