Handgun vs Spray

[>>>---WW---->]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlaJsnEzjNE

I just came across this 13 minute video. This is always a fairly hot topic when it comes to encountering bears while hunting or hiking. The guy in the video seems to have done a lot of research. Go ahead and check it out if you want. It could impact your way of thinking.

[Trophyhill]

Thanks Bill! Great video!

[Elkhunttoo]

Good stuff.... with a new job last year and this year I have had to go qualify with a pistol. It has given me a new perspective on how good I am with one. My awnser is that I don't live/hunt is grizzly bear country anymore

[Trophyhill]

I thought this was interesting. I was surprised at the caliber guys are taking into griz country. I traded in my .44 mag for a .45 acp.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... fUs11Kk6Kb

[RAMMONT]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlaJsnEzjNE

I just came across this 13 minute video. This is always a fairly hot topic when it comes to encountering bears while hunting or hiking. The guy in the video seems to have done a lot of research. Go ahead and check it out if you want. It could impact your way of thinking.

I disagree with several points that the guy in the video made.

1. Bear spray is not quicker to deploy than a pistol, assuming that you use the same holster/carry system, in fact, the spray might be a bit slower.
2. Bear spray is not more effective.
3. Using a gun to protect your life will not become a legal liability.

Most people refer to studies that were based on bad science. There are a couple of studies that I've read (out of Utah and Alaska) wherein they count all deployments of bear spray - including spraying a casual encounter with a bear at camp sites or while hiking. On the other hand, the only time guns were deployed was when a bear was actually attacking. An attacking bear is far more determined than a bear that is just curious so those successful spray deployments are actually false positives and should not be in the data.

I also noted that in the Alaska report they counted an attempt to use the firearm as a deployment of the firearm, even if the person was not able to shoot the firearm, that's going to inflate the failure rate of firearm deployment. The other issue is that there needs to be a distinction between the kind of firearm used. Long barreled firearms are not anywhere near as easy to deploy or aim mixing them with pistols isn't good science. In the last couple of years I've read of at least two incidents where a hunter tried to use his hunting rifle to stop a bear attack and the bear simply swatted the rifle out of the person's hands.

There is very little chance of being prosecuted if you can prove that a bear was an actual threat. The problem is that some people will shoot a bear when it's 40 or 50 yards away while it was casually walking past them and that's not a threat situation. Brown/ Grizzly bears are a lot larger than most people realize so when they see one in the wild they panic and over react, that's when they get in to trouble. In the real world that bear really isn't a threat until you see it display aggressive characteristics. Standing on it's hinds and sniffing the air is not a threat. Shuffling toward you with his ears up is not a threat. You need to study and be aware of when a bear is a real threat, it's a personal responsibility thing, you owe it to the bear to not be stupid and shoot him just because you don't have a realistic view of the world around you. 99% of the time bears will run if you give them a chance, if they attack you it's because they felt that they were in physical danger or their food supply was threatened - which amounts to the same thing.

A study needs to be done that looks at comparing the actual deployment and use of spray and handguns on bears that are actually in the process of attacking a person. If that were done then I believe that you'd find that spray is pretty useless and the handgun would be far more effective at protecting a person from being killed. I know that one poster has linked to a study of handgun effectiveness but like most of these studies it just makes the argument worse because it simply proved that handguns work very well at protecting us but it doesn't compare how effective handguns are compared to spray, and in order to stop the armchair experts you need to spell out, in detail, an exact comparison of how well firearms work vs. spray, otherwise you'll always read about how somebody's opinion is that one or the other is better.

[Swede]

Good article Bill. I am satisfied the video producer knows what he is talking about. I do not think he cares if you spray or shoot the attacking Grizzly. No one shooting a bear should worry about going to prison for killing a bear in self defense, but you need to report it. After just spraying a bear, I guess you can go on your way as soon as you clean out your drawers.

[saddlesore]

The handgun may be more effective IF , big IF, the person was accomplished in using it . My experience both in general use and teaching more than a few handgun users as a NRA certified instructor, most would not be able to even hit a charging bear let alone place a bullet in a vital DRT location in a bear. Some here ,might vary well have that talent. However most THINK they do, but do not.I have had too many guys come to my classes saying they can shoot a handgun accurately for my CCW permit portion, but when it comes to putting lead down range in the X ring ,they were woefully lacking and it wasn't even moving.

[MtnOak]

The stats do say use bear spray but I still take a pistol.

[Tigger]

I think Saddlesore really nailed it. People think they are better shots than they area and that is not considering the highly stressful situation or the moving target. I have a pistol and bear spray. Bear spray will always be my first attempt. One other thing to keep in mind, if you spray a bear, I don't believe you have to report it. Thus many successful bear spray encounters go unreported.

We hunt in a grizzly infested area. A guy got mauled 2 years ago and got off a few shots. They don't know if he hit it or not and so there may have been a wounded grizzly out there. Oh great. Thanks for that! On the other hand, if he would have sprayed it, now the bear may associate that with humans and avoid humans. Think that sounds crazy? Explain how skunks are not extinct......!

[Elkhntr08]

I’ll keep the spray on the belt and the 1911 in the drop leg holster.

[Lefty]

Interesting
While I do hunt where the largest grizzly in the lower 48 lives he still isn’t an Alaskan bear


I carry bear spray
My daughter carries a pistol and spray Sadly I know we aren’t always prepared for an encounter

While moose hunting with my daughters I carried a shotgun Buck shot when moose hunting
But overnight game retrieval I’ll carry my goose load
The stats he referenced , I just don’t want a bear rolling me around

I will admit today I was scouting some non grizzlie country for this fall

[Wyo67]

While our areas are not in grizzly country and don't carry either spray or a pistol, I'd probably follow Elkhntr's lead if we did. If you get the chance, I'd recommend checking out the Joe Rogan with Remi Warren podcast (first 10-15 minutes), where Remi describes the Alaskan bear attack when he was up there with Steve Rinella. Stuff that will make you question how do you prepare.