Thread: Interesting read.

Most of you are probably aware of Nathan Foster and his work, myself not...well until having a poke around on his website today.

Interesting stuff I reckon and worth sharing for those who don't know or just enjoy this sort of thing.

https://www.ballisticstudies.com/Kno...e+Killing.html

I find him informative, but I have also seen him the topic of some very passionate discussions on this forum. lol

Wouldn't know. Just found that a decent read with food for thought.

He came and gave a talk to us at our local Deerstalkers and he came across as a bullshit-free zone to me

I fail to see how anyone can take him seriously when he can't even tell the difference between Guilt and Remorse . And his medical background is , what ????? .

Originally Posted by Tankd

I fail to see how anyone can take him seriously when he can't even tell the difference between Guilt and Remorse . And his medical background is , what ????? .

That is relevant how?

I like what he has to say and have brought some of his books. helped me with technique for shooting higher recoiling rifles than my 243.
Zq

Originally Posted by Tankd

I fail to see how anyone can take him seriously when he can't even tell the difference between Guilt and Remorse . And his medical background is , what ????? .

unless splitting hairs, the two words are interchangeable are they not?

Mr Fosters work is well regarded and is a frequent reference for me.

A quick read will certainly dispel the myth of a 243w being a great 500m big game rifle for instance.

Originally Posted by Preacher

That is relevant how?

All he has written is a long diatribe of self agrandissement to show how smart he thinks he is , death by septicemia and asphyxiation don't even remotely have anything to do with hunting and the only thing the temporary cavity does , in a hunting sense , is bruise the crap out of everything . Then his evidence of proficiency of terminal effect is a picture of a disemboweled organ ?.
The guilt and remorse is a bit of a stretch but when he attempts to expand the act of killing it becomes relevant . And Terminal Ballistics is a very complex subject , that even the medical profession do not fully understand , let alone some layman .

Ok bro..I'll be remote...a non-fatal neck wound leading to swelling can partially or completely close off the airway. Death by asphyxiation.
A non-fatal wound, particularly into the gut cavity will cause death by septicemia over the ensuing week to 10 days.
I guess the relevance is an ethical one. Have appropriate gear that you practice with and take shots when you know you can put them on the deck.

Footnote...I'm just messing around dude as I'm a bit bored.

2 points I would take up.
I brought up the 243 but did not mention long range big game hunting.
2nd the risk of wounded game comes down to the person behind the trigger.
Each of us makes a judgement call every time we pull the trigger.
some shots at 50 meters are not on but for someone practiced and with the right gear 800mtr maybe ethical.

OK this is a 3rd point.
he has collected and published information about bullet terminal performance. As a reloader this has helped me select the most appropriate bullet for what I shoot.
Information about bullet impact velocity and weather it passes though, expands a small amount or has 100% fragmentation are important to know.
To me ethically I am better of to use a bullet that creates a significant path of destruction though the heart lungs or nervous system as that allows for a greater error in shot placement and a fast humane kill. (weighed up against meat damage).
Zq
like everyone I have limits and this is a grey area for me.
Ethics of long range hunting when you cant recover the games are questionable. on the other hand pest control is a different story.
for me 400 mtr is a dam long shot. for others it's 600 or 800 mtr. (when hunting)

He also forgot the stone and sling in his historical summary. How can I ever take him seriously......

Originally Posted by ZQLewis

2 points I would take up.
I brought up the 243 but did not mention long range big game hunting.
2nd the risk of wounded game comes down to the person behind the trigger.
Each of us makes a judgement call every time we pull the trigger.
some shots at 50 meters are not on but for someone practiced and with the right gear 800mtr maybe ethical.

OK this is a 3rd point.
he has collected and published information about bullet terminal performance. As a reloader this has helped me select the most appropriate bullet for what I shoot.
Information about bullet impact velocity and weather it passes though, expands a small amount or has 100% fragmentation are important to know.
To me ethically I am better of to use a bullet that creates a significant path of destruction though the heart lungs or nervous system as that allows for a greater error in shot placement and a fast humane kill. (weighed up against meat damage).
Zq
like everyone I have limits and this is a grey area for me.
Ethics of long range hunting when you cant recover the games are questionable. on the other hand pest control is a different story.
for me 400 mtr is a dam long shot. for others it's 600 or 800 mtr. (when hunting)

Bullets are funny things and one mans opinion based on his minimal testing of each projectile, his pre-concieved opinions of how the projectile might or should perform, with a whole heap of what he read on the internet and a good dose of hot air thrown in the mix dont really give me the confidence to take his word as gospel

Bullets are funny things and one mans opinion based on his minimal testing of each projectile, his pre-concieved opinions of how the projectile might or should perform, with a whole heap of what he read on the internet and a good dose of hot air thrown in the mix dont really give me the confidence to take his word as gospel

All he has written is a long diatribe of self agrandissement to show how smart he thinks he is , death by septicemia and asphyxiation don't even remotely have anything to do with hunting and the only thing the temporary cavity does , in a hunting sense , is bruise the crap out of everything . Then his evidence of proficiency of terminal effect is a picture of a disemboweled organ ?.
The guilt and remorse is a bit of a stretch but when he attempts to expand the act of killing it becomes relevant . And Terminal Ballistics is a very complex subject , that even the medical profession do not fully understand , let alone some layman.

Originally Posted by csmiffy

I find him informative, but I have also seen him the topic of some very passionate discussions on this forum. lol

My case rests

Notice the phrase "food for thought". I don't believe I said anything about it being the be all and end all of the subject matter.