So, the deer would have died, after one shot. It may have ran, and those of us that know better would not have pushed it, and given it 1/2 to 1 hour depending on a number of factors. But the cartridge would have made a clean kill in one shot.

Sounds more like poor judgment than a bad cartridge.

Either of his first shots would have killed the deer but I have been known to shoot a deer or hog a few extra rounds if the shot was available. First deer I ever killed was with a 30-30 and I shot him 4 times heart and lungs nothing but liquid and he still ran about 50 yards. Does that make the 30-30 a poor choice for deer nope.

A lot of PHs in Africa wish American hunters would shoot till the animal is down instead of admiring the shot only for the game to run off for a long tracking job.

I’ve got no problem putting extra rounds in a critter.

But saying a given cartridge is inadequate because one decides to shoot a deer more than once is complete

Agreed

I never said it was inadequate.

I just said I have only seen one deer killed with a 7-30 waters and that it took 6 shots.

That’s all I said

I've never written, in a patient care report, that someone was drunk either.

I have written, "pt. was having difficulty walking, had slurred speech, and had difficulty remembering the events that led uo to the MVC".

That's what you call painting the picture for someone else to determine what was occurring. The end result is the same.

I’ve seen guys shoot deer 5 and 6 times with .270’s and .30-06’s too

I was just adding my experience with the round.

And back to what the rest of us have been saying, not the cartridge's fault.

Because everybody knows the .270 and the .30-06 will kill anything walking.

Changed my mind. Ill be nice.

It’s hard sometimes.