[fabsroman]

I actually debated using my .220 Swift on whitetails with a Barnes XLT bullet (i.e., the X bullet with a lubricating coat on it). However, I decided to stick with the .300 Win Mag. Now, I do know people that use a .22-250 to kill deer and I actually saw a 4 point buck taken with a .22-250. Personally, I like to use a gun that allows me to take any shot that presents itself, whether at 50 yards or 400+ yards. One never knows where that big buck will show himself.

With that said Dom, if you truly limit your shots to 100 meters or less, I think you will be fine with the .222 and any X bullet. Every X bullet I have used on deer has done a great job. They have all exited the animal and they caused massive internal damage. If you look at the energy pattern of an X bullet, they leave a damage trail within the body cavity that looks like a football. The entry and exit wounds are rather small, but the damage on the inside is extreme. All I can say is, try it once and if it works, continue to use it. If you lose an animal and you know you made a good shot, stop using it for that type of animal.

Yes, I believe in the humane taking of game, but where does a person draw the line. What exactly is humane? The most humane thing to do would be to make a head shot that kills the game instantly, but that is a rather tough shot. Is it humane for a deer to be stuck with an arrow so that it will lay down and die over several minutes? Is it humane to shoot a deer in the lungs so that it will suffocate on its own blood and/or bleed to death? What is humane to one person isn't necessarily humane to another. Is a .300 Win Mag enough gun, or would a .416 Rigby be a better choice because it would cause much more shock and much quicker loss of blood? What exactly is under gunned and what exactly is over gunned? Would it be better for somebody to use a .222 and correctly place the shot or a .50 cal and not correctly place the shot? Okay, I'll admit that shot placement is everything. Again, a million what ifs.