steve863

This is real good! I just hope this dude never posts a video of a romantic evening with his wife or girlfriend. I could only imagine how he'd handle that!

Yeah, that Suburban might give us away. Actually, I just found a donation center near me and decided to give it a try. I figured an old rusty bike wouldn't get them overly suspicious. A bit tough on the back, but hey, it ain't much worse than dragging one up hill! Had my wife snap a picture of me from our car.

That's exactly why I asked the question, Doe! I have no doubt that what you say is true. Lots of poor people out there who are just as big complainers as anyone else. We also shouldn't forget that our country is the only one under the sun that has people living under the poverty level and yet they are obese So they surely ARE eating something (probably lots of the wrong things) eventhough they claim to be in need. Doe, after we finish our game call recording I have some raggedy clothes we could put on and maybe we can take a trip to one of these donation centers? Man, we better stop because we are frightening ourselves here!!!

I always wondered how these needy people felt about getting venison? I know beggars can't be choosers but I can imagine that some of them would be sqeamish or disgusted about being given or eating deer meat if they never ate it before just like much of the rest of society can be. Just because they might be needy doesn't mean they don't have the same Bambi syndrome like many others seem to have.

Wow, this is good stuff. No wonder I stunk with a bow and murdered trees, branches and leaves on the ground instead of deer. I'm sure failing high school geometry didn't help me any either! My teacher Mr. Carlin did warn me that it would cost me one day.

I hunt in a rifle area so my choice is pretty easy. If I hunted in a shotgun zone I think I'd still stick with the shotgun during the regular season for the additional shots if needed. Yeah, muzzleloaders are fun to shoot and are accurate, but I don't think a modern shotgun with scope and rifled barrel is too far off. Surely enough accuracy out of most of them to kill deer up to 100 yards. Plus, I don't think most people should be shooting muzzleloader any further than that either. Yeah, the bullet can be sent further, but the trajectory starts getting tricky shortly after that distance. You make a poor shot past that distance with a muzzleloader and don't have a quick follow up shot to help out, you just might be looking to get yourself into some trouble in my opinion.

It looks like I have done my good deed for the day then!! I like your addition of the grunts also. I think we might be on to something here. Maybe we will be giving Quaker boy and Knight & Hale a run for their game call money soon?

Maybe someone should record themselves peeing at home and then sell CD's of the sound so hunters can play it back out in the field? Maybe someone could make a few dollars selling it. Worth a try I guess. Hopefully they will edit out the sound of the flushing toilet.

I hear you about sweating above 9 feet! We have a couple of stands that have real aluminum ladders, the type used by roofers, to reach the stand and are still no more than 15 feet at the most above the ground. I feel fairly safe in these homemade stands, but couldn't imagine climbing any higher into some of the contraptions other hunters use. Since I am planning to bowhunt again this year I pulled out one of those old fashioned bowhunting rangefinders I bought years ago where you focus it to a single image and get a range reading. Man, those things stink big time. Can hardly see anything clearly thru it. One of those new electronic rangefinders might be a worthwhile item. Surely they have to work better than what was available in the past. To me range estimation has always been the hardest part to bowhunting.

Yes, I've heard of that, but when bowhunting I can't imagine guesstimating all this when a deer is standing there can be too easy. There is enough to consider already with deer ducking, jumping the string, etc. before any of the other physics come in to play. I think the less one has to compensate for before the shot, the better their chances will be. The property I hunt is very steep, it's all pretty much all uphill or downhill. Even if I'm in a tree stand a deer will either be above me or eye to eye with me if he approaches me from the uphill side. So, I don't know how much of an advantage of concealment I really have up in the tree other than being able to see further in all directions. If I have to shoot downhill, the distance can start picking up real fast.

One surely doesn't need a tree stand to kill a deer with a gun. I've probably killed just as many if not more from the ground. Many were with my back against a tree and not too much concealment around me. Tree stands probably help with bowhunting, though. Although I can't understand the guys that go over 20 feet high for bowhunting. Heck, if you are 30 feet up, you've got 10 yard of distance for the arrow to reach the ground straight down. I can understand being above the deers line of sight, but if you are adding too much distance for a shot, how could it be a real advantage?

That's a good question. The only thing I could think of is that they required those hunting with a crossbow to have the safety course certificate in their possession. Or maybe there could be a special box printed on ones privilege tag where it would be checked off that one passed the course. Either way my hunch is that this required course was put into effect to eliminate the hoards of bowhunters who might trade in their compounds for crossbows once crossbows are allowed in the bowseason. LOL

I'm sure that extraction of such substances from various species is done everyday somewhere for considerably less than the $30,000 they offered for that buck. I don't think there would be a shortage of extractors for that kind of money. They'd do whatever it takes.

If you'd like a few of us could come up to your property and spook him back your way if we happen to see him.

Cool, where can I get scope mounts like that??

I would like to be the guy standing below the instructor when he was dangling without an accessible knife and asking him if he'd like to borrow mine after I finish peeling my apple with it. Wonder how stupid he would think it was then?

That's a great shot! LOL And that was all that the camera was able to capture. Those carcasses continued on for another 150 yards around the block!!

One good reason to have a knife on your belt and NOT in your backpack. I think I'd sooner take a few broken bones by cutting the rope and falling the rest of the way down, than dangling on a rope and suffocating. How far off the ground could he have been if he was already part of the way down?? 10 feet maybe? That is surely survivable. I know some guys go up to nose bleed territory like 30 feet up a tree which I think is ridiculous. Those guys are just looking for big trouble in my opinion.

I just find it a bit funny that one will need a safety course for crossbows when none is needed for muzzleloaders. I would think someone could do way more damage to themselves with a muzzleloader by not knowing how to properly use and fire one.

Doe makes a real good suggestion. Maybe some of your shooting friends could let him use a few different calibers? I think it will surprise you what he will be able to handle. I started deer hunting in a shotgun area so there was little choice in the matter. If you wanted to hunt deer you got pounded by the slugs and that was it. As Doe said any rifle I shot after that punishment was nothing in comparison.

Well, yeah, surely a .22 will be the best practice of all for a youngster AND someone a lot older. But it did sound like the original poster was talking about a rifle capable for deer hunting eventhough he didn't say so specifically. I have no doubt that a lot of deer have been killed with a .243. I however am more of a realist when it comes to caliber choices like I am with many other things. I surely don't think a .300 magnum is necessary for deer, but at the same time don't think a .243 is either. Plenty of other sound choices somewhere in between!

These days they make mild loads for the bigger calibers, so I think that is something to consider also. I can understand not wanting him to start flinching and stuff, but I think one can't expect perfect shooting from a youngster in the field no matter what caliber they shoot. I just think a kid making a less than perfect shot on a deer will be better off with a 7mm-08 than he will with a .243. A .243 in my opinion is more of a rifle for someone who can shoot accurately. In most instances that 7mm slug will do more damage on that animal and it will be less likely that the animal will be lost. I think it would be worse for the kid to go thru a scenario where he might lose a deer than to be worried about the flinching. If he was 98 lbs soaking wet, I might agree with a .243 since something bigger would be punishing on him, but at his size a bigger caliber shouldn't be a problem with a little practice.

He is keeping those in a safe place. They will be zipping thru a deer or two in the coming weeks! He will show them to you again when they have some blood on them! LOL

Well, this could be argued, but I think a big youngster like him could easily handle something more potent, so why give him something on the lower end of the spectrum?? You give him one of the other bigger calibers and he pretty much could use the gun forever without ever needing another one. Price wise there will also be NO savings in getting a 243 in comparison to something bigger.

I knew it had to be home made! Hey, whatever works for him. I just love it when guys can drop more deer with this old stuff than others who spend a fortune on equipment, but have ZERO hunting skills!