[andy]

(the entire POINT of handgun hunting) so they have to use some abortion of a single shot "hand rifle", or some monster revolver that nobody'd ever actually CARRY.

 

[TODD 3465]

If they CARRY it hunting then they CARRY it dip-dunk. BFD, if it ain't their CCW.

 

[andy]

they dont have the hunting, ammo-making and marksmanship skills to make a realistic sidearm suffice, ya see. They also dont have the self discipline necessary to turn down shots that they know that they can't handle. So they have to sell out the idea of using a true sidearm to accomplish what lesser men need a longarm to accomplish.

 

[Garand]

Gunkid/erika, just because you lack those skills, doesn't mean that everyone else does.

 

[Aslan]

Actually, the entire point of handgun (or any) hunting is to harvest an animal. Your own personal take on what the point of choosing a particular tool, is just that, your personal take.

:devil:

 

[Wylycoyte]

So they have to sell out the idea of using a true sidearm to accomplish what lesser men need a longarm to accomplish.

Those pesky untermensch and their long arms! Real men refuse to match the tool with the job, and therefore prove their inherent superiority.

I'd post more, but now I must go pound some nails into a board with a router bit, a wad of chewing gum, and an old coat hanger...

 

[John in AR]

I've carried my Colt series 70 govt model .45acp with CorBons as my only deer gun, but didn't come across any game on that trip out.

I more often carry the .454 revolver, as deer season coincides with bear season, and the .454 is a better choice for bear.

And before we start with the '1911 lets you shoot 4-5 times faster than a big revolver' debate, bear in mind the revolver delivers 4-5 times the power PER shot, so "inflicted power"-wise, it's a wash. Plus the 1911's total payload is around 3,100 ft/lbs (7x450 or so with good factory ammo). Once again, the revolver beats this by 4 times; 6x2,000 ft/lbs, or 12,000 total.

If it were hunting for survival, guys would play it safer, and you wouldn't see them pushing the limits of their own ability or their equipment's; but it's a sport. So instead of a scoped .308 rifle, they'll use a scoped .308 handgun, etc. It makes him put more work into it than the rifle does.

 

[Glenn Bartley]

they dont have the hunting, ammo-making and marksmanship skills to make a realistic sidearm suffice, ya see.

I am beginning to see that as far as hunting goes, legal hunting anyway, you have no idea what makes arealistic sidearm. A realistic hunting sidearm is one that is most likely to help you bag your game, while not being too much of a pain in the butt to lug afield. Legal hunters plan which sidearm to bring hunting based upon regulations, and upon what type of game they are hunting - not based upon SHTF Fantasies, and which gun would be better as self defense/hunting combo.

 

[Dorobuta]

Right tool for the job and all that. Plus many states, like mine, have specific seasons for various weapons, like bow only, muzzle loader, hand gun, and rifle. Likewise, they have restrictions on calibers, draw weights, etc.

then ethics enter into the picture, most hunters want to make legal, ethical shots. These present plenty of challenges, something that outdoorsmen understand.

you don’t come across as either ethical or skilled when it comes to hunting and the outdoors in general.

 

[Terry G]

I don't think Melvin has legally hunted anything in his life. Road hunting an shining, maybe, but Deer hunting with a legal firearm, nah.