Shawnee,
You are failing to grasp the difference between a statement illustrating the trouble in a thought process and advocation of such process.
I'll illustrate:
If one was to say...
People look at porn on computers. You own a computer. Therefore, you look at porn.
That would be an incorrect correlation and a non-valid thought process.
By my illustrating that non-valid thought process, I would have a problem with someone then saying that "You stated that owning a computer means you look at porn on the computer."
No, that wasn't at all what I said in the above example.
My saying:
JWarren wrote:
"By that logic, 22lr is not underpowered, and anything over that is overpowered."
Is NOT equivalent to my saying anything that resembles
Shawnee wrote:
I didn't say the .22lr was a "logical" deer caliber - you did
No, I did no such thing. I illustrated the error of using number of deer killed with a caliber to guage whether that caliber should be considered underkill, overkill, appropriate, ethical, or unethical.
Your words from Your post, JWarren. You put them in your mouth, not me.
Clearly, I didn't say what you thought I said.
However, this whole discussion veers off the topic. I posted this in order to attempt to explain how attempting to highlight an error in a thought-process IS NOT the equivalent of actually subscribing to the very thought process you are highlighing the error within.
I actually don't think you and I are saying anything all that different. I willingly and happily concede that there are a plethera of calibers below .30 caliber (specifically 308 and/or 30-06) that are perfectly adequate to ethically hunt deer. I actually never made a claim otherwise.
By that every concession, I logically have to concede that anything above some nebulous "perfect" caliber would be theoretically overkill.
For instance...
If we had some quantifiable and undisputable method of reaching an agreement that .243 Winchester was the perfect caliber for deer. It necessarily follows that anything greater in caliber and/or muzzle energy is overkill-- even if the amount of "overkill" is an insignificant amount.
And no... I did NOT just say 243 was anything. I used it as an example.
However, the entire concept of "overkill" MUST to come into question. I suspect that we cannot even get a consensus on what that means. It seems that there isn't such consensus even on this thread-- let alone in the firearms community.
To me, I do not even concern myself with "overkill" concerns until I start losing a significant amount of meat from the effect of making the shot. In my SUBJECTIVE measure, I do not feel that 308 or 30-06 has reached that point.
And the very fact that you and I disagree only illustrates the subjective nature of this topic.
EDIT:
Let's you, me, and whoever else that may have an opinion on "overkill" of 308, 30-06, or any other caliber either drop it, or take it to a new thread. Let's leave this one back for the BTSP or Ballistic Tip discussion.
Best,
-- John