FMJ is FMJ. He got pretty much he same results as if he would have used .308 FMJ but the hole was .2" bigger. Unless you catch a big bone like the shoulder a .50 FMJ isn't going to do massive damage.

This guy did.

http://www.buckstix.com/HowitzerHunt.htm

I'd like to try that on a sounder of pigs at a feeder, but 1. I don't have a cannon, and 2. I'd have to armor plate the feeder.

https://youtu.be/6P3uwl5HzzQ

Who all has seen this and what do y'all think about it? One of the craziest kills I've ever seen but can't say I wouldn't try the exact same thing if I owned a 50.

Current thread that is a few days old on same subject
http://texashuntingforum.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/6990407

I may be talking out of both sides of my mouth with this statement but it comes across to me as unethical.

I would be ok if 50's were outlawed for game animals.

Let me have it!

That’s a no-no around here. If it’s legal, it’s ethical. Period. And you are a traitor to the hunting community for speaking ill of our brother Keith Warren.

Haha, I could see it going both ways. Unethical for the destruction of meat when bullet impacts animal but also not due to the quick death.

many terrorists, if they could, would attest to the concussion of the .50cal round. You just gotta be close. I think this is a great illustration of the power of this firearm. Even though Keith missed, hell, we all miss.

so he didn't actually hit the deer?

He didn't miss

+1...Pure Overkill and really not necessary

Wow, you are correct he did miss the deer.

I didn't watch the last 30 seconds until just now.

At least he took a head shot. I like to see a video on hogs

That would be something to see.....

OK, just watch the next video down on the youtube list form this one and you will see there is no way this guy missed. he hit the deer, the FMJ bullet went thru the eye sockets, and it dropped. NO way the bullet sucked the eyes out of the deer head. No way that can happen physically from a bullet whizzing by unless the bullet hits the eyes. This guy is a little weird to even think that.

Just go shoot a deer, and then use a sharp knife to cut out the deers eyes and you will see there is a lot more to it than meets the eye (pun intended).

Pure ego. Have lost respect for him a little.

He didn't miss the deer more of Keith Warren's BS. a near miss doesn't knock over a water bottle or in the first post in this now merged post a house of cards. The water bottle was one of my nephews shots at it missed by about an inch, bottle stayed standing.

The bullet he used was not a FMJ but a Hornady 750gr A-Max, I have shot at least 200 of those in reloads in my 50 the bullet is actually larger than a 308 loaded round. I suspect it was loaded by HSM as they sell factory loads with that bullet. I believe the bullet went in one eye and out the other and if he had put his finger in the eye socket he would have felt a large hole, The mist is from sinuses, mouth and eye balls blowing apart.

I have shot a golf ball from 50 yards that was set on top of the black particle board for pinning targets to, the only thing we could find was a white half circle of small powder size pieces imbedded in the board.

I can’t wrap my mind around the hate for hunting with a .50 BMG. What’s the max size round that should be legal? What about other .50 caliber rounds? Muzzleloaders? And why should any round be illegal to hunt with? Because YOU don’t like it? Should everything you don’t like be illegal?

Absolute bunk.



That is basically what it is coming down to. It is more of the "If you don't hunt the way I hunt for the reasons I hunt you are doing it wrong" sort of mentality.

Shooting a deer with a .50 BMG is about like shooting a coyote with a .308, but you won't hear people talk about that being unethical or that it should be illegal, though you will hear that it is probably overkill.

Can't suck the eyes out of a coyote with a .308 near miss on a head shot. That I know from experience, LOL.

No, I personally don't like it at all.

I guess the key word in this is ethical. Which to me it doesn't seem ethical but that's a slippery slope to argue so I will leave it at that.

I think in time the State will draw the line on maximum caliber

Again, I said on Game Animals.

What about in 5 years and Barrett introduces their new 75 BMG??? Their moto can be "guaranteed to fully incinerate a deer from a mile".

What is not ethical? Will it cause too much suffering to the animal to be killed by more tissue damage?

Why do ethics change between game animals and non-game animals? That doesn't sound like an ethical decision at all. Ethics only apply to animals you like or care about based on an arbitrary determination of being a "game animal"?

Barrett came out with their .416 to thumb their nose at the states that have banned the .50. It’s not much smaller. Similar ballistics. Is that one okay? Where do we draw the line?

Well, as you can see I drew the line and said a 50 seemed unethical

Where do you draw the line?

I have decided to make no further comments about this post I do believe that commonsense will prevail.