I can see why all the debates rage on. Hand rifle vs. hand gun has great arguments on both sides. The way some shooters shoot a "hand rifle," by using special rests like the front one that has levers and knobs to adjust the firearm to thereby adjust the sight picture without the human hand touching the firearm, is a good case in point. And using a bottleneck cartridge in an accurized bolt action specialty pistol equipped with a high dollar scope to shoot at an antelope at 500 yards or so with the above mentioned rig is a far cry from using a two handed hold on a Ruger .44 magnum to shoot a deer at 45 yards.

Now, having said that, I believe that each one of us, as an individual, needs to define in our own way what "handgun hunting" truly means to US, and if we are comfortable with it, go for it.

I have killed a bunch of big game animals (including some really nice record book animals) with single shot scoped "hand rifles," but have chosen to go back to revolvers now for a number of years.

I agree with Whit's input.

In fact, my latest goal (which I have mentioned on this website a time or two prior to now), is to break my own SCI World Record Handgun Mule Deer (204+ SCI Typical taken with an Encore) with a revolver.

I have in the mean time taken a mule deer and a couple bull elk with my revolver that easily make the SCI Handgun Record Book, which seem to mean more to me than my Hand Rifle record book entries.

But that is just me, and my own opinion. To each their own. As others have said, we need to back each other up in the long run.