British Slo-Mo Deer Headshot Video [NSFW?]

“This video is designed to show where to head-shoot deer,” fieldsportschannel asserts. “It is aimed at deer managers only.” Dear me. I think they could have put that a bit better—- although it’s hard to see how without using the word “targeted.” Still, it is what it is: a good clean kill. Surprisingly, there’s not been a dickie bird from animal rights activists in The Land of Hope and Glory. Only a matter of time, mate. Only a matter of time.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

63 Responses to British Slo-Mo Deer Headshot Video [NSFW?]

  1. avatarMr. Grimm says:

    That was rather shocking, but the gentleman who was explaining shot placement was more interesting and informative than actually seeing the shot.

  2. Is this what they call “gun p0rn”?

  3. avatarMatt in SD says:

    I could have done without that.

  4. avatarDon says:

    I’m feeling a weird combination of “Eww” plus “I love deer jerky” right now.

  5. avatarInternet Guy says:

    At least the people in the video weren’t getting off to it. Really bloodthirsty hunters can be creepy.

  6. avatarJoey S says:

    Of all the ways to die, I think I’d choose that way. Just outside eating some grass, looking into the horizon, pondering where I’ll frolicking to next, BOOM!

  7. I think the high speed video is unnecessary to get the point across.

    • avatarBob says:

      I have to disagree, Firstly there was plenty of warning about the content, but I believe it to be a very good example of what bullets actually do. Dead is dead, it can be clean or messy depending on many factors.

  8. avatarAPBTFan says:

    Instant Marty Feldman!

  9. avatarRuss Bixby says:

    Better for the deer than getting taken down by a wolf, I suppose, but I like wolves.

    Ah, well; England…

  10. avatarJames1000 says:

    There is something about that dudes British accent that makes this video rather jovial. Tea anyone?

  11. avatargloomhound says:

    I’ve been deer hunting since I was 12 so it’s been 34 years behind the gun and I can tell you I did not like that one bit.

    I was taught that head shots are too risky due to the chance of wounding a deer and sentencing it to a lingering death. I have seen this proven out in the field having found and seen deer with their eyes and muzzle shot off.

    Also I know logically that a well executed shot to the skull kills instantly, but not everything needs to be guided by nothing more that the cold light of logic.

    I love the deer I hunt and this just seems disrespectful.

    • avatarRuss Bixby says:

      I guess it depends on how close you can get. With the wee beasties breeding like (insert third world nation) in parks in the absence of predators, I imagine it’s not quite like when I have to set a spell in a blind.

      Still… disturbing, if cartoonish.

      • avatarDavid W. says:

        It is also deer management, not deer hunting. This is Britain, I really doubt there are many deer hunters out there in the first place so you could probably get closer to the deer when they no longer see humans as a threat.

        I will admit, that video kinda turned my stomach. Glad I only go for chest shots and even happier that my brain isn’t a high speed camera.

    • avatarJavier says:

      Completly agree , I posted basically the same thing almost simultaneously , my post if a few below you. I never shot at the head , hearts and lungs all day. You put it better than I could “I love the deer I hunt” !!

  12. avatarRuss Bixby says:

    Well, now that I’ve watched it, I have to say there’s something of the cartoon about the effects of hydrostatic shock in that shot. It’s like a scen from Who Framed Roger Rabbit, in its way. Marty Feldman, indeed.

    For all that, it’s sodding merciful.

  13. avatarShenandoah says:

    Seeing the deer’s skull explode and be disfigured like that strikes me because it’s a less than dignified death for a noble animal, yet I do not object to it because it was an instant, merciful death. It is no more wrong than shooting a deer through the heart, or watching a deer pursued and slowly ripped apart by a pack of wolves over the course of several hours. Not all things in life can be neatly served with a cherry on top.

  14. avatarJavier says:

    I am a hunter , I allways shoot for heart or lung bigger target and less chance of hurting but not killing and causing animal more pain. I did not like the video , it was too much for me and can’t get the image out of my mind. Even though I have harvested many deer, sometihing about that video made me feel sad.

    • avatarإبليس says:

      Harvesting deer? Are they plants now? Something about that term is more degrading to the animal than slow-mo headshots.

      • avatarJavier says:

        That’s what’s hunters call it. What sounds more degrading 1. I shot the deer with a 30 06 and blew his heart out of his side ! All his ribs and blood and bone blew onto the tree. Then I walked up took my knife out sliced him up and ripped out his guts. Or 2. I harvested the deer and field dressed him. It’s just actually a way to be less degrading

  15. avatarmiserylovescompany says:

    In light of Michael Moore’s vicious diatribes the other day, I have to say I find this one a bit ironic. A little offputting…yeah, you could say that. All the more so since it’s a British production (they must have a friggin’ PLAGUE of deer now that no one’s allowed to properly hunt anymore), what with the matter-of-fact tone and accent.

    However….I am not that mortified. Even though I have hunted only rarely and still more rarely successfully at that. I grew up on a farm in Missouri ranching beef cattle, like so many around here. Once when I was about 8 or so, we took a steer to slaughter for beef. While my grandfather was tending to business I wandered off in search of more interesting adventures, and presently found myself in….hog receiving. Ha! Receiving, indeed! It was a VERY illuminating experience to see a hog get processed from beginning to end in about 15 minutes, from the moment they herded it into the pen, and stunned it (probably a captive bolt gun?), then strung it up, bled it, skinned it, gutted it (a real anatomy lesson there!), and butchered it before sending it off to the freezer. 8 years old, remember. Remember, death by any means in the end is still death. It’s true that as a species we don’t apply that to humans, but if you’re the dead one the last thing you’ll be doing is disagreeing.

    I think that as a lot we have not only fallen far from reality, we have fallen to depths of ignorance and effiminate hypersensitivity that can scarcely be comprehended. Boys are no longer allowed to be boys (see any stupid school incident for steaming heaps of evidence) and the ninnies are now running the asylums. I will not bow to such foolishness in my lifetime, and even though I (fortunately?) have no children to subject to our public indoctrination system, I would urge that all such parents who still have a shred of sense of reality take their kid on a field trip….to the slaughterhouse! You won’t hurt tender sensibilities as much as you might imagine and they will learn a few realities – such as the fact that meat doesn’t just appear in the grocery store out of nowhere, etc,

    Tom

    • avatarLongBeach says:

      Excellent last paragraph. It would do a lot of good for kids (and their parents) to take steps towards being more aware of the not-so-warm-and-fuzzy elements of life. Not in the interest of scaring them, but helping to raise awareness of the true goings-on of the world. For me, I have rarely seen any real footage of people/animals being shot, so watching that video SERIOUSLY got my attention. Obviously I know from my range sessions and from extensive reading how powerful a firearm is and what it can do to objects/animals/people, but seeing that deer headshot probably the most vivid demonstration of firearm effectiveness I’ll see for a long time

    • avatarcrndl says:

      or maybe turn them into vegetarians :)

    • avatarLarry2 says:

      Well said Tom. I took advantage of an opportunity last Fall to share with my 7 and 8 yr olds a recently killed deer which they had seen moments earlier run happily though our field. They watched it be gutted and then be taken away for butchering. They were a bit quiet and we talked about it afterwards. A few weeks later we ate that same deer. They didn’t have any problem with it. I feel blessed they understand and appreciate that something had to die for us to have a meat based meal.

  16. avatarmike says:

    I can appreciate the sudden, quick death, no pain argument. But something about the slow mo still bothers me. It’s just not the way mother nature intends for any animal to die. Better that another wild animal do the slow killing, instead of a man-made projectile.

    • avatarJTPhilly says:

      A slow painful death is better than an instant, painless kill? That makes a lot of sense.

      As a hunter, I wouldn’t take a head shot due to the many possibilities discussed already, but this isn’t deer hunting. It’s deer management. There are many managers in the U.S. who do the same thing, as well. It’s a very calculated event, and they don’t take a shot they aren’t 100% certain that they can make humanely.

      The slo-mo obviously isn’t pretty. But a slow death by a wild animal is better?

    • avatarrosignol says:

      …….

      In nature, herbivores are mostly eaten alive when they become to old or sick to outrun predators.

      Predators generally starve to death or are eaten alive by other predators.

      Humans are unnatural because we strive for a quick, painless kill. And it’s not just because the meat from an animal that died in pain tastes bad.

      • avatarPatrick says:

        I was under the impression that many herbivores are killed relatively quickly. The chase causes a large release of endorphins, and that doesn’t wear off for at least a minute or two. When the animal is caught, there is severe bleeding and it quickly loses consciousness.

        The predator, on the other hand, will likely die of temperature, starvation, disease, or injuries sustained while hunting. The latter seems like an incredibly painful way to go.

        • avatarHuman Being says:

          Go for a jog then poke yourself with a needle. Still feel it? So do they. The “there’s a massive spike of endorphins and then a painless fade to black” thing is voice-over pablum to keep animal-lovers from turning off (or writing in to complain about) the animal shows. They hurt. They’re terrified. Both continue until after fresh oxygen ceases flowing to the brain.

          There’s no magic “painless death” switch that herd animals have developed. If anything, they will try to fight until they are no longer able. Those that do manage to get away can live to pass on that behavioral tendency to their progeny – so it gets propagated. Any that lay down and go “oh well, looks like I’ll miss the Bridge game with Maude…” will have much less probability to pass on that tendency. One behavior tends to reinforce in the population more than the other.

          Study of terminal ballistics on this site should tell you the former. Charles Darwin should have explained to you the latter.

  17. avatarRalph says:

    a good clean kill

    A good instant kill, yes, but there’s nothing clean about it. Nor should there be. Death is supposed to be ugly. Respectful hunters know it, which is why they always strive for an instant kill. Gun owners who carry for self defense know it too, which is why we take great measures to avoid shooting anyone even in situations where shooting would be justified.

    People who think that death isn’t ugly have names like Adam Lanza.

  18. avatarsindaan68 says:

    That was….jarring.

  19. avatardwb says:

    When i lived in London I was initially shocked at how graphic and matter-of-fact everything was and how “cheerily” they seemed to present it. “The trains are delayed because there is a person under the train” says the nice young lady on loudspeaker at Victoria’s Station. The drug abuse ads were horrid. Perhaps one becomes desensitized over time.

    So this video (and the guy speaking) – fits right in.

    carry on, then.

    P.S.. what was he shooting anyway, i could not tell?

    P.P.S i do some deer management and I understand the need for head shots, although its not usually encouraged. Most of it happens in suburban areas and you don’t want the deer running too far into someone’s yard. Even a double-lunged deer shot from close range can travel surprisingly far on adrenaline.

    P.P.P.S admit it, you watched it more than once. What really creeps you out, the deer, or your own instinctive curiosity?

  20. avatarTheUnfortunateRealist says:

    To all the hunters who are saying “its too much, wahh wahh wah” how the hell would you ever defend your familiy if an intruder breaks into your house? Might have to shoot a HUMAN in the face. But anyways It’s “deer management” not hunting.
    If they don’t shoot these deer they will overpopulate and starve. That’s cruel and “disrespectful”.
    Oh you only do body shots? If you’re worried about missing the head shot and maiming the animal maybe you should rethink your chosen hobby.
    About the video:
    It is interesting to see the terminal ballistics of the shot. Better than what you get shooting gel or gallons of water. I’ve never seen a deer headshot in real life.

    • avatarJavier says:

      Just because I am a hunter that enjoys harvesting and stocking , does not mean I can not have compassion for what I kill. Of course I am worred about maiming the animal and not killing it , I have respect for living things that have not threatened my lively hood. As far as a home invader , I do not have to guess , unfortunately I have been in that situation and did not hesitate for a fraction of a second. You can not conpared a POS that breaks in to your house to hurt you with a bautiful animal that doesn’t harm you insteads provides meat for your family. You need to reexamine your morals and your uncompassionate psychotic urge to kill and hurt peaceful animals for the fun of it. I hunt to harvest not hurt.

      • avatarTheUnfortunateRealist says:

        Lol. So now animals are held in higher regard than humans? I bet if that doe was eating your fields dry you’d have a different view on the situation. Your cash crop? Bye bye. No money.
        1) they are not hunting. Pest control.
        2) POS felons go to jail. In no way shape or form do I hold a deer in higher regards than a human. Felon or not.
        3) like I said before, if you only feel comfortable with body/lung/heart shots fine. A head shot will get the job done too.

        I’m not debating the morality of the situation. The men in the video obviously know wtf they are doing. Your comments give the illusion your some kind of wilderness police force, condemning via online the unethical treatment of obviously over populated, disease ridden, unwanted animals. If I was a hunter in Britian I would probably do the same as these men as well as other humane means of population control.

        “Did not hesitate”. Glad you can identify the target, see whats beyond your target, and aim all without hesitating. I applaud you.

        If I ever draw my gun at something/someone, it means I have already decided what I am aiming at is worth killing. Don’t question my morals.

        • avatarJavier says:

          I will take your applaud , thank you, because I did and always follow Jeff Cooper rules, and never hesitated.

          Now for your list , here are your responses

          1) an animal is still a living thing , no matter what you are doing

          2) I guess the felons you know are very nice and good people , but when you break into my house with intent to hurt , rape my wife and little girl , and rob me. I hold the deer in much higher view in every way shape and form

          3) it not that the head shot will not get the job done too, it’s the chance of missing. The head is not only smaller but moves much more

          I did not say the guys in video didn’t have morality , I said you may not in this situation because you are complaining that we are crying the hunters, just because we love and respect what we harvest !!

    • avatargloomhound says:

      Do you hunt deer?

      Do you think it’s so easy to shoot a person, any person in the face?

      Do you think it’s the same thing to shoot a person that means you harm as it is to a shoot deer feeding in a field?

      Do you know that the size of a whitetails brain is about as big as your closed fist, while the size of it’s heart and lugs is about the size of a dinner plate. Also I believe that deer they show being shot is a much smaller roe deer.

      Will not a doe with her lower jaw shot off not starve to death?

      • avatarTheUnfortunateRealist says:

        Woaah. Easy Mr. questionator!
        Did you know that I pretty much kickass with all my rifles and shotguns. If I don’t think I can hit a tennis ball sized target, I WILL NOT TAKE THE SHOT. Like I said before, I feel comfortable making headshots. Not at all ranges. Don’t be in my business because your stomach can’t handle the video. If you listen to the video (that means using your ears, not your mouth) the men in the video ask if it is it too much.
        Please stop acting like a typical American. That’s why other countries hate us and burn our flags. Keep your self rightiousness to yourself. Let other cultures hunt with blow guns for all I care.

      • avatarTheUnfortunateRealist says:

        Tennis balls should have diameter between two and a half inches (6.35cm.) and two and five-eighths inches (6.67cm.)

        Can’t get sub 3MOA at 100 yards? Don’t hunt. (www.peta.org)

        But if you can and choose to go for heart/lung that’s fine too.
        Don’t hate.

  21. avatarJames1000 says:

    The only problem I have with this video is the issue of them ruining perfectly mountable deer heads.

  22. avatarIn Memphis says:

    Please tell me Im not the only one laughing right now. The eyes bursting out was some real Looney Tunes s#!t

  23. avatarTim McNabb says:

    Well….ewww. Still, it was an ethical kill. I’ll get over the “eww”.

  24. avatargloomhound says:

    luckly it was an ethical kill this time.

  25. avatarJake says:

    Seriously nobody mentions CWD yet? As far as I knew headshots are verboten in the US because the prions that cause CWD mostly stay in the CNS system and aren’t released unless the skull is cracked open. And if they are released they stay viable almost indefinitely and can then spread to exponentially more deer.

    • avatarCentralIL says:

      +1

    • avatarLarry2 says:

      Yes, this

      • avatarJake says:

        Jeez we can’t be the only three! This is ridiculous, we don’t even know how these things work yet, we only know that they have almost infinite shelf life and infectiousness, under almost any environmental conditions. That scared the CRAP out of me when I first started reading about preventative measures to keep it from spreading. Note to the editor man, need some CWD info tacked on somewhere, using this method is simply bad science.

        • avatarWade says:

          CWD is not as common as you seem to think it is. Those in the biologist community in Texas call it a ‘political disease’, because its much scarier on paper than in real life. It usually kills the host before it can spread very far, except of course in extremely dense populations, like in the video.

          On the subject of British deer, CWD has only been found in North American Cervids. (Whitetails, mule deer, elk, etc. It cannot infect exotic Cervids like axis deer.)

          The only way to spread CWD by shooting a deer in the head would be if a large amount of brain matter were deposited in a water or food source, or if the ‘pink mist’ were to be inhaled by a bystanding deer. Since CWD is spread through bodily fluids, spraying infected brain bits everywhere is no more infectious than letting an infected deer live. Deer leave bodily fluids everywhere, in water, all over feeders, plants, etc.

          You have an excellent point, and I applaud you for making it.

        • avatarLongBeach says:

          Forgive my ignorance guys, but what’s CWD?

        • avatarWade says:

          Chronic Wasting Disease. It’s a prion that pretty much rots the brain. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_wasting_disease#section_1

  26. avatarSarge says:

    1) Quick
    2) Painless
    3) Physically intact

    When it comes to killing just about any living animal, you generally get to pick any two out of those three. While disturbing (and also fascinating, from an anatomy/physics standpoint) to see in slow motion, it is guaranteed that the animal literally never knew what hit it. Hydrostatic shock wave propagation much faster than synapse signal propagation.

    Even a heart shot is not so quick as to go unperceived by the recipient, and bleeding out into your own lungs, drowning in your blood strikes me as a rather agonizing way to go.

    Same issues come to the fore in capital punishment; over time the species has more or less shifted from “quick/painless/messy” toward “slow/(arguable)/dignified.” I’m not so sure this is real ‘progress.’ I’d much rather go out as that deer did than 20 years in a cell, then strapped to a gurney helplessly awaiting the needle. Or gagging and agonizing as my lungs fill with fluid

    Short of a dynamite helmet, or riding a nuke, I can’t think of any more painless way for a creature to end life. Though it does make a mess.

  27. avatarLeo338 says:

    I love my firearms but I have never been hunting and I don’t think I would want to ever kill a deer. I took a weekend trip about a month ago to a little town called Ruidoso. The deer there are all over the place and walk around the neighborhoods and the golf course. After a few hours I was able to hand feed some of them. I prefer this type of encounter with wild animals over shooting them for sport. However, I do not feel the same way when it comes to wild boars. Perhaps one day I may go out and hunt one of those.

  28. avatarjwm says:

    I have no problem with hunting or culling animals. I was a hunter and just last weekend I was out with my adult son who has jumped thru the hoops to get a hunting license in Ca. He’s starting from scratch and wants someone with experience to go with him. I have no license and carry no gun while we’re out.

    My only real question about these culls is what happens to the meat? I know that it is necessary to manage game numbers but I hate to think that the meat is being wasted when there are no doubt charitable groups that could make use of the protein.

  29. avatarJohn Fritz says:

    Nice. That was one surprised-looking deer. Damn rats with antlers. You like deer? Go live around Valley Forge Park for a year or two, you’ll be cured.

    No love lost here. The more deer I see getting lead poisoning the better I feel. As far as that goofy head shot goes, I’d sure rather Bambi get her dome blown apart than a gut wound and stumble around the woods for a few days dying a horrid painful death.

    My Crown Vic got to blast a deer on the way home from work one night. I will tell you it happened so fast that my brain wasn’t even done transmitting the signal for my foot to get off the gas and on the brake before it was over. I went back to look because I was going to call the Berks County ARL to come and kill her if she was laying by the road still alive. She was gone though. I did feel bad about that.

  30. avatarLucas D. says:

    Holy shit, Bambi 2 is hardcore!

    Pip pip, jolly good show, mates.

  31. avatarJohnbob says:

    What, in Latin, is called “caput displodit.”

  32. avatarInternet User says:

    They never hear the shot. It is just lights out.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.