Weapon suggestion

[zzGypsy]

Quote:
wait... are you suggesting that's what to use on the coyotes?

 

[pdbantam]

hardware cloth and posts set 24" in the ground

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

555 rounds of .22 LR cost $20 way cheaper, but the bullet sucks.
Jams and does many bad things to your gun

That's poor maintenance and operator error.
My 22's don't jam, and the bullets don't "do bad things to the gun"

Tested and proven a 17HMR is better than a 22LR

It won't kill them any deader than a 22, and it still costs FAR more to shoot.​

 

[RoosterRanch]

Quote:
The OP isn't wanting to learn to HUNT predators

They merely want to shoot predators ATTACKING the birds.

A 22 is all that is needed for a beginning shooter, and it will take care of all the problems without being overpowered

Why make things harder than they need to be?

That's right & the bullets are cheap. Still need to be very careful the bullet will travel along ways if you miss. The 22 is usually everyones first gun besides the BB gun.

I think this is what the OP set as requirements.

Two requirements: the weapon is light and it does not have a brutal kickback. I have arthritis in my shoulders, hands and wrists. I also don't want to spend $$$. I am looking for a mid priced weapon. I have all intention of killing the dogs that come on my property and threaten my chickens

Was not aware I complicated the issue for the OP. The INTENT is to kill dogs on the property, not stop the attack The terminal balisticts of a 243 are far superior to a 22, if you want a wounded dog you may have to explain, or a dead one that has killed its last chicken, the choice is yours.
243 ammo is more expensive, but the rifle can be purchased very cheaply.

 

[thekid]

Quote:
That's poor maintenance and operator error.
My 22's don't jam, and the bullets don't "do bad things to the gun"

Tested and proven a 17HMR is better than a 22LR

It won't kill them any deader than a 22, and it still costs FAR more to shoot.​

Pretty much everywhere I have read that the 555 brick from sucks and the ammo destroys your gun. 17HMR IS better

 

[Ole rooster]

Why do post such as this have a greater tendency to trend so far away from the original question? Nobody is going to war. Nobody is killing wolf or bear. Just a dog in the backyard that kills chickens. More than likely nothing over a 150 foot shot. Probably more towards a 50 foot shot.

No reason for folks to get testy just because their caliber of weapon isn't discussed as much as some other. If I had my druthers I would pick the .223 in a bolt gun with the 62 grain round. I know what they did in 'Nam to human flesh,but I would guess it would be somewhat similar. But not everybody thinks that will do the job. Heck, that doesn't bother me on bit, and it shouldn't bother you. Before this stops somebody is going to suggest the .50 cal Barrett.

 

[zzGypsy]

Quote:

Hey Roo... we're already up to explosives... try to keep up here, eh?

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

Pretty much everywhere I have read that the 555 brick from sucks and the ammo destroys your gun

Not everything you read is true.
In 55 years of shooting 22's, I've never had ammo "destroy a gun", and I've shot just about every kind there is to shoot​

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

The terminal balisticts of a 243 are far superior to a 22,

Of course that is true, but we aren't discussing terminal ballistics.

This is about the best gun/cartridge for a beginning shooter with arthritis

Anything larger than a 22 LR is overkill for this scenario​

 

[Bear Foot Farm]

Why do post such as this have a greater tendency to trend so far away from the original question?

Some always think bigger is better.

When I was working at the gun shop, I had a guy tell me he wanted a 7 MM Weatherby Magnum because "the gun I have now won't kill a deer"

When I asked what he had, he said " A 257 Weatherby Magnum"

That round has more energy at 500 yds than a 243 has at 150 yds​