The psychology of the bully
in [Slackware]
|
Prev: where is zmodem?
Next: props to the slack developers
From: Floyd L. Davidson on 15 May 2007 07:15 Two Ravens <two-ravens(a)operamail.com> wrote: >rm(a)biteme.org wrote: > >> The 7mm and 6.5 are far more powerful than a .22. �The .600 Nitro is >> an elephant gun. >> >> What on earth are you talking about? > >Using smaller than expected calibre rifles to shoots dangerous big game. > >The 0�600 Nitro Express was, as you point out, designed as "an elephant >gun", that does not preclude those who can, using a smaller calibre to >shoot either elephants or other dangerous animals that may be bigger than >the person shooting them. A couple odd facts: 1) More elephants have been killed with a .303 caliber than anything else. 2) More caribou have been killed with a .303 caliber than anything else. -- Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd(a)apaflo.com
From: Two Ravens on 15 May 2007 08:51 rm(a)biteme.org wrote: > But all of these guns are much, much, more powerful than a .22. > That depends on what you are referring to as a '.22' as it includes not only the rimfire cartridges but all the centrefire so-called .22's as well the 220 swift is still a '.22' as are the 222's, if you mean .22 rimfire then say so, as there are several varieties of that alone. The fact remains as Floyd has pointed out, that an awful lot of meat gets taken with former military calibres because there are a lot of rifles in those calibres about, .303 and 7 x 57mm being quite common and even those cartridges are known by a number of different nomenclatures .275 Rigby for example. Bullet placement and deformation within the wound channel are the two most significant factors in choosing a suitable calibre for any given quarry. -- Two Ravens "...hit the squirrel..."
From: Two Ravens on 15 May 2007 09:54 Two Ravens wrote: > rm(a)biteme.org wrote: > >> But all of these guns are much, much, more powerful than a .22. >> > That depends on what you are referring to as a '.22' as it includes not > only the rimfire cartridges but all the centrefire so-called .22's as > well the 220 swift is still a '.22' as are the 222's, if you mean .22 > rimfire then say so, as there are several varieties of that alone. > You may find these two volumes useful, I have. I know that I have Volume 1, as at the moment most of my books are packed away I can't be sure if I still have Volume 2. http://www.eabco.com/Ackley01.htm -- Two Ravens "...hit the squirrel..."
From: notbob on 15 May 2007 10:21 On 2007-05-15, Two Ravens <two-ravens(a)operamail.com> wrote: > Bullet placement and deformation within the wound channel are the two most > significant factors in choosing a suitable calibre for any given quarry. I don't see any problem with using a .22 rimfire to kill a polar bear. Average weight of a polar bear is about 900lbs and the avg wt of a Hereford steer is a bit less, about 750lbs. A field butcher, a butcher who will come to your ranch and kill and butcher a steer in the field, typically uses a .22 rimfire to dispatch the steer. You put the little 40 grain bullet right in the brain pan and either the steer or the bear are going to drop like a sack of potatoes. Well, in truth, there may be one slight problem with the polar bear. It's not likely to stand there like a dumb cow chewing its cud while you're taking time to place that shot just so from about three feet away. nb
From: notbob on 15 May 2007 10:35
On 2007-05-15, Floyd L. Davidson <floyd(a)apaflo.com> wrote: > I know of polar bears killed with a .218 Bee, and virtually > every 22 caliber available (including 22LR rimfire). The lowly .22 rimfire is more than capable of killing a whole range of animals, including man. It's perfect for seals. Forty grains of lead to the brain pan does wonders for alleviating that pesky survival instinct. No meat or pelt damage, too. Hell, even seals use them. Navy SEALS use suppressed .22's for stealthy guard disposal. nb |