7.62NATO

I use an M14 with a 5-round magazine for hunting where rifles are allowed. And I certainly don't give a flying fock if that is "respectable", or not. My reasons are my own.

Centaur 1

Fast forward twenty years into the future, and I bet that we see such an increase in the use of AR-15's for deer hunting that no one will question the use of military weapons. I'd personally like to have an AR-15 in either a 6.8 SPC or maybe even a .25 WSSM. It doesn't make any sense to state, "Defensive type rifles get zero respect in the hunting field and no points for style" just because a gun looks different from what you're used to seeing.

oldsmellhound

I really like my Norinco SKS too. It won't win any beauty contests, but it is 100% reliable and decently accurate (though the sights are terrible).

I've shot quite a few groundhogs with it- all with hollow-point bullets. Based on those experiences, I would recommend staying away from hollowpoints for deer. The bullets tend to expand excessively and fragment, even in a small animal like a ground hog. Several hogs were torn in half or turned inside out by the bullets. I would go with a good quality soft point - it should do just fine on deer.

vabyrd

Maybe you like to play Army...

Really? The AR has been out since the 60's. It's a fad, nothing more.

7.62NATO

Ya got me. I like to pretend whitetails are "the terrorists". Actually, anything that moves while I'm out it the woods. I actually load up about 15 20-round mags and pretty much shoot anything that's behind enemy lines.

jerrrrstanley

My Grandfather had a bolt action rifle that was 7.62X39. I don't remember him killing any deer with it but my Great Uncle shot 3 does in a row with it within 2 minutes. He didn't mean to, he thought the gun may have been off but when he shot they dropped in their tracks and fell out of sight. He thought he was missing (which is RARE for him) and when the next one would step up he would put her down too! He was using a plastic tipped bullet and they DESTROYED eveything on the inside. Poor ol deer never had a chance. I think it is a great round for deer hunting under 200 yards. I used to hunt with my SKS but never killed anything with it. Just liked the ideal of having 40 rounds with me hahaha! Young and dumb I guess!

sconnyhunter

What does the 7.62*39 do to deer? If you hit em, it kills em.

turkey guide

762x39 is used a lot for deer around here, not my choice but I've seen it in action and it works fine. The last buck I saw shot with one was shot in the neck and jumped out of the ditch he was crossing and landed dead on top of the bank. My choice is an AR-10 in 308. I'm not just playing ARMY either. I was using AR-15's before I was in the ARMY. The Army designates their weapon M-16 which is identical except for the full auto funtion or 3 round burst, while the civilian hunting rifle is semi auto. I think full auto has been phased out in the M-16 in favor of the 3 round burst. I have shot both in military sevice. Of coarse I want the best hunting rifle I can get so I choose the one that I am familiar with and have used the most as a civilian and in the military.
Interesting note, for those who don't agree with AR's in civilian hands. AR-10's were originally built as a high end sporting rifle in semi auto form, in 308 for hunters in the 1950's just like today. Of coarse yes, they were offered to the military in full auto versions and 15 years or so later they were accepted finally, (who wouldn't want a Gov't contract?) but only after being downsized to 223 and made full auto for military use. Armalite, the original Company to build them had gone broke by then, trying to satisfy the military and sold out to COLT, who got the first contract. In the mean time they had sold many thousands to civilians for hunting, their original purpose. The military accepted them long after soldiers began using them in semi auto versions sold to the public. Soldiers picked these up in both 308 and 223 wherever they could find them. So truely they were hunting rifles first, then they were made full auto, made 223 and several changes were made like the dust cover and charging handle, for military use. Yes they were a division of Fairchild, a company that built planes for the military, and who fully intended that Gene Stoners new weapon would be offered to the military. Everything the military changed made it more useful, except for the full auto which has no place in hunting. Todays AR's are built specifically for hunters in many calibers and by many companies. Most of these companies still build them in 3 round burst for police and military use also.
People in most cases remain ignorant of these facts because they have seen the AR used by the military for so long and because they have seen so much anti assault weapons propaganda that tends to show full auto weapons being misused, and then tells them that this was an assault weapon made for war. This is technically true, full auto weapons are made for war and full auto weapons are assault weapons. Semi auto sporting rifles are made for hunting and shooting sports, they are not assault weapons but few people know the difference. It's like saying bowhunters use assault weapons because wars were fought with them, true, but not fair. Bows and arrows today are way more effective than what early man used, to hunt and deffend himself in war, but still not considered assault bows that are too dangerous for civilians to own and hunt with, while some military weapons shoot the exact same calibers, as civilian arms used for mostly hunting. They are the same gun and no more dangerous in any way, whatever the configuration, except for the full auto and FMJ, AP and exploding bullets which are illegal to hunt with. So, buy a legal box of ammo, buy a legal magazine and hunt. Who cares what it looks like if it shoots, and does the intended job?
For some who will probably still disagree, look up Gene Stoner and the history of Armalite Rifles, and don't annoy me with your dissapproval of these facts. Find out the truth for yourself.

7.62NATO

turkey guide - thanks for the informative post, though I haven't done my own fact checking yet. . However, the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting or sporting. If it protects anything, it protects the civilian use and ownership of "military style" arms. Not saying you agree or disagree with this, but your post seems to suggest that people should be okay with ARs, etc because they were designed for hunting/sporting.

usmc1978

That shouldn't be ANYONE on this site. If anyone in these parts disagrees with ARs in civilian hands, they had better wake the heck up. I'm not going to give you the whole lecture, but suffice to say the end result of that attitude is that we'll all be disarmed.