Do we need a Shooter's Media Watch...?!!?

[Stix]

This is a little bit of a rant to start, & then a bigger bit of questioning Roo destruction laws, & thus the suitability of some people who represent us shooters in the media...

Im sick of the rubbish i see everywhere in the general media, but here is an example of what i find a little irritating, and another example of something concerning ...

So there is an article in the March edition of the SSAA's Shooter mag...
Its about Noslers range of frangible hunting/varmint bullets.
Given that i shoot bunny's & foxes, & quite like the challenge of putting a little distance between me & those bunny's, i went straight to this article when i opened the mag.

Can anyone tell me this isnt a money making product placement/paid advertisement disguised as an interesting article about bullet performance...?

Its slmost like the shooters print version of 'a current affair' with an exclusive interview with the latest person booted out of that channel's current reality tv drama...

But moving past that...something else i couldnt believe i was reading was this bit ive circled in the pic below...

The article goes about saying how good these bullets are because i the author's mate with his roo cull permit, dropped a roo with his 22-250...at 400 metres...!!..

2020-03-08 12.06.10.jpg (468.08 KiB) Viewed 4033 times

An impressive shot for sure--well assuming it was a head shot--not so for a body shot given how big they are.

But i thought the max legal distance to shoot them was 200 metres & must be head shot. , yet here the SSAA are sprooking you can shoot them at 400m if you use Nosler bullets that youve tested at the range prior.

2020-03-08 12.10.58.jpg (178.62 KiB) Viewed 4033 times

Infact, id guess the "crop raider" that was shot in the head at 235 metres in the preceeding paragraph was probably a roo too--i mean its unlikely to see a rabbit in a crop at 235m unless its not long after seeding, & foxes & cats arent what you'd call crop raiders, & i doubt he was shooting pest birds at night.

Are there exceptions to the 200 metre head shooting rule that im not aware of, in the National Code of Conduct for destroying roos...?
The only one i know of os that where you have to deliver a finish to an injured animal from an accidental misplaced shot.

Or is this a case of ignorance from greed, so much so that the law is overlooked for the sake of earning a quick buck for an editorial product placement...??...

giphy (6).gif (993.47 KiB) Viewed 4033 times

[StraightWhiteMale]

A shooters media watch would be great.

Spreading the word that whether a firearm is made from plastic or wood it is the action that matters not the appearance.

black guns matter

[Sergeant Hartman]

Send em am email with your concern and see if you get an answer.

I would have thought its illegal to shoot that far... could likely result in loss of license.... please don't shot me i am not a hunter.... pardon the pun

[StraightWhiteMale]

Send em am email with your concern and see if you get an answer.

I would have thought its illegal to shoot that far... could likely result in loss of license.... please don't shot me i am not a hunter.... pardon the pun

Is it even real? They might just claim it is a fictional event as it does not mention a location. It could be in Iraq for all intents and purposes.

[bladeracer]

I was very crook for a few weeks, during which the magazine arrived. They go straight on the pile of unopened mags normally, but being stuck in bed I opened it and had a flick through. What an absolute waste of paper that was. It's just a one hundred page advert as far as I can see. Quit the magazine business as it does nothing useful with members' funds, put the money saved toward bringing non-shooters on board.

Have they taken on editorial staff from the UK perhaps?

[Stix]

Is it even real? They might just claim it is a fictional event as it does not mention a location. It could be in Iraq for all intents and purposes.

Huh...?

Sorry...but are you saying the author of the article may have gone to the middle east to test nosler varmint bullets on Roos where they dont have pest destruction regulations...?

Anyway, i cant see how they could claim this to be fictional...the author is writing about his & his mates hands on experience......If it is fictional, they are just lying to the membership base...

[StraightWhiteMale]

Huh...?

Sorry...but are you saying the author of the article may have gone to the middle east to test nosler varmint bullets on Roos where they dont have pest destruction regulations...?

Anyway, i cant see how they could claim this to be fictional...the author is writing about his & his mates hands on experience......If it is fictional, they are just lying to the membership base...

I am being hyperbolic here mate but can you prove that it wasn't Iraq or anywhere else in the world? There are kangaroos in quite a few countries as people have taken them overseas or they have escaped from zoos and kept breeding.

Who hasn't embellished on a story and seeing as he is selling a product that could be the case. Who really knows.

Me and my friend saw what we thought was bigfoot at 800 yards in his rangefinder. See what I did there mate? I embellished. I have no friends. Haha

[Stix]

Lol...
Yea i get your point SWM..which is in part the same point/one of that im making...

I guess im saying i dont see a rational arguement out of the claims as they have as good as varified their claims...& as such i dont think it paints the shooting/hunting/ground pest shooting fraternity in a good light if this is how we are 'mentored'.

I think if you read the article, they've cornered themselves...
Im sure they werent shooting under a permit endorsed for another country...
And i doubt even the most stupid person wouldn't pick up that their rangefinder was reading over & above 200m out, despite how much even the biggest tales of long range varminting are exaggerated for the sake of product promotion & self inflating.

This is obviously a poor attempt at an objective product promoting editorial, & if there are no laws that allow you to shoot roos beyond the 200metres aside from finishing a wounded animal in distress, i just see this article as irresponsible...period...
But im open to seeing it from a different perspective--thats why ive posted it to see what discussion it brings...

Maybe thats why i dont fit in anywhere...because i generally refrain from using a diplomatic filter & call out sh!t when i see it...

[Blr243]

I did not read the article ...admitting illegal behaviour online is stupid , admitting it in a nationwide magazine is insanely stupid. And irresponsible.... it encourages the acceptance of such activity ....it seems a business concentrating on profits has forgotten its ethical responsibilities

[Sergeant Hartman]

Umm it could be that either the state the person is barred in doesn't have the rules of 200m max, or editor just missed it or doesn't know the rules and regs.

I dunno

[straightshooter]

Stix
Are your little grey cells becoming active.
Just about all shooting media is about selling something. I can't ever remember reading a magazine revue of some shooting related item telling the full story of any failings of the product unless it was in a crypto code I don't understand.

[Stix]

Haha...!!
I too thought the grey matter might be firing Straightshooter...
And when i saw your name i was intrigued to see what informative input you'd contributed...

But given it seems you've missed the most pertinent point of the the thread, that being to seemingly sprook of breaking Roo destruction regs in that blatant attempt to disguise advertising as an informative editorial , it appears i could be wrong on atleast one of the two points...

[Sergeant Hartman]

SS bring another related but good point. I have been watching some videos of a few reviewers and i don't i have ever seen them say anything bad, even that gavintoob aka ultimate reloader

[bladeracer]

SS bring another related but good point. I have been watching some videos of a few reviewers and i don't i have ever seen them say anything bad, even that gavintoob aka ultimate reloader

Try Paul Harrell, he's happy to say if something is crap.

[KMA]

The editor should pick up on this stuff that shows shooters in a bad way.Dont all hunters have that one mate who seems to pull off this brilliant shot at something a really long way away ,while it was running,in thick fog.Ha ha.

[Wapiti]

We've had many consecutive cull permits here for roos, and I probably shoot at them every day when out checking/feeding stock. Can't say I'm a brilliant shot, but theres no way I could humanely hit a roo in the head at 400m 2 from 2 shots. The reason is, I just cannot hold steady enough at that range, even with the engine off, and custom rests on all the vehicles.
That's generally how i hold back from shooting, using a rangefinder it's aftyer 250 yards or so. If it's too far, I can't get a good hold and it's not that hard to tell. If I can't get closer, I won't do it. I'm sick of chasing up wounded animals when theres enough out there, not to take chances. It's distasteful and I hate it.

Code of conduct basically says (to me) to shoot only when reasonably assured of a humane kill, and head shoot only.
I know there are some very good shots out there better than me (most probably), and some might shoot long range off a bipod and treat animals like steel targets, with all their distances recorded. I do that too for fun, but not at game. Maybe that's how old mate took the 400m shot?

[TassieTiger]

Not sure if people can recall, but a while ago in the magazine, there was an article about taking a kid plinking and shooting cans.
At the time, boredom at work meant that after reading the article, I emailed SS and asked them where and how a person might be able to legally take a young person plinking as it was outlawed to target shoot in state forests, ranges wouldn't generally allow can shooting and well...you get the point.

Their response was as pathetic as the article - advising that they would not have the room in the magazine to address how/where, youngsters could go "plinking" and that you should check with your local laws...I countered and said, that the article would have been much more effective, may have even encouraged new members / new owners / new permits, etc IF they had have taken the time to tell people how and where they could legally undertake what the 4 page article was spruiking...but at the end of the day - it occurred to me - it's just filler. Its utter crap. They don't care about anything...

Another similar article re budget hunting rifles just got printed - where the author selected the 4 best budget hunting rifles around a grand or so. The results were a bit crap in regards to MOA standard, but the author deemed them perfect for hunting so these 4 got a LOT of air time...no Mauser M18, No Steyr, No Sauer,
etc etc etc - only those rifles of manufactures who advertised in the rag.

Australia - we have an answer to your toilet paper woes - use the magazines from SSAA....

[poid]

That kind of product placement is everywhere, online too. Noticed it big time when looking for a pack, if you search for something like "best hunting packs" the listings on the first page are sites whose "top packs" are just bunch of gear that is sold on Amazon so they can get their click-thru commission. You wouldn't know that companies like Kifaru, Stone Glacier, Kuiu etc even exist!