Kraken wrote:
Your forefathers went hunting with single shot rifles and always got what they went after, so what happened to the mighty hunter of today?
You are as ignorant as you are naive.
Single shot rifles were wildly inaccurate, with the exception of the rifled models made by custom gunsmiths (e.g. the Jaeger, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky). Most were smooth bore, partially rusted, and incapable of hitting anything much beyond 50 yards. Most colonists carried a smooth bore "fowler" which was a combination of a .62 caliber smooth bore and shotgun (approximately 20 gauge). Most game was taken with the shotgun, with deer rarely taken except by more accurate rifled guns; a deer shot with the .62 caliber ball was a rarity.
Until the early 19th Century, military arms were similarly smooth bored, not rifled. Even the U.S. Colonial army didn't use rifled weapons. They were armed with captured English Brown Bess and French Charleville smooth bores. U.S. made rifles were generally reserved for snipers, and they were accurate out to +300 yards.
Taking game in the colonial days gave the hunter a success rate about that of a wolf, abround a 1 in 10 success rate. Many were more successful trapping game than shooting.
Today's "mighty" hunters fare a lot better, first shot hits are up around 50%, and first shot kills below that. Animals rarely, if ever, drop when shot, whether with an arrow or rifle bullet. They frequently run off, leaving a blood trail for the hunter to follow. However, even using the trusty Winchester Model 94, more game has been missed the first shot than cleanly killed. The hunter stands a greater chance with a good scoped bolt action rifle. And most states don't allow deer hunting with calibers like the .223; they require calibers of .25 centerfire, and larger. The .30-06 is still one of the most popular rounds.
I own a couple of custom-made flintlock rifles, and while they're capable of fine accuracy out past 200 yards, they were built using modern rifling and building methods.