I got a couple of guys really giving me hell on another forum because I'm of the opinion that taking head shots on deer is just a pretty bad idea in general. Here's my case but I'm curious to hear what the general opinion here is.
First I cannot see why you would want to aim at such a small kill zone on a deer when the heart lung area is so much larger irregardless of your marksmanship skills. Aim at the center of the heart lung area and you have at least a good 4 or 5 inch margin of error in any direction. On a head shot a few inches can take you from a lightening kill to a maimed deer.
Second, even when a deer is standing still it will still often be moving it's head quite a bit. Sometimes suddenly and with little warning. The heart lung area being on the torso is a much more stable target that moves very little when the deer is standing still. Why shoot at a potentially moving target when a much more stationary one is right there for the drilling.
Third, they claim that sometimes it's the only shot you have. Well I tell you, I have hunted whitetails a lot of years, from trees, from ground stands, while stalk hunting and even in front of dogs. Perhaps there was a time or two that I saw a deer I would have shot and didn't because the only view I had was of it's head, but if so, I can't remember it. Therefore I refuse to believe that situation is one that happens often enough to severely hurt a hunters ability to fill his tags. This is also a safety issue to me as well. If all you can see is a deer's head is it really a good idea to shoot? More than one hunter has been killed by another who thought he was shooting at part of a deer that he saw through the brush.
Fourth, some of them claim they do it because it spoils no meat. Sorry, I reject this claim too. A bullet through the ribs behind the shoulders destroys very little edible meat. In fact it destroys none at all unless you eat deer ribs, deer lungs or deer heart. Maybe some people eat the ribs on deer but the one time I tried them, I was left with the impression that there was so little meat on them that they were a waste of time to fool with.
Fifth, they say it puts them down fast. Sure, when all goes well there's no doubt about that. But is a heart/lung hit deer gonna run far enough to make this minor benefit worth the risk? I just don't see it. I mean we are talking a difference of less than 100 yards.
Lastly, some state that they don't do it normally but if it came down to not filling their tag and it was the only shot they had they would do it. Well if your family is going hungry then sure I guess. But I doubt that is the case with most hunters. If there is one thought I could purge from the collective psyche of the American hunter it is the notion that the worst thing that can possibly happen on a hunt is that you "Not Kill Something". And that that outcome is so unbearable that any risk you take in an attempt to avoid it is therefore justified. I've come home from many hunts empty handed. I've come home from other states and ate a big bowl of tag soup several times. But those outcomes don't bother me 1/100th as much as the prospect of wounding and losing an animal because I did something stupid. Wish everyone felt the same.
So there's my case. What say you? Am I being an intolerant a-hole and cramming my ethics down other peoples throats or do you agree with my feelings? Feel free to blast away. Trust me you cannot hurt my feelings and I've got my asbestos underwear on. LOL!
First I cannot see why you would want to aim at such a small kill zone on a deer when the heart lung area is so much larger irregardless of your marksmanship skills. Aim at the center of the heart lung area and you have at least a good 4 or 5 inch margin of error in any direction. On a head shot a few inches can take you from a lightening kill to a maimed deer.
Second, even when a deer is standing still it will still often be moving it's head quite a bit. Sometimes suddenly and with little warning. The heart lung area being on the torso is a much more stable target that moves very little when the deer is standing still. Why shoot at a potentially moving target when a much more stationary one is right there for the drilling.
Third, they claim that sometimes it's the only shot you have. Well I tell you, I have hunted whitetails a lot of years, from trees, from ground stands, while stalk hunting and even in front of dogs. Perhaps there was a time or two that I saw a deer I would have shot and didn't because the only view I had was of it's head, but if so, I can't remember it. Therefore I refuse to believe that situation is one that happens often enough to severely hurt a hunters ability to fill his tags. This is also a safety issue to me as well. If all you can see is a deer's head is it really a good idea to shoot? More than one hunter has been killed by another who thought he was shooting at part of a deer that he saw through the brush.
Fourth, some of them claim they do it because it spoils no meat. Sorry, I reject this claim too. A bullet through the ribs behind the shoulders destroys very little edible meat. In fact it destroys none at all unless you eat deer ribs, deer lungs or deer heart. Maybe some people eat the ribs on deer but the one time I tried them, I was left with the impression that there was so little meat on them that they were a waste of time to fool with.
Fifth, they say it puts them down fast. Sure, when all goes well there's no doubt about that. But is a heart/lung hit deer gonna run far enough to make this minor benefit worth the risk? I just don't see it. I mean we are talking a difference of less than 100 yards.
Lastly, some state that they don't do it normally but if it came down to not filling their tag and it was the only shot they had they would do it. Well if your family is going hungry then sure I guess. But I doubt that is the case with most hunters. If there is one thought I could purge from the collective psyche of the American hunter it is the notion that the worst thing that can possibly happen on a hunt is that you "Not Kill Something". And that that outcome is so unbearable that any risk you take in an attempt to avoid it is therefore justified. I've come home from many hunts empty handed. I've come home from other states and ate a big bowl of tag soup several times. But those outcomes don't bother me 1/100th as much as the prospect of wounding and losing an animal because I did something stupid. Wish everyone felt the same.
So there's my case. What say you? Am I being an intolerant a-hole and cramming my ethics down other peoples throats or do you agree with my feelings? Feel free to blast away. Trust me you cannot hurt my feelings and I've got my asbestos underwear on. LOL!
Last edited:
(head shoot terrorist not deers)