Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Re: Heart Shot Photos
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Outlaw6.0" data-source="post: 834421" data-attributes="member: 23486"><p><span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">As in every debate, there will always be two sides. Opinions, when wielded correctly, are a useful tool, affording us conversation & as previously stated utilization of our hard wired penchant for debate.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">There is plausible reasoning why conversations/debate touching on the ethical/moral compass of our sport is generally frowned upon. Hopefully, we can avert that taking place here.... maybe <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">I do applaud the OP for taking the higher path while expressing their concern; their hypothesis definitely does highlight an area necessary of analysis. While I do agree with Harry Callahan, that opinions usually suffer from a certain odor </span><span style="font-family: 'Wingdings'"><span style="font-family: 'Wingdings'">J</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'"> I believe <em>part </em>of the original post does hold validity.</span></span></p><p> </p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">On the other hand, the original post, in the context it was delivered, is derivative of a blanket policy. Blanket policies, while constructed with the best of intentions, are usually not conducive to progress (for lack of a better term).</span></span></p><p> </p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">The progress of which I speak is the refinement & improvement of the equipment & technique sportsmen use in the field. While I do agree that Random grotesque photos posted all over the interwebs displayed as nothing more than a self-promoted pat on the back is generally NOT in the best interest of sportsmen. </span></span></p><p> </p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">On the other hand, I recall various threads (pictures included) on this forum that have not only created much discussion but have enhanced the overall knowledge of the more novice shooter. Photographic evidence used in a supporting role during a discussion related to terminal ballistics (when used correctly) can only bolster the argument involved. We can & do learn from what we see inside our quarry & it is my belief that we owe it to the game to share our findings with our fellow sportsmen.</span></span></p><p> </p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">Internal ballistics is a science, hypothesis' need to be tested & findings should be reported. Would Berger bullets enjoy the reputation afforded them today if we as responsible sportsmen chose to not share our tests/photos & experiences? I don't think so. What about the smaller companies like Matrix or Cutting Edge? Companies such as these rely on word of mouth from knowledgeable sportsmen as a rudimentary endorsement for the product as well as a basis for improvement of the end product. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">Is it necessary to post a gut pile on Face Book? No, that's akin to dog fighting behind the local PETA building. You're asking for trouble. </span></span><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">Does that necessitate non-disclosure across the board? Absolutely not. Places such as LRH not only accept but, on certain occasion encourage dispersion & for good reason.</span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">The fear of offending someone in the caustic world of PC appeasement is understandable however, a small dose of common sense with a discretion chaser is more than enough to rectify the situation.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: 12px"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">In this case, a blanket policy is not the "best policy". There is more than enough averment to show strong argument for both sides of this debate. We owe it to our quarry to know not only what works, but what works better & how to use it more effectively. We owe it to our camaraderie to share our lessons learned; thus enhancing the capability of all sportsmen. The increased capability & lethality of our brethren is the champion of what may be construed as ethics as its finest. </span></span></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>But hey, that's just my opinion.......</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>t</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Outlaw6.0, post: 834421, member: 23486"] [COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]As in every debate, there will always be two sides. Opinions, when wielded correctly, are a useful tool, affording us conversation & as previously stated utilization of our hard wired penchant for debate.[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]There is plausible reasoning why conversations/debate touching on the ethical/moral compass of our sport is generally frowned upon. Hopefully, we can avert that taking place here.... maybe :)[/FONT][/COLOR] [SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]I do applaud the OP for taking the higher path while expressing their concern; their hypothesis definitely does highlight an area necessary of analysis. While I do agree with Harry Callahan, that opinions usually suffer from a certain odor [/FONT][FONT=Wingdings][FONT=Wingdings]J[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Calibri] I believe [I]part [/I]of the original post does hold validity.[/FONT][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]On the other hand, the original post, in the context it was delivered, is derivative of a blanket policy. Blanket policies, while constructed with the best of intentions, are usually not conducive to progress (for lack of a better term).[/FONT][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]The progress of which I speak is the refinement & improvement of the equipment & technique sportsmen use in the field. While I do agree that Random grotesque photos posted all over the interwebs displayed as nothing more than a self-promoted pat on the back is generally NOT in the best interest of sportsmen. [/FONT][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]On the other hand, I recall various threads (pictures included) on this forum that have not only created much discussion but have enhanced the overall knowledge of the more novice shooter. Photographic evidence used in a supporting role during a discussion related to terminal ballistics (when used correctly) can only bolster the argument involved. We can & do learn from what we see inside our quarry & it is my belief that we owe it to the game to share our findings with our fellow sportsmen.[/FONT][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]Internal ballistics is a science, hypothesis’ need to be tested & findings should be reported. Would Berger bullets enjoy the reputation afforded them today if we as responsible sportsmen chose to not share our tests/photos & experiences? I don’t think so. What about the smaller companies like Matrix or Cutting Edge? Companies such as these rely on word of mouth from knowledgeable sportsmen as a rudimentary endorsement for the product as well as a basis for improvement of the end product. [/FONT][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]Is it necessary to post a gut pile on Face Book? No, that’s akin to dog fighting behind the local PETA building. You're asking for trouble. [/FONT][/SIZE][SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]Does that necessitate non-disclosure across the board? Absolutely not. Places such as LRH not only accept but, on certain occasion encourage dispersion & for good reason.[/FONT][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]The fear of offending someone in the caustic world of PC appeasement is understandable however, a small dose of common sense with a discretion chaser is more than enough to rectify the situation.[/FONT][/SIZE] [SIZE=3][FONT=Calibri]In this case, a blanket policy is not the “best policy”. There is more than enough averment to show strong argument for both sides of this debate. We owe it to our quarry to know not only what works, but what works better & how to use it more effectively. We owe it to our camaraderie to share our lessons learned; thus enhancing the capability of all sportsmen. The increased capability & lethality of our brethren is the champion of what may be construed as ethics as its finest. [/FONT][/SIZE] But hey, that's just my opinion....... t [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Re: Heart Shot Photos
Top