How to bring up a boy to kill

[Brian Ellis]

Torturing an animal for 3 hours.

[KRSESQ]

On the one hand, the shooter and Buddhist in me says this kid needs to work on his aim to make his kills faster and cleaner. On the other hand, going after a brute like this is no small feat, even for an adult. This is not Wilbur. Wild pigs can be vicious animals. Hell, DOMESTIC pigs can be vicious animals! If this one had charged, the kid would have been trampled to jelly in seconds. Gripping hand, 700-800 lbs of sausage from this thing can feed a lot of people.

Kevin

[Brian Ellis]

No, the thing that got me was the father and friend with high power rifles ready in case it charged the kid, but they allowed the animal to bleed for 3 hours, so that the kid could claim the kill with a pistol, which is hardly an adequate hunting tool.

I have nothing against hunting if it is a vital necessity and provided it is done as humanely as possible. I am against blood lust, especially if it is taught to kids, even if under the name of so-called "sport".

And I would never wish to be anywhere near to any 11 y-o kid toting a pistol!

[Dr Mordrid]

No one should try killing a hog until they're big enough to use a proper (read: large caliber) weapon accurately. IMO pistol big game hunts are for experts only, and you're talking to a long time pistol hunter.

I pefer a Thompson/Center G2 Contender in 45-70 for hogs (below). One well placed shot = one kill.

That said I will take Erik on a hog hunt as soon as he can take his classes & get a license AND handle one of my big bored rifles; maybe the 300 Mag, .375 Mag or the .50 plains rifle. The license he can get at 12, but we'll see if he's man enough for the cannons by then.

[MultimediaMan]

Really, Brian. Sometimes you talk out of your @$$; imperiously declaring this person a candidate for becoming some violent monster when you likely have no knowledge or expertise hunting dangerous game. It is like calling a transplant surgeon a butcher for removing organs from organ donors. You have indicated in previous posts and threads, that you are somewhat of a layperson on the subject of hunting, and generally dislike hunting and guns in general. You are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to label someone a monster-in-training.

Hunting is about killing as humanely as possible. Let's put those three hours in perspective, shall we?

Three hours to kill an animal which weighs as much as a small horse, but built as nearly tough as a Cape Buffalo. The young man is to be commended for tracking and killing the wounded animal. Suffering is a terrible thing: if you are going hunting, rest assured you have already made the decision to kill a living thing: this is a morally acceptable thing. It is also accepted, but maybe not emphasized enough, that at that point you are morally obligated to kill as quickly as possible. No one likes to see any creature suffer. However, things do go wrong on occasion: this fact does not make you a savage or a monster. It DOES make you responsible for harvesting the animal as humanely as possible.

It is possible (and likely) that our intrepid hunter had no idea how big the animal he shot actually was until after he hit it the first time. But again, you are now commited to killing the animal. You cannot un-shoot it or take it to the vet at that point.

Leaving a wounded animal in the field is a careless and dangerous act; careless because the animal was left in a hopeless state to suffer for a possibly lengthy period of time (days, even weeks), and could have well posed a threat to any bystander (hunter or otherwise) which may have crossed it's path before it expired. Wild Hogs can be aggressive even unprovoked. Now put the animal in pain and see what it's disposition might be.

I personally don't think he should have been going after this thing with a handgun of any caliber; 8 shots merely illustrates how tough the animal likely was. If I were to have been carrying a my hunting rifle of choice for that type of animal, I would have felt considerably undergunned. However, this is not case of poor planning, this is an extraordinary case of perseverance.

Case in point: I normally use a .358 Winchester for Boar with a heavy jacketed (275 Grain) softnose bullet. This would not have been enough for that Boar, barring an ideal shot. I had known ahead of time I was going after a 1000+ lb hog, I would have brought a .375 Ultramag or a .416 Ultramag (I don't even have a .416, but I know my dad has that particular chambering reamer in stock, and I think he also has a .416 barrel blank sitting in the barrel rack...).

The .50 S&W magnum is a powerful cartridge, but the sectional density (Mass divided by Diameter, squared) of the the bullet cannot compare to a rifle in terms of penetrating power. It's more than enough for a thin-skinned deer or small to "large" sized hog (~350Lbs). 8 Rounds expended was a case of not having enough gun. But who knew? Even the "high powered rifles" the article mentions may not have been sufficient for an animal of this size. Most of the time, they use Carbine-class rounds (.444 Marlin, .45-70) which also suffer from the same sectional density problems that the .50 S&W does.

I would be willing to bet dollars to dimes this young man will never commit a violent crime, at any time in his life. Why? This young man knows there is no reset button in real life. He knows what his weapons are capable of doing and knows that he is responsible for what they do.

[MultimediaMan]

No, the thing that got me was the father and friend with high power rifles ready in case it charged the kid, but they allowed the animal to bleed for 3 hours, so that the kid could claim the kill with a pistol, which is hardly an adequate hunting tool.

This could also be viewed as a life-experience thing. My first successful elk hunt was a mixed bag; The easiest part was shooting the animal. Less pleasant was field dressing it. You killed it, you dress it. It's not all fun and games.

The same rule applied when dealing with a wounded animal: You shot it, now make sure you've killed it; make sure you stop it's suffering. Hunting is not putting an animal in front of a firing squad. It's your hunt; this animal's suffering is now laid firmly at your feet. Others should not step in to finish the animal unless they have to; it also might not be legal to.

I hate it when I don't get a clean kill; I'm mad at myself more than anything, because in my mind, I failed to carry out my obligation. I'm sure the young man on reflection feels this way too. It's one of those things you have to live with.

[Dr Mordrid]

Sometimes a bad kill is just unavoidable. I can remember hitting a 200 lb. deer square with a .50 caliber plains rifle shooting a 500 grain sabot, making a hole the size of a medium fist. Knocked him 180 degrees around but the damned thing got up and ran over a quarter mile on nerves alone. He sure didn't have a drop of blood in him by the time he dropped.

Problem is that deer store glucose in their livers and dump it as soon as fight/flight fires up, meaning they can be dead on their feet and still run like hell until they run out of blood, glucose or both. How far? Depends on the deer and the hit.

I think to do a one shot kill on that particular deer I would have had to get a head shot, which is not a high percentage shot and best avoided, or use an artillery piece. Then again most of my friends and relatives think that .50 is an artillery piece

[James_D]

Hunting is about killing as humanely as possible. Let's put those three hours in perspective, shall we?

Three hours to kill an animal which weighs as much as a small horse, but built as nearly tough as a Cape Buffalo. The young man is to be commended for tracking and killing the wounded animal. Suffering is a terrible thing: if you are going hunting, rest assured you have already made the decision to kill a living thing: this is a morally acceptable thing. It is also accepted, but maybe not emphasized enough, that at that point you are morally obligated to kill as quickly as possible. No one likes to see any creature suffer. However, things do go wrong on occasion: this fact does not make you a savage or a monster. It DOES make you responsible for harvesting the animal as humanely as possible.

It is possible (and likely) that our intrepid hunter had no idea how big the animal he shot actually was until after he hit it the first time. But again, you are now commited to killing the animal. You cannot un-shoot it or take it to the vet at that point.

Leaving a wounded animal in the field is a careless and dangerous act; careless because the animal was left in a hopeless state to suffer for a possibly lengthy period of time (days, even weeks), and could have well posed a threat to any bystander (hunter or otherwise) which may have crossed it's path before it expired. Wild Hogs can be aggressive even unprovoked. Now put the animal in pain and see what it's disposition might be.

I personally don't think he should have been going after this thing with a handgun of any caliber; 8 shots merely illustrates how tough the animal likely was. If I were to have been carrying a my hunting rifle of choice for that type of animal, I would have felt considerably undergunned. However, this is not case of poor planning, this is an extraordinary case of perseverance.

Case in point: I normally use a .358 Winchester for Boar with a heavy jacketed (275 Grain) softnose bullet. This would not have been enough for that Boar, barring an ideal shot. I had known ahead of time I was going after a 1000+ lb hog, I would have brought a .375 Ultramag or a .416 Ultramag (I don't even have a .416, but I know my dad has that particular chambering reamer in stock, and I think he also has a .416 barrel blank sitting in the barrel rack...).

The .50 S&W magnum is a powerful cartridge, but the sectional density (Mass divided by Diameter, squared) of the the bullet cannot compare to a rifle in terms of penetrating power. It's more than enough for a thin-skinned deer or small to "large" sized hog (~350Lbs). 8 Rounds expended was a case of not having enough gun. But who knew? Even the "high powered rifles" the article mentions may not have been sufficient for an animal of this size. Most of the time, they use Carbine-class rounds (.444 Marlin, .45-70) which also suffer from the same sectional density problems that the .50 S&W does.

I would be willing to bet dollars to dimes this young man will never commit a violent crime, at any time in his life. Why? This young man knows there is no reset button in real life. He knows what his weapons are capable of doing and knows that he is responsible for what they do.

First of all that is indeed a big Boar, though I wouldn't eat the meat... yuck. hogs taste like someone pissed on the meat. When I boar or Elg hunt, which i do lot in Hungary and Norway. I always used either my .308, or .318, and also I never shoot unless I am 99% certain that I can kill with one shot. I disrespect the way this hunt was done though, i know that US have a somewhat less restrictive way of hunting than EU. In most EU countries you need a hunting license, where you have to qualify on a theoretical part and on a shooting range. If you don't kill the animal in a proper way, there might be some repercautions. Like Boar hunting in Hungary, you have to see the whole animal, if you kill a sow which have cubs, then you are in big trouble. Or also letting an animal hurt, when you have the means to expedite its way to its gods, then that is also bad hunting practice. You might loose your right to hunt again, or get a big fine, and have to qualify for a new hunting license.

JD

[Dr Mordrid]

Seeing that whole pig wouldn't do you any good as far as dropping it. Unless you hit something like that with a gun like my 45-70, almost literally a hand cannon, or a big bore rifle a chase is almost inevitable.

Hell, I remember a friend of mine hitting one twice in the forehead with a 300 Mag when it charged him and it still kept coming; the bullets ricocheted off its angled forehead without penetrating. He had to take 3 more shots from 8' up a tree

[MultimediaMan]

Again, these guys were out hunting boar, which are normally about the size of a medium to large deer (with really short legs).

This beastie was three times the size of a typical boar for that region. Hunting rifles typical of Alabama would have been inadequate for this type of animal.

Hunting in the Southeastern part of the US is typified by an open forest canopy with dense undergrowth and thickets; the forests are almost completely deciduous. This has been a wet year for the northern part of the region, too. Generally speaking, you cannot see for more than 50 yards or so unobstructed. What this means is that your guide might see something you do not and vice versa even if only standing a few feet apart.

Understanding the environment this boar was taken in is crucial to getting the context in which the story unfolds accurately conveyed.

No one comments about how "unfair" or "inhumane" the 3 hour battle with the Blue Marlin was while offshore fishing; it's fishing after all, right?. I fail to see anything different about hunting, as long as it is finished properly.

[Wulfman]

gun-issues aside, was that really a wild pig, or rather a descendant of house pigs? I heard the latter tend to be bigger.

mfg
wulfman

[Brian Ellis]

Almost certainly a feral pig. At one time, pigs were bred on the belief that the bigger the better, irrespective of the quality of the meat. Remember Blue Boy in State Fair? (THAT gives my age away!)? Dunno about States-side, but pig farming in Europe tends now towards smaller, leaner animals, because the public are more conscious about fat.

The problem is that they can interbreed with wild pigs and that can produce really Big AND Vicious brutes, with capital letters to show the offspring inherit the bad from both sides. Wild pigs were extinct in the UK until some guy imported a few that he let loose in the New Forest which traditionally was used to allow domestic pigs to forage for acorns in the autumn. The inevitable happened and some have had to be culled. The same is now happening elsewhere in the UK.

[Gurm]

And I would never wish to be anywhere near to any 11 y-o kid toting a pistol!

This demonstrates the difference between our cultures, Brian. I learned to shoot well before I was 11, both with a bow, rifle, and later pistol. I was well supervised. However, it's actually rarer even here in the USA than popular media would have you believe. I grew around farmers, which explains it. But frankly, my license to carry is collecting dust at the moment, because I don't trust any lock around my kids. (Note that I worded that the way I did!)

Logan and Jacob will likely learn to shoot as well, with my in-laws. I know, we aren't expecting an armed uprising anytime soon, right? *ahem*

[Brian Ellis]

This demonstrates the difference between our cultures, Brian.

I hardly call the handling of lethal weapons at a tender age a culture; I would even consider it demonstrates a lack of culture.

[Jammrock]

I hardly call the handling of lethal weapons at a tender age a culture; I would even consider it demonstrates a lack of culture.

I'm curious, are you opposed to range shooting, or sport shooting that does not involve hunting?