# Deer Hunting with an M1 Carbine



## TrafficsKindaBad (Aug 23, 2013)

I'm trying to get into deer hunting and wanted your opinion on hunting whitetail with an m1 carbine. I won't be taking shots any longer than probably 100 yards. I want to use the carbine, but I also have a Mini-14 Ranch Rifle in 5.56. I've tried to read up on it, but is the 30 carbine round an ethical and effective way to take a deer? Thanks


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

I think so, given the parameters you stipulated. It isn't an ideal round, but should be adequate. It would be little different to using a 30/30, which is very popular for short range whitetail hunting.


----------



## Scorpion8 (Jan 29, 2011)

M1 carbine round is probably the absolute minimum for deer-sized game. Is it ethical? Not if you have a better, more effective rifle/cartridge combo available. Some areas do not allow 22's (even centerfire) for deer-sized game, so check your local game regs. Is it effective? Only if you're a pretty good shot. Your chances of a non-lethal wound are much increased, especially unless you hand-load game-quality bullets. Do not use FMJ bullets on game. That is unethical.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

GCBHM said:


> I think so, given the parameters you stipulated. It isn't an ideal round, but should be adequate. It would be little different to using a 30/30, which is very popular for short range whitetail hunting.


.30 carbine is much closer in ballistics to the 80gr 'Super X' .32-20. Much less cartridge than the .30-30. With a modern hunting bullet at less than 100 yards and well placed, it is "ethical and effective" for white-tail.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

hillman said:


> .30 carbine is much closer in ballistics to the 80gr 'Super X' .32-20. Much less cartridge than the .30-30. With a modern hunting bullet at less than 100 yards and well placed, it is "ethical and effective" for white-tail.


Yeah, I guess it would be closer to the .32-20. The .30-30 is the smallest deer sized rifle I would use, and was thinking the .30 would be the absolute smallest I'd use on deer. I'd use a 5.56 well before I'd go with a .30, but it would work if you had nothing else.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

I would not shoot at a deer much beyond 50 yards with an M1 Carbine. It was designed for platoon leaders, mostly 2nd Lieutenants, to use instead of a pistol, because so many couldn't shoot a pistol well. At least that's what most WWII veterans believed. Ballistically speaking, it's in the ballpark with a .357 Magnum handgun, which ain't chopped liver, but it ain't a .30-30 either, which is recognized mostly as a 100 yard (plus) rifle. I love the M1 carbine, but it's an anemic hunting round for a deer rifle, and should be used up close.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Well, I _don't_ think that trying to take a whitetail deer with the .30 Carbine round is an ethical proposition. Certainly, I wouldn't do it.

The object of the exercise is to harvest meat without causing the animal to suffer any more than absolutely necessary. The .30 Carbine can't reliably accomplish that. There's a greater chance that you will merely cause injury, and will have to track and finish a wounded animal. Worse, you might even lose the track, and leave a wounded deer to painfully limp through the rest of his short life.

(I wouldn't use a .223 for whitetail, either.)


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Well, I _don't_ think that trying to take a whitetail deer with the .30 Carbine round is an ethical proposition. Certainly, I wouldn't do it.
> 
> The object of the exercise is to harvest meat without causing the animal to suffer any more than absolutely necessary. The .30 Carbine can't reliably accomplish that. There's a greater chance that you will merely cause injury, and will have to track and finish a wounded animal. Worse, you might even lose the track, and leave a wounded deer to painfully limp through the rest of his short life.
> 
> (I wouldn't use a .223 for whitetail, either.)


A .223 would be just fine for whitetail in thick brush, and I wouldn't hesitate to use it for that purpose; however, I would not choose it with the many other options available. I would think that the .30 would be a suitable rifle for the same purpose, in thick brush within (but absolutely no further than) 100 yards. In those conditions, you're probably only going to have a realistic shooting range of about 25-50 yards at best.

My caliber of choice for a GP whitetail rifle would be the .270, but if I could have only one rifle to hunt in my inventory, I would go with the 7mm magnum.


----------



## TrafficsKindaBad (Aug 23, 2013)

We can use .223 here in NH, so I could go that route. I know people are divided about this issue and some are on the fence. I would certainly use a good quality bullet made for hunting in a factory load, or reload my own. I have yet to be convinced one way or the other, but I think it would be really cool to do.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

TrafficsKindaBad said:


> We can use .223 here in NH, so I could go that route. I know people are divided about this issue and some are on the fence. I would certainly use a good quality bullet made for hunting in a factory load, or reload my own. I have yet to be convinced one way or the other, but I think it would be really cool to do.


In either case there is a semiauto magazine capacity limit for deer hunting in NH, right?


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

GCBHM said:


> *A .223 would be just fine for whitetail in thick brush*, and I wouldn't hesitate to use it for that purpose; however, I would not choose it with the many other options available. I would think that the .30 would be a suitable rifle for the same purpose, in thick brush within (but absolutely no further than) 100 yards. In those conditions, you're probably only going to have a realistic shooting range of about 25-50 yards at best.
> 
> My caliber of choice for a GP whitetail rifle would be the .270, but if I could have only one rifle to hunt in my inventory, I would go with the 7mm magnum.


I have to differ with this a bit. Lighter bullets tend to deflect more than do heavier, slower moving bullets when they strike limbs and thick brush. One of the best brush busters here in the wooded hunting areas in the east is the .44 Magnum in either a handgun or even better... a lever action rifle.

The M1 Carbine can take white tail deer BUT, the choice of the .30 caliber load is absolutely critical; as is the distance, the hunter's ability to deliver a killing shot, and a few other factors.

I'm like some others with this in that there are better choices for white tail deer and the OP would be better served to consider something from that basket. Deer don't always do as one plans.


----------



## TrafficsKindaBad (Aug 23, 2013)

Yeah, 5 rounds, I think.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

SouthernBoy said:


> I have to differ with this a bit. Lighter bullets tend to deflect more than do heavier, slower moving bullets when they strike limbs and thick brush. One of the best brush busters here in the wooded hunting areas in the east is the .44 Magnum in either a handgun or even better... a lever action rifle.
> 
> The M1 Carbine can take white tail deer BUT, the choice of the .30 caliber load is absolutely critical; as is the distance, the hunter's ability to deliver a killing shot, and a few other factors.
> 
> I'm like some others with this in that there are better choices for white tail deer and the OP would be better served to consider something from that basket. Deer don't always do as one plans.


I certainly agree there are better choices, and that there are better brush guns than a .223 or .30 cal, but it is up to the shooter to decide whether or not to take a shot whether it be through branches or an open shot at say 40 yards. Personally, I would choose to go with a heavier round, but I would shoot the .223 if it was all I had. My personal preference for thick brush would either be a shotgun with a slug or something like a .44 carbine. Something with open iron sights and short. The .30-30 would suffice, or a .35 Remington would be better.

As to capacity, I believe you can get five round magazines for the .223, if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

The 444 is also a rather potent round which would work well as a brush gun. Suffice it to say that, as I said initially, the .30 carbine isn't the ideal round for hunting. It can work, but you'd have to be rather good. On second thought with the .223/5.56, I'd use it more for open greenfield shooting over brush shooting, although I do think the .223 would be an effective round. You'd probably be better served to choose another round. If you can find a .44 carbine, that is probably the quintessential short range brush gun, IMHO.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

A whitetails toughness against gunfire can generally be judged along the same lines as one might judge a self-defense round to be used against a human - they aren't that hard to kill, but they have to be hit hard in the right place, to be stopped in their tracks. I hunted for years with a .30-06 using a 165 grain Nosler ballistic tip over a maximum load of RL-22 - way more than necessary, but I chose that particular load for its accuracy. The last three deer I shot were with this round, and none made it more than 30 yards from the point of impact, but only one dropped in its tracks. All three were heart-lung shots at 90 - 120 yards, with the POI not varying by more than an inch or two.

Even with a great load, the .30 carbine is marginal, at any distance much beyond handgun ranges, unless you hit the brain or the spine, which is a low percentage shot with a carbine. It can be done, and probably is every year. But the odds of missing the sweet spot by an inch or so are high, and it just doesn't have that extra power that can compensate for a shot that was slightly off target. Of course, you can say the same for a bow and arrow shot, so there's a good argument for you, if you want to go ahead and risk it at longer ranges.

Personally, I don't bow hunt because of the increased likelihood of missing a clean kill shot, but I don't fault anyone who does have enough confidence in their ability to do it. Same goes for using a carbine at 100 yards plus.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

TrafficsKindaBad said:


> Yeah, 5 rounds, I think.


VT was 4 I think last time I looked. What I'm concerned about is the availability of magazines (but they could be everywhere and I wouldn't know).


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

GCBHM said:


> I certainly agree there are better choices, and that there are better brush guns than a .223 or .30 cal, but it is up to the shooter to decide whether or not to take a shot whether it be through branches or an open shot at say 40 yards. Personally, I would choose to go with a heavier round, *but I would shoot the .223 if it was all I had.* My personal preference for thick brush would either be a shotgun with a slug or something like a .44 carbine. Something with open iron sights and short. The .30-30 would suffice, or a .35 Remington would be better.
> 
> As to capacity, I believe you can get five round magazines for the .223, if I'm not mistaken.


Here in Virginia, when last I hunted, the minimum caliber size was/is .23 caliber with at least 350 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle. If we had a SHTF scenario and you had to feed you and your family, then I would use anything I could get my hands on and with which I had ammunition. If that was a 5.56/.223 then so be it. Our deer here tend to grow fairly large and with the density of their wooded home areas, you do need something that will get the job done when conditions are not perfect, which they more often that not aren't.

I agree with your list of a .44 Magnum carbine, a .30-30 lever or bolt action, or a .35 Remington. These are all excellent gun/caliber combos for my state.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

GCBHM said:


> *The 444 is also a rather potent round which would work well as a brush gun.* Suffice it to say that, as I said initially, the .30 carbine isn't the ideal round for hunting. It can work, but you'd have to be rather good. On second thought with the .223/5.56, I'd use it more for open greenfield shooting over brush shooting, although I do think the .223 would be an effective round. You'd probably be better served to choose another round. If you can find a .44 carbine, that is probably the quintessential short range brush gun, IMHO.


The .444 Marlin is great for bear. It does have a lot of recoil which can affect follpwup shots. I have a nephew who has taken quite a few deer with his.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

SouthernBoy said:


> Here in Virginia, when last I hunted, the minimum caliber size was/is .23 caliber with at least 350 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle. If we had a SHTF scenario and you had to feed you and your family, then I would use anything I could get my hands on and with which I had ammunition. If that was a 5.56/.223 then so be it. Our deer here tend to grow fairly large and with the density of their wooded home areas, you do need something that will get the job done when conditions are not perfect, which they more often that not aren't.
> 
> I agree with your list of a .44 Magnum carbine, a .30-30 lever or bolt action, or a .35 Remington. These are all excellent gun/caliber combos for my state.


Some years ago I read a report on a study of bullet deflection in brush. The upshot was that, if the bullet hits brush on the way to the target it _will_ deflect.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

SouthernBoy said:


> Here in Virginia, when last I hunted, the minimum caliber size was/is .23 caliber with at least 350 ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle. If we had a SHTF scenario and you had to feed you and your family, then I would use anything I could get my hands on and with which I had ammunition. If that was a 5.56/.223 then so be it. Our deer here tend to grow fairly large and with the density of their wooded home areas, you do need something that will get the job done when conditions are not perfect, which they more often that not aren't.
> 
> I agree with your list of a .44 Magnum carbine, a .30-30 lever or bolt action, or a .35 Remington. These are all excellent gun/caliber combos for my state.


I do agree the .223 is a light round, but I guess my thinking is that if an arrow can kill a deer then so can a well placed .223. I've seen several pics of rather large game, such as boar and big cats, dropped with a .223, so I would think it would suffice. That said, my preference would be something larger. I believe any of the three calibers above would be perfect for the brush hunter, but even at that, I would prefer either a .270 or 7mm Mag. Either of those would be great GP hunting guns for almost any game you want to take.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

GCBHM said:


> I do agree the .223 is a light round, but I guess my thinking is that if an arrow can kill a deer then so can a well placed .223. I've seen several pics of rather large game, such as boar and big cats, dropped with a .223, so I would think it would suffice. That said, my preference would be something larger. I believe any of the three calibers above would be perfect for the brush hunter, but even at that, I would prefer either a .270 or 7mm Mag. Either of those would be great GP hunting guns for almost any game you want to take.


I've seen videos of wild hogs (bores) being shot with an AR (5.56mm) and the animal definitely went through some changes while it was dying. Not pretty and not quick. Wild bores do take a lot of killing so that has to be kept in mind.


----------



## shootbrownelk (May 18, 2014)

A .30 carbine would be a horrible choice for a deer rifle. They won't dispatch a deer quickly or humanely. Forget it and get a REAL deer rifle. You owe it to the animal.


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

TrafficsKindaBad said:


> I'm trying to get into deer hunting and wanted your opinion on hunting whitetail with an m1 carbine. I won't be taking shots any longer than probably 100 yards. I want to use the carbine, but I also have a Mini-14 Ranch Rifle in 5.56. I've tried to read up on it, but is the 30 carbine round an ethical and effective way to take a deer? Thanks


Is that the only rifle you got? Use a .243, 30-06 or .308


----------



## TrafficsKindaBad (Aug 23, 2013)

Yeah, those are the only two centerfire rifles I have. I will probably do some shotgun hunting, but want to--at some point--take a deer with a rifle. I also plan on handgun hunting this year with a S&W 629 with a 6.5" barrel. I'm not an experienced hunter and so taking into account what many of you are saying, I'll get something different before rifle hunting. Maybe after I have some more experience with it I can reevaluate whether I want to [or can] down a deer with the 30 carbine. A 357 or 44 mag lever gun are on my list.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

TrafficsKindaBad said:


> Yeah, those are the only two centerfire rifles I have. I will probably do some shotgun hunting, but want to--at some point--take a deer with a rifle. I also plan on handgun hunting this year with a S&W 629 with a 6.5" barrel. I'm not an experienced hunter and so taking into account what many of you are saying, I'll get something different before rifle hunting. Maybe after I have some more experience with it I can reevaluate whether I want to [or can] down a deer with the 30 carbine. A 357 or 44 mag lever gun are on my list.


Sounds like a plan. The .44 Magnum in a rifle offers several useful bullet weights too - from 180 up to 300gr for hunting in the thick stuff.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

J


TrafficsKindaBad said:


> Yeah, those are the only two centerfire rifles I have. I will probably do some shotgun hunting, but want to--at some point--take a deer with a rifle. I also plan on handgun hunting this year with a S&W 629 with a 6.5" barrel. I'm not an experienced hunter and so taking into account what many of you are saying, I'll get something different before rifle hunting. Maybe after I have some more experience with it I can reevaluate whether I want to [or can] down a deer with the 30 carbine. A 357 or 44 mag lever gun are on my list.


Shotgun as in rifled slug ?


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

TrafficsKindaBad said:


> I'm not an experienced hunter and so taking into account what many of you are saying, I'll get something different before rifle hunting.


Good plan.

There are plenty of things that will enhance your hunting experience that make more sense than lowering your chances of success by using a rifle that ethically should only be used in a narrow set of circumstances. The most important thing, your first time out, is to be relaxed before you take a shot, and to be sure you can make the shot. The tendency for inexperienced shooters is to rush the shot, maybe even shoot at a running deer, which is almost never a good idea, with a rifle.

Good hunters wait for high percentage shots, so much so that the shot, itself, is kind of an anti-climax because they know they are going to hit the little spot on that big old deer that they are aiming at. And, it's much more satisfying to let a nice buck walk away than to make a bad shot.


----------



## Kynochco (Jan 9, 2015)

Experimenting with alternate rounds and trying out a hunt with an M1 might have its merits, but the tried and true will never let you down, such as it is with the 06 or 08. Hunting is more than just a sport it's also about conservation.


----------



## hks95134 (Feb 13, 2015)

Bisley said:


> A whitetails toughness against gunfire can generally be judged along the same lines as one might judge a self-defense round to be used against a human - they aren't that hard to kill, but they have to be hit hard in the right place, to be stopped in their tracks. I hunted for years with a .30-06 using a 165 grain Nosler ballistic tip over a maximum load of RL-22 - way more than necessary, but I chose that particular load for its accuracy. The last three deer I shot were with this round, and none made it more than 30 yards from the point of impact, but only one dropped in its tracks. All three were heart-lung shots at 90 - 120 yards, with the POI not varying by more than an inch or two.
> 
> Even with a great load, the .30 carbine is marginal, at any distance much beyond handgun ranges, unless you hit the brain or the spine, which is a low percentage shot with a carbine. It can be done, and probably is every year. But the odds of missing the sweet spot by an inch or so are high, and it just doesn't have that extra power that can compensate for a shot that was slightly off target. Of course, you can say the same for a bow and arrow shot, so there's a good argument for you, if you want to go ahead and risk it at longer ranges.
> 
> Personally, I don't bow hunt because of the increased likelihood of missing a clean kill shot, but I don't fault anyone who does have enough confidence in their ability to do it. Same goes for using a carbine at 100 yards plus.


It takes a lot of pre-season practice no matter what you hunt with.

The fascinating thing about bowhunting is that I have met anti-gun amateur activists who absolutely adore me for bowhunting because it does not involve a firearm. They hate guns, and hunting without a gun is fascinating to them, apparently. I hunt for the meat, and my bow proves it to them.

My arrows cost $30 each -- $15 for the broadhead and another $15 for the rest of the arrow. So I am not going to waste an arrow on a questionable shot.

Anything longer than 35 yards with my recurve bow would be questionable. And that's when practicing every day.

Now, on to the humaneness of the kill -- different topic.

A chest-shot deer will die within an hour and within about 100 yards -- that's as good as it gets with archery. This is very poor performance compared with any gunshot.

A gut-shot deer will die within a few days and within the county -- this is the worst case scenario that most bowhunters try to avoid.

An arrow-shot deer bleeds to death. This is ideal from the perspective of harvesting the meat because the meat then becomes nicely bled-out.

Whereas a gun-shot deer normally does not bleed-out before death, and must be gutted and hung up quickly for the blood to properly drain from the meat, or else you end up with blood-infused meat which does not taste great -- "gamey" being the operative word.

So what does an animal deserve? I don't believe a slower archery death is any more painful than a quick gunshot death.

I would feel bad (again) about gut shooting a deer (again) either way -- gun or bow. Even so, it gets the job done.

What I really hate is wasting an animal's life for nothing -- wasted meat. As long as I can recover the carcass and butcher it for food, I feel good about that.


----------



## hks95134 (Feb 13, 2015)

Kynochco said:


> Experimenting with alternate rounds and trying out a hunt with an M1 might have its merits, but the tried and true will never let you down, such as it is with the 06 or 08. Hunting is more than just a sport it's also about conservation.


There are 2 kinds of M1's -- you need to state "Garand" or "Carbine." Big big difference.

The M1 Garand is a 30-06 semi-auto. No issues there, except that it has a lot of wood on it and is heavy to carry all day.

The M1 Carbine is the forerunner of the 5.56x45 and not particular appropriate for deer hunting, as has been pointed out by the seasoned hunters here.


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

I killed the largest buck of my life with a .223 Mini-14 Ranch Rifle. I exploded his heart with a 55 grain ballistic tipped Sierra boat tail bullet. It only took him about five jumps to realize he was dead. Placement trumps tracking skills every time.
GW


----------



## hks95134 (Feb 13, 2015)

There's a big difference between a skilled and practiced marksman versus a new guy just getting into deer hunting.

A new guy is unlikely to even know where a deer's heart is. Nor what angles of shot are necessary to access it.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

hks95134 said:


> ...The fascinating thing about bowhunting is that I have met anti-gun amateur activists who absolutely adore me for bowhunting because it does not involve a firearm. They hate guns, and hunting without a gun is fascinating to them, apparently. I hunt for the meat, and my bow proves it to them...


This is, of course, bigotry of the most disgusting kind: The hoplophobe bigots would rather see a deer bleed slowly to death, than have it die quickly of shock, all in the name of eliminating those nasty guns.
Taken to its logical extreme, I suppose that those hoplophobe activists would rather that you not even use sharp-edged arrows, but, better, that you bludgeon the deer to death.
[/snark]


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

goldwing said:


> I killed the largest buck of my life with a .223 Mini-14 Ranch Rifle. I exploded his heart with a 55 grain ballistic tipped Sierra boat tail bullet. It only took him about five jumps to realize he was dead. Placement trumps tracking skills every time.
> GW


My youngest grandson shot two small deer with a single-shot H&R HandiRifle, loaded with Barnes .223 TSX 55 grain factory loads. The wounds were devastating, and both were down quickly, even though one was not hit properly (one lung).

I have carried my AR-15 (set up for varmints) with the intention to shoot a deer, but have not been offered a good shot. It has a 20" 1:8 heavy barrel and I hand load Barnes 70 gr. TSX for it, and I have no doubt that it will do the job well, with a properly placed shot. It is more accurate than my bolt rifles, and I have confidence that the bullet will go exactly where I send it at 200 yards or under.


----------



## hks95134 (Feb 13, 2015)

The nice thing about my Remington 700 in 300 RUM (a very large cartridge designed by the Canadians to kill any of their bears "up there") is that it will kill anything in North or South America on 4 legs.

I normally aim for anywhere in the chest from any angle even from behind.

That's the advantage of a real deer rifle.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

goldwing said:


> I killed the largest buck of my life with a .223 Mini-14 Ranch Rifle. I exploded his heart with a 55 grain ballistic tipped Sierra boat tail bullet. It only took him about five jumps to realize he was dead. Placement trumps tracking skills every time.
> GW





Bisley said:


> My youngest grandson shot two small deer with a single-shot H&R HandiRifle, loaded with Barnes .223 TSX 55 grain factory loads. The wounds were devastating, and both were down quickly, even though one was not hit properly (one lung).
> 
> I have carried my AR-15 (set up for varmints) with the intention to shoot a deer, but have not been offered a good shot. It has a 20" 1:8 heavy barrel and I hand load Barnes 70 gr. TSX for it, and I have no doubt that it will do the job well, with a properly placed shot. It is more accurate than my bolt rifles, and I have confidence that the bullet will go exactly where I send it at 200 yards or under.


Just because you _can_ do something, doesn't mean that you _should_ do it.
(I used to know someone who took a couple of deer every year...with a .22 rimfire rifle.)

Further, people who cannot place their bullet(s) as accurately as you can will try to ape your success and thereby experience disastrous results.
The real disaster, though, will be the gut-shot or lung-shot or merely wounded deer, who will expire undetected in the underbrush after suffering for a day or two.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

It's a good point, Steve. But I've attempted to set good examples for unskilled hunters for a long time, and I have yet to have one take my advice without screwing up, first. So, I pretty much do my own thing, and don't make a big deal out of it. I lament the unnecessary wounding of such a fine animal, but you can't hold everybody's hand and make them do right.


----------



## hillman (Jul 27, 2014)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Just because you _can_ do something, doesn't mean that you _should_ do it.
> (I used to know someone who took a couple of deer every year...with a .22 rimfire rifle.)
> 
> Further, people who cannot place their bullet(s) as accurately as you can will try to ape your success and thereby experience disastrous results.
> The real disaster, though, will be the gut-shot or lung-shot or merely wounded deer, who will expire undetected in the underbrush after suffering for a day or two.


I absolutely detest the gut-shot animal scenario. I gut-shot a deer once - it moved at the wrong time - and followed a scant blood trail for about a quarter-mile until it crossed a highway. Couldn't find the spoor on the other side. Didn't sleep well for awhile after that. I never want to see one 'hump-up' again.


----------



## hks95134 (Feb 13, 2015)

That is correct -- if an arrow can kill (anything) then a well placed 5.56x45mm round can also.

However it makes much more sense to apply the cartridge to the quary that it was/is intended.

And 5.56x45 is intended for long range varmints or 25 to 500 yds humans.

And as was pointed out earlier by one of our historians, the M-1 Carbine was intended for 2nd Lieutenants.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

hks95134 said:


> ...And as was pointed out earlier by one of our historians, the M-1 Carbine was intended for 2nd Lieutenants.


OK, so now I know who to shoot, with an M1 Carbine.
But I gotta ask: What gun is proper for taking Field Grade officers?


----------



## hks95134 (Feb 13, 2015)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> OK, so now I know who to shoot, with an M1 Carbine.
> But I gotta ask: What gun is proper for taking Field Grade officers?


The Mosin Nagant has taken out more of those than any other gun.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

hks95134 said:


> The Mosin Nagant has taken out more of those than any other gun.


German officers? Or Russian? :mrgreen:


----------



## hks95134 (Feb 13, 2015)

Mostly USA.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

hks95134 said:


> Mostly USA.


Really?

I would have guessed Russian, or German, and even then I would have included the Mosin-Nagant revolver.


----------

