Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!erb1!osnome!hunting
From: tas@sat.datapoint.com (Tom Stewart)
Newsgroups: rec.hunting
Subject: .223 to little for deer, but big enough for people?
Message-ID: <544@erb1.engr.wisc.edu>
Date: 17 Apr 91 12:08:20 GMT
Sender: news@erb1.engr.wisc.edu
Distribution: world
Organization: Datapoint Corporation, San Antonio, TX
Lines: 21
Approved: hunting@osnome.che.wisc.edu

I've had a .223 Remington for several years.  It shoots great, with
little recoil, and is accurate out to somewhere past 200 yards with
a simple rest and no particular care in aiming.

Although I've thought about taking it deer hunting here in the Texas
Hill Country and along the Gulf Coast I've never done so.  All the 
statements about "a .223 is too little to kill a deer" have had
something to do with not using it.  However, I haven't really ever
understood why a .223 is big enough for the military to shoot at
200+ pound warriors in a battle but not big enough for a 50-130 pound
deer at rest.  Obviously, an M16 is gonna push several rounds at
a single man, but I don't believe all of them are expected to hit.

If anyone would care to express an educated (or not so educated)
opinion on why 55-65 gr. bullets work on people but not whitetails
I'd appreciate it.

Thanks,

Tom Stewart
Canyon Lake, Texas