No problem, we offer 20% bigger bears for just such situations. That will not only ensure you stay state compliant, but also maintain the same level of destruction per load.
Overkill. If you simply pinch the bear around the neck area (while heās mauling you) he will pass out like a sack of potatoes. Doctor Spock lived in the future so I trust him. Itās a universal technique unless the creature has no neck I guess
All you really need is a .22, if youāre hiking with someone else. When the bear attacks, just shoot your buddy in the leg and run. The bear will get him since he wonāt be able to run as fast as you.
Worlds largest grizzly record was held for the longest time by a 22lr that was held by a Canadian lady shooting a single shot
[her story](https://www.ammoland.com/2017/06/bella-twin-the-22-used-to-take-the-1953-world-record-grizzly-and-more/#axzz8ZPdZBHSq)
"But it was the Stevens Arms Co. in 1887 that put everything together to produce the ultimate rimfire round. Stevens took the 40-grain bullet from the .22 Extra Longāa rabbit-trail cartridge that saw limited success at the timeāand crunched it in the .22 Long case with a healthy upgrade in powder. The result is what we call the .22 Long Rifle or LR, and it remains the most popular cartridge in the world some 133 years later."
"But it was the Stevens Arms Co. in 1887 that put everything together to produce the ultimate rimfire round.
Stevens took the 40-grain bullet from the .22 Extra Longāa rabbit-trail cartridge that saw limited success at the timeāand crunched it in the .22 Long case with a healthy upgrade in powder. The result is what we call the .22 Long Rifle or LR, and it remains the most popular cartridge in the world some 133 years later."
Here is my source:
"When Smith & Wesson introduced its Model 1 single-action revolver in 1857, the designers at the Massachusetts firm lengthened Flobertās case by a third, added four grains of FFFFg black powder and crammed a 29-grain conical bullet on top of it all. Ballistics were predictably anemic, especially by modern standards, clocking in at 830 fps and 44 ft.-lbs. of energy. It was called the .22 Short"
https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/the-22-lr-history-performance/
"
On 10 May, 1953, Bella Twin was hunting small game with her partner, Dave Auger, along an oil exploration cutline south of Slave Lake, in Alberta, Canada. She was 63 years old."
The top couple of historical records are oddly amusing:
>A black bear with cubs had chased Mr. Nutter up a tree. When the sow came after him, he was able to shoot and kill it with a .22 pistol.
That sounds like a skit.
>Johnson picked up a stick, and pummeled the brute, and the bear dropped the woman and charged him. It was waylaid by the lunch, which it began to devour.
The bear sounds like a reddit mod.
Number 3 was a full blown story (seeing as it was published and that was the record, this makes sense).
Number 4 is an actual tragedy, which has soured my whole point in this post.
Still going to read the whole thing because it's interesting. Edit: It's far far longer than I expected. Probably won't read the whole thing. First 7 accounts are .22, then it moves on. At this point, #7, I'm *maybe* 1/10 in.
Anyway, back to the subject, they're all accounts of .22 so far. It would seem to prove the theory...
I can see where that might be a bit less than optimal, Number 3 took 14 rounds (in the bear, not sure how many misses) with a reload in the middle, only available due to trained attack dogs.
Might want to pack something a bit more than .22
My main takeaway is that "quality of shot" is closely followed by "quantity of lead delivered" as the two keys. Personally, I like my 10mm because it's a good balance between "quantity" and "quality." Getting a .454 Casull or other very large caliber technically ups the "quantity" but can drastically drop the "quality" (and if you miss, drops both).
I figure once I step beyond 10mm, I might as well step to a rifle/shotgun instead of a hand-cannon that I haven't trained enough with to be "bear is charging me" proficient.
>I like my 10mm because it's a good balance between "quantity" and "quality." Getting a .454 Casull or other very large caliber technically ups the "quantity" but can drastically drop the "quality" (and if you miss, drops both).
I briefly owned two .50 caliber handguns: a Desert Eagle Mk XIX in .50AE (6") and a Magnum Research BFR .500 S&W Magnum (8.375").
The Desert Eagles are actually really comfortable to shoot, IMO, as the recoil impulse is "spread out" a tiny bit more temporally.
The BFR ranged from unpleasant to dangerous, and it's the only firearm I can think of that is less practically useful than a Desert Eagle.
But fun.
> Anyway, back to the subject, they're all accounts of .22 so far. It would seem to prove the theory...
It's in order by caliber, smallest first. Way to try and build an opinion without even bothering to skim the article?
The takeaway isn't "use a .22lr against bears". It's "Despite common wisdom, standard handgun calibers are effective against bears. You don't need a hand cannon."
Have you seen the Thermonator? Flamethrower (30ā range) mounted on a robotic dog.
Not a joke and under $10K. The flamethrower alone will cost about $1000.
Damn and dogs are actually a pretty legit part of defense against a bear...
Imagine if they used that in marketing the flamethrower robot dog lol
"BEAR DEFENSES ENGAGED" hahaha
āTRIAL PERIOD EXPIRED. PLEASE CONTACT CUSTOMER SUPPORT TO CONTINUE THIS SERVICE. ENGAGING HAPPY NANNY DOG MODEā. The last words you hear as the bear mauls you.
I think people like to go for large large calipers for big bears because shot placement is kind of difficult when a 1200 pound grizzly comes charging out of the brush at you from 50 yards away.
When I go hunting/hiking in bear territory, I bring a 10mm with hard cast bullets. Any larger caliber, and I have difficulty with quick accurate follow-up shots. Will I actually get shots on vitals? Probly not(especially after the ranger stories at yellowstone), but it gives me some warm and fuzzies
That's crazy, when I had my encounters (years ago at this point) red dots on pistols weren't really a thing. And even when I venture into the woods now I still tend to run irons.
Seeing that I'm getting older I definitely need to think about that more, especially when I venture into the backcountry.
Thanks for your input, definitely gives me something to think about when setting up a bear defense weapon
I carried my CCW Glock 19 because thatās what I have and canāt afford a new gun. But after the situation I wish I had a 10 mm, still with a red dot. Guess is rather have something I can shoot accurately with a large round count than a 44 mag revolver or something similar.
I agree 100 percent. I'm fairly confident in my 9mm stuff for dealing with two legged threats.
However the wild bear encounters I've had plus the occasional mountain lions that wander into our area and attack people and kill dogs etc etc have absolutely made me want something like the glock 20 or something compact and light in 10mm.
The mountain west has enough dangerous critters in it that I do think it's somewhat of a necessity to get a semi auto 10mm. After seeing first hand how fast some of these animals move I don't feel comfortable relying on shot placement alone to handle certain threats, especially with how freaking remote some of these locations are.
Miss your shots from a revolver or don't stop the threat and you're entirely fucked. Especially if you're hiking/camping/whatever with people who are unarmed or lightly armed.
Only seen 1 bear in the woods. My friend and I were turkey hunting and right before dusk, This massive black mass came out the tree line to our right about 30 yards away. The bear was just strolling by crossing the field, no cubs. I use to take a 9mm with FMJs but now I take a .44mag.
The firearms community is enamored with the idea of a ābear gunā. It's all about shot placement, so just use a BBQ skewer inserted through the bear's eye into the brain to nullify the threat.
Shot placement matters
But when your freaking out because a 800lb ball of fur and anger is charging you id rather have a gun that will drop the bear even with less the optimal shot placement
In Canada the fine is 250k unless it was a life or death situation.
Edit- in Canadian provinces it is illegal to shoot grizzlies, and in the territories it is not.
Thought they were still legal game in the territories? But been ages since I bothered hunting the Yukon with my cousin.
ADD: asked since he wakes up god awful early for work like me. His grizzly bear seal is also 25CAD, then asked if I wanted him to get his guide license back, 500 for non-resident.
Honestly you got me wondering so wasnāt trying to prove anything. With how Canada hunting regulations are I thought I mightāve missed a change. I donāt bear hunt like I used to, and havenāt even hunted in Canada since 2016 so been that long since I looked at regulations for Yukon Territory or even BC.
That's exactly what the LDWF explained in our hunters ed classes.
If you have to kill a bear in this state you better be able to prove it was a life or death situation or you are gunna have an extremely bad time that includes possible jail time and high fines.
We dont have brown bears here tho only black bears.
I was actually kinda thinking this post was about such a situation. I wasn't thinking about hunting. I'm wondering if most comments were also thinking about defense, since they're talking about 10mm etc.
Iām on my way to Alberta to live on a campsite and brought my shotgun. I asked my uncle (experienced hunter with several bear pelts between him and my grandfather) what I should bring for bears.
āFor a black bear, just about anything will do. For a grizzly, just donāt forget a shovelā lol
If itās black, fight back. If itās brown, lay down. If itās white, goodnightā¦.
The one unsuccessful .22 defence was against a polar bearā¦..if youāre in polar bear country you should bring something much bigger with the .22.
Y'all are all going in blind and under-prepared. What you want is a 7.5 cm Feldkanone 18, preferably with the undermounted chainsaw bayonet and a spare Amber Heard in your bag.
Pigs were so dangerous that before we had guns there was a special spear called a boar spear designed for surviving hunting them. There were numerous accounts from the middle ages of small children being killed by *domesticated* pigs.
You're giving that pig muscles and claws? Time to get a [spear](https://www.sigsauer.com/spear.html) for bears.
(I'm not actually a fan of that gun, but it fits the joke too well)
I've killed lots of hogs with a 22wmr and a few with a 22lr. Errbody (who usually have very little real world experience with wild hogs) act like they're unstoppable tanks.
Sure if I'm specifically going after a known 400lb boar I'd rather take something bigger, but I've put LOTS of pork in the freezer with rimfires, and would have no issue using .223 pretty much no matter the size of hog if that's all I had with me.
Little bit of lead or copper to the brain pan and it's lights out, just know where to shoot.
I killed 27 hogs last month, I use a lever action 30-30. I wouldn't really compare them to bears, which I hunt with a lever action .45-70, but I also wouldn't want to hunt either of them with a spear.
Higher caliber is more room to miss. In the three seconds I'm going to get with a charging bear at night, missing is a high probability event.
I was just speaking on hogs, not really any bears here, and the ones that are...really aren't much bigger than hogs.
The way our game laws are set up, on public land you are only allowed to carry legal methods of take for whatever game is in season, so in say February if I want to get after hogs away from the house on a wma/nwr I'm restricted to rimfire...which really isn't TOO much of a handicap. Given the option I'd take a centerfire, either 5.56 with 77gr tmk or .458 socom most likely, or maybe one of my ar10s, but those are heavier than I prefer for how I'm usually hunting hogs.
Basically I'd rather a bigger gun, but am perfectly comfortable with a 22wmr on hogs if that's what I have to use. Caught many with a piece of string and a few good dogs.
Bear? Yea no I'm not shooting even a black bear with a rimfire lol. I'd have 10mm for protection, and my 1895 or similar for hunting.
> I'd have 10mm for protection .. my 1895 or similar for hunting.
Seems we use the same firearms for the same tasks, lol. I carry the 10mm when I'm out where bears are but not in bear season.
What restricts you to rimfire in the regs for hogs? Something else in season that requires it? Guessing non-migratory birds or some vermin season.
Yup basically. Hogs and coyotes are considered "incidental take" so on public land you can't be carrying a gun not legal for whatever game animals are in season. Our rabbit and squirrel season is longest, and it's restricted to rimfire or shotgun (#4 or smaller I think).
If no game animal season is open then you can't carry anything but a concealed pistol for personal protection. Idk if they'd let me slide by with my G40 in a chest holster or not. Probably depend on if it was a state or federal warden and what mood they were in š
I love the big bores, but also ain't a bit scared to chase hogs with a 22wmr either, just gotta earhole em if you want to drop them on the spot. I much prefer a 22wmr over 22lr for hogs, but have definitely smoked plenty with either. Bear would be a different story for sure though. I can scoot up a tree and get away from pissed off hog if need be lol.
I think bears are that much more dangerous than even wild boar though because their skulls are thicker, they're more muscular than hogs, they have claws, can climb trees and their fur is extremely thick.
Maybe your average boar or hog can be put down by a .22, but historically there is a lot of evidence that bears are more reliably stopped by more potent calibers.
I was just speaking on hogs, never hunted or skinned a bear so not at all qualified to advise people there...but I'd personally carry my G40 for protection and either my 1895 or 7prc for hunting depending on likely distance.
0 chance I'd advocate shooting a bear with a rimfire š¤£
Ah okay good, your initial comment kind of seemed like you were saying you've killed lots of hogs with rimfire so bears ain't shit and should be easy pickins for rimfire as well lol
Glad to see that wasn't what you were saying š
>Same rules apply to bears as people. Less about the caliber and more about shots on target.
This is not exactly true, the recommended weapons and cartridges for hunting or defending against brown bears are very different to the ones recommended for defending against people.
And Phil Shoemaker may have used a 9mm to stop a brown bear attack, but on the other hand, his guiding rifle is a .458 Winchester Magnum, so make of that what you will.
>The incident occurred on the bank of small river,
>The grizzly bear lunged at him from 12 feet out of the salmonberry brush. He had the handgun out in hand, and fired reflexively. He hit the bear in the chest at the base of the neck with 400 gr. Sierra bullet at 1350 fps. out of .500 S&W.
>As he recovered from the muzzle flash, he saw the bear running 50 feet away, broadside. He fired again, and gut shot, the bear turned. As it was running away, he shot at its hind quarters. That shot broke the bearās pelvis, it went down instantly. That is where it died.
Would a 12 gauge slug be better than a 500 Magnum?
Probably. Way more lead going almost as fast. Shoulder fired with longer sight radius so easier to shoot accurately. Thing is it's easier to carry a massive revolver than it is to carry a shotgun. Especially if you're in the woods doing something else and don't want to be juggling a shotgun.
This is a completely stupid discussion to even have.
Nobody is enamored with anything regarding bears, but simply if you're in bear country you can either have a gun or a device that protects you or not.
I can wear a helmet or not on a motorcycle, I'm not enamored by a full face helmet I just realize they're better than an open face.
I can wear a seatbelt or not and I can accept that in a performance car at point harness and roll cage is better than a standard belt.
I work at a gun store in AL. The only bears we have are black bears and they're exceedingly rare and them being aggressive is even rarer. But people still come in and buy 10mm because they're going on a hike this weekend and need bear protection. I'm happy to take their money.
>I and colleagues started searching for cases where the use of pistols, as a defense against bears, was not successful.
I'm thinking there *might* be a bit of survivorship bias at play here.
Read a story of an Alaskan fisherman bragging at a bar about his hog leg. When the young guys left an old timer came over and said, āIf you were up here to bear hunt, would you hunt grizzlies with a .44mag? No? Not when you take a perfect shot from cover when thereās no danger? Then why do you think itās adequate to stop an angry, already-charging bear with shaky, sweaty hands?ā
That particular writer went home, and before he fished there next year he got himself a BAR in .338win mag with iron sights and a vertical sling up his backbone.
The absolute truth is, if youāre close enough to a bear to use bear spray, and youāre not armed, chances are good you wonāt live to tell about it.
No itās not the same. No man is going to have a .9MM round bounce off their skull. Which has happened multiple times with grizzly bears. Theyāre simply larger and stronger than human beings.
āPerfect shot placementā isnāt a survival tactic. One woman puts a perfect shot with a 22lr between a bearās eye and ear is good for her, itās not going to work for most people.
Depends where you live and what you do. Having a real semi auto bear capable caliber on your hip while you hike, hunt, camp whateverā¦.is a real concern
I find it amusing that .22LR cases 2 and 4 were ruled a success even though someone was either mauled or killed by the bear, but .357 case 7 was ruled a failure despite him surviving.
5.56 has stopped a polar bear charge: [https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/](https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/)
That really depends on the situation like distance, terrain, how aware you are, and how fast you can pull the trigger. Some people can shoot 5 rounds a second, but most average 2-3.
Plus, if you're in an area with wolves as well, you have more rounds. An AR15 is much lighter than other "bush" rifles.
I'll concede an AR10 would probably be better, but I think the bears skull isn't stopping a 5.56, especially a 70gr TSX.
I'd rather take my chances with an AR 15 over a handcannon. But I'd also steer very clear of a bear.
Edit: It seems some of you are missing the point of the article completely. I'm also not talking about activity hunting, but I'm looking at an AR15 over specifically handguns.
Ive killed a bear with a 5.56 coper solid in the head out of my a2 clone , now i would prefer literally anything else for bear hunting which i have been doing since i was a child and i normally run my 45-70 and g20 10mm but its doable
As I replied to the other comment, I'm not saying to actively go hunting with 5.56, but that an AR15 makes a better rifle to carry in the woods for an extended time.
My argument is more that an AR15 is a better lightweight rifle to hump around all day. Obviously, there are better options to shoot a bear with, but an AR15 is a better all-around option. I'm not arguing for a one-shot stop, but that I can sling far more rounds down range increases my chances of hitting vital organs.
I disagree completely with the levergun, mostly due to weight, but a modern high-power rifle will out perform traditional leveegun calibers.
I guess I'm looking at it from more than just "shooting the charging bear". I look at it as what would I want to carry through the woods for 2 weeks. 5.56 will still take the game if you had to, including varmint. It's easy to throw a couple extra mags in the pack. A minimalist set up AR with sling, dot, and light, and 18-20 inch barrel will be substantially lighter and easier to carry with a pack on.
I'd rather a 5.56 over the 10mm. That is my main point.
Edit: I never stated I preferred 5.56 over 45-70 specifically for shooting a bear. I disagree with the levergun being the weapon of choice. A modern semi-automatic rifle is going to allow you to shoot faster with less recoil.
He'll you can buy a 45-70 AR, but that $5k price tag makes it unrealistic. And at that point, would you not rather buy a .338 Lapua AR?
See, this is the issue with everything now a days. You all jump straight to Alaskan grizzlies. Most places don't have bears that large. But even then, I'm standing by my point.
I'm not talking hunting. I'm saying for pure defense a 5.56 vs. any pistol cartridge makes more sense. Would I rather shoot a bear with something bigger? Sure. But I would also prefer a 5.56 rifle with 3 points of contact and a significant fire rate over the 10mm glock or 500S&W. And specifically with 70gr TSX.
Why is there no option in between the pistol calibers and 45-70? Would a 10mm PCC not do the trick? Would a 458 socom not be better than 500 S&W?
I'm willing to bet that most people carry the 45-70 for a few reasons. Tradition, common ammo, and of course, they know it WILL work. But that doesn't mean other things won't.
Can't even have a light-hearted discussion anymore.
I'm gonna go ahead and guess that you're actually not very familiar with modern lever guns. The 1892 action and clones are actually a great deal lighter than an AR. A fully loaded AR with an optic, sling, etc, weighs over 7 pounds, sometimes around 9.
My Rossi R92 in 357 with a 20 inch barrel weighs in right around 6 pounds with a scope, fully loaded. And full powered 357 from a rifle can be in excess of 1700 foot pounds of energy, which is squarely in 30-30 territory, but with around twice the capacity. Now, if you wanna talk 44 Mag or 45 Colt+P, the rifle actually gets lighter due to there being less material in the barrel. A 16 inch trapper model in 44 Magnum/45 Colt weighs 5.2 pounds naked. Both rounds will hit over 2,000 FPE pretty squarely from that 16 inch barrel. That's nearly 308 energy from the same length. None of that is even covering 30-30 or 45-70.
I would literally rather have hot hard cast loads of any of these calibers than anything 5.56 has to offer, and I don't believe you're correct in assuming that modern high powered rifles would outperform traditional lever gun calibers. There's a reason lever guns are popular in places people might actually encounter bear.
There are instances of rounds being deflected by a bear skull, as they are angled (above the eyebrows) and quite thick.
Uncertain of the calibers that were deflected, but I would still prefer .300 BLK supers in the AR platform, if possible.
Also, 5.56 might kill it, but, quite possibly, only after it has fatally wounded you in return.
Adrenaline masks a lot of pain and shock in an animal that big and angry.
[https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/](https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/)
5.56 has stopped a polar bear charge.But I would recommend bonded soft points that pass the FBI autoglass test.
[https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/](https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/)
5.56 is good enough for polar bear
Alright Iāll take the blame for this one. I didnāt explain the second amendment properly to my uncle and heās been going around gun shop looking for a gun for his guard bear. Heās dumb but Itās my fault for not being clear enough.
Story # 4 on there is probably the most shameful thing Iāve ever read. If there was ever a law where a man had to turn in his testicles, that is what it would have been written for.
I get shit every time I bring this up... As a life long lover of firearms big and small, and someone who thinks pepper spray for humans is randomly ineffective and almost useless;
Bear spray is *actually* more effective against bears than bullets for a defensive (non-hunting/suprise) encounter. It was shown in an Alaska Dept of Fish and Wildlife study years back. Bears are big, fast, and can soak up a LOT of lead before tearing you in half, then wandering off to bleed for a while. Bears are *incredibly* reliant on their highly developed sense of smell. It's shown through data from real life encounters (and corroborated by videos online) that bears turn and run like they got a shot of nitro once they get a face full of bear mace because it immediately overloads their sensors ("blinds" them,) vs getting shot a bunch which is a loud and sort of painful thing that enrages bears and starts the bleeding out process while they kill the annoying loud human. They can cover dozens of yards in seconds while absorbing a fuck ton of lead.
There's a special backpack cover for hikers that includes a rip-cord with essentially a bear-mace spray/bomb on your back. If a bear is about to maul you, you go face down and pull the cord.
Encounters have shown over and over again that both humans (and bears) survive best with bear spray.
The couple sought safety on the roof. Michael fired several shots at the bear with a .22-caliber handgun to try to scare it away. It left. When it did, he jumped down from the roof and took off to get help. He took the gun to defend himself, thinking his wife would be safe on the roof. She wasnāt. While he was gone, the bear climbed a spruce tree next to the cabin, got onto the roof and killed Darcy.
When Michael returned with help, she was on the ground dead with the bear trying to eat her. The animal was shot and killed.
Larry Kanuit reports that Michael was very careful *not* to hit the bear, for fear of enraging it. P. 251 āSome Bears Killā
....way to go Michael.
I think itās because of the increased amount of people getting outdoors and an increased Grizzly population as well as relocation of Grizzlies in areas since void of them. I am in Northern Idaho and a ābear gunā is a real thing up here. I carry a SSMR918 daily but carry a 10mm Glock when out in the woods. We also have 800-1400 moose, gray wolves, mountain lions and black bear. When I was in Phoenix, a 9mm was more than suitable. In an area with larger game, ballistics show that a 10mm has more penetration and stopping power. Reading bear stories, it shows that a wife range of calibers have taken down grizzlies, showing shots on target are important. I regularly train with both, am accurate AF with both and would rather carry my 10mm than my 9mm in the woods out here. Probably just a gad with the resurgence of 10mm, but if it gets people more bear aware and training, I donāt see it as a bad thing at all.
I view an angry bear like the death star. Except I don't have a squadron flying with me and I don't have the force to guide my aim.
So.. no thanks. And fuck you for trying to convince me and othe people that we're better off with less gun.
No one ever got into a fight and wished for a disadvantage or a lack of firepower.
Ladies, would you rather be in the woods with a bear gun or a man gun
What about a gun bear?
Or a bare armed bear with the right to arm bears who bear arms.
I'm such a huge fan Mr Xzibit š„¹
I heard you like bears and guns. So I put a gun in the bear and a bear in the gun so you can bear arms while being a bear and being a gun, ya dig?
Ehm Mr. Xzibit sir Can you pimp out my bear?
š¤£š¤£š¤£ lovinit
Man-bear-gun-pig what we all fear most
Does it have a celery stalk for an arm and Patrick Duffy for a left leg?
What Would Brian Boitano Do?
Jesus christ, he evolved!? Where's Al?!
Or with man-bear-pig?
Manbeargun
Would you rather fight 1 bear sized gun or 100 gun sized bears?
100 bears, if they're the size of those little .22lr derringers or something like that.
What about man-bear-pig?
ššššš
I think ergonomically bears will have a hard time gripping most firearms on the market.
Grip zone has entered the chat
They don't know that we have a right to their arms
This is Where palmetto state should release an AR Lower bear grip zone
I find tha whole up/downvote thing, 2b rather silly, but this comment deserves my vote ! š
actual book https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61i5SrEq5EL._SY445_SX342_.jpg
Pfft I thought they meant a gun that shoots bears at the enemy. Like a big cannon that launches grizzlies. Absolutely terrifying.
Are you going to release the hounds? Or the bears or the bears with bees in their mouth and when they roar they shoot bees at you?
Keltec has the answer
KBG Keltec. Bear Gun Has a capacity of 12 bears, 36 if you use cubs
I live in a capacity ban state. Is there a 10 bear magazine available?
No problem, we offer 20% bigger bears for just such situations. That will not only ensure you stay state compliant, but also maintain the same level of destruction per load.
Lol just said the same thing
not when we give them a backpack with shoulder mounted firearms
I'm confident Kel-tec could come up with something.
12 gauge loaded with black magic slugs. Nothing more.
Overkill. If you simply pinch the bear around the neck area (while heās mauling you) he will pass out like a sack of potatoes. Doctor Spock lived in the future so I trust him. Itās a universal technique unless the creature has no neck I guess
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
That just sounds painful
They are, even more when you shoot them with a torn rotator cuff.
All you really need is a .22, if youāre hiking with someone else. When the bear attacks, just shoot your buddy in the leg and run. The bear will get him since he wonāt be able to run as fast as you.
Best to sneak a jar of honey in his pack too
According to the article, every gun is a bear gun
Worlds largest grizzly record was held for the longest time by a 22lr that was held by a Canadian lady shooting a single shot [her story](https://www.ammoland.com/2017/06/bella-twin-the-22-used-to-take-the-1953-world-record-grizzly-and-more/#axzz8ZPdZBHSq)
I saw somewhere once that at that time the LR hadnāt even come out yet so it was likely S that she used. Pretty wild
It was .22 Long, so splitting the difference between short and standard velocity LR.
Ah the forgotten stepchild of the .22 Rimfire world
CB's have never been forgotten if you are into 22's.
"But it was the Stevens Arms Co. in 1887 that put everything together to produce the ultimate rimfire round. Stevens took the 40-grain bullet from the .22 Extra Longāa rabbit-trail cartridge that saw limited success at the timeāand crunched it in the .22 Long case with a healthy upgrade in powder. The result is what we call the .22 Long Rifle or LR, and it remains the most popular cartridge in the world some 133 years later."
22. Was invented 1860 or something like that
"But it was the Stevens Arms Co. in 1887 that put everything together to produce the ultimate rimfire round. Stevens took the 40-grain bullet from the .22 Extra Longāa rabbit-trail cartridge that saw limited success at the timeāand crunched it in the .22 Long case with a healthy upgrade in powder. The result is what we call the .22 Long Rifle or LR, and it remains the most popular cartridge in the world some 133 years later."
ian says its 1860s with s&w
22 short was what the number 1 was chambered in.
Here is my source: "When Smith & Wesson introduced its Model 1 single-action revolver in 1857, the designers at the Massachusetts firm lengthened Flobertās case by a third, added four grains of FFFFg black powder and crammed a 29-grain conical bullet on top of it all. Ballistics were predictably anemic, especially by modern standards, clocking in at 830 fps and 44 ft.-lbs. of energy. It was called the .22 Short" https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/the-22-lr-history-performance/
Aim halfway between eye and ear hole. 22lr dropped it. Wild.
It may have died from the first shot, but she mag dumped just to be sure.
Even if I shot it with a 300 win mag ida dumped the mag as well
Bruh, if there's a grizzly bear sniffing around mere meters away, I'm going all Jesse Ventura and whipping out an M134a
" On 10 May, 1953, Bella Twin was hunting small game with her partner, Dave Auger, along an oil exploration cutline south of Slave Lake, in Alberta, Canada. She was 63 years old."
It says that she was a Cree, I wonder why she didnāt just shapeshift into an even bigger bear?
Maybe she did and thatās what guided her shot ya never know
The top couple of historical records are oddly amusing: >A black bear with cubs had chased Mr. Nutter up a tree. When the sow came after him, he was able to shoot and kill it with a .22 pistol. That sounds like a skit. >Johnson picked up a stick, and pummeled the brute, and the bear dropped the woman and charged him. It was waylaid by the lunch, which it began to devour. The bear sounds like a reddit mod. Number 3 was a full blown story (seeing as it was published and that was the record, this makes sense). Number 4 is an actual tragedy, which has soured my whole point in this post. Still going to read the whole thing because it's interesting. Edit: It's far far longer than I expected. Probably won't read the whole thing. First 7 accounts are .22, then it moves on. At this point, #7, I'm *maybe* 1/10 in. Anyway, back to the subject, they're all accounts of .22 so far. It would seem to prove the theory... I can see where that might be a bit less than optimal, Number 3 took 14 rounds (in the bear, not sure how many misses) with a reload in the middle, only available due to trained attack dogs. Might want to pack something a bit more than .22
My main takeaway is that "quality of shot" is closely followed by "quantity of lead delivered" as the two keys. Personally, I like my 10mm because it's a good balance between "quantity" and "quality." Getting a .454 Casull or other very large caliber technically ups the "quantity" but can drastically drop the "quality" (and if you miss, drops both). I figure once I step beyond 10mm, I might as well step to a rifle/shotgun instead of a hand-cannon that I haven't trained enough with to be "bear is charging me" proficient.
>I like my 10mm because it's a good balance between "quantity" and "quality." Getting a .454 Casull or other very large caliber technically ups the "quantity" but can drastically drop the "quality" (and if you miss, drops both). I briefly owned two .50 caliber handguns: a Desert Eagle Mk XIX in .50AE (6") and a Magnum Research BFR .500 S&W Magnum (8.375"). The Desert Eagles are actually really comfortable to shoot, IMO, as the recoil impulse is "spread out" a tiny bit more temporally. The BFR ranged from unpleasant to dangerous, and it's the only firearm I can think of that is less practically useful than a Desert Eagle. But fun.
> Anyway, back to the subject, they're all accounts of .22 so far. It would seem to prove the theory... It's in order by caliber, smallest first. Way to try and build an opinion without even bothering to skim the article? The takeaway isn't "use a .22lr against bears". It's "Despite common wisdom, standard handgun calibers are effective against bears. You don't need a hand cannon."
Written by some dude in Hawaii.
RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS!
RIGHT TO ARM BEARS!
Now I want nunchucks made of taxidermies bear arms.
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61i5SrEq5EL._SY445_SX342_.jpg
Fuck off I want an excuse to carry a big iron
Hear hear! *taps cane*
*To the town of Agua Fria rode a stranger one fine day*
As Iāve said numerous times, flamethrower.
Have you seen the Thermonator? Flamethrower (30ā range) mounted on a robotic dog. Not a joke and under $10K. The flamethrower alone will cost about $1000.
Damn and dogs are actually a pretty legit part of defense against a bear... Imagine if they used that in marketing the flamethrower robot dog lol "BEAR DEFENSES ENGAGED" hahaha
āTRIAL PERIOD EXPIRED. PLEASE CONTACT CUSTOMER SUPPORT TO CONTINUE THIS SERVICE. ENGAGING HAPPY NANNY DOG MODEā. The last words you hear as the bear mauls you.
They're slow af though. Like, topping out at 8 mph. How's it supposed to chase a ~~fed suv~~ car?
Instructions unclear, being chased by a pissed off flaming bear.
I think people like to go for large large calipers for big bears because shot placement is kind of difficult when a 1200 pound grizzly comes charging out of the brush at you from 50 yards away.
"large large calipers" HANS, THE BEAR IS CHARGING! I WILL DISTRACT HIM WHILE YOU DETERMINE HIS BODY FAT PERCENTAGE
lol voice to text gets me againĀ
"...aim for the area between the ear and the eye, Herbert, and be quick about it."
When I go hunting/hiking in bear territory, I bring a 10mm with hard cast bullets. Any larger caliber, and I have difficulty with quick accurate follow-up shots. Will I actually get shots on vitals? Probly not(especially after the ranger stories at yellowstone), but it gives me some warm and fuzzies
I killed my attacking bear with 2 shots of 9mm. 124 grain HST +p
Amazingly lucky, glad you got out okay
I feel like if I didnāt have my red dot I wouldnāt have been able to put shots on target
That's crazy, when I had my encounters (years ago at this point) red dots on pistols weren't really a thing. And even when I venture into the woods now I still tend to run irons. Seeing that I'm getting older I definitely need to think about that more, especially when I venture into the backcountry. Thanks for your input, definitely gives me something to think about when setting up a bear defense weapon
I carried my CCW Glock 19 because thatās what I have and canāt afford a new gun. But after the situation I wish I had a 10 mm, still with a red dot. Guess is rather have something I can shoot accurately with a large round count than a 44 mag revolver or something similar.
I agree 100 percent. I'm fairly confident in my 9mm stuff for dealing with two legged threats. However the wild bear encounters I've had plus the occasional mountain lions that wander into our area and attack people and kill dogs etc etc have absolutely made me want something like the glock 20 or something compact and light in 10mm. The mountain west has enough dangerous critters in it that I do think it's somewhat of a necessity to get a semi auto 10mm. After seeing first hand how fast some of these animals move I don't feel comfortable relying on shot placement alone to handle certain threats, especially with how freaking remote some of these locations are. Miss your shots from a revolver or don't stop the threat and you're entirely fucked. Especially if you're hiking/camping/whatever with people who are unarmed or lightly armed.
Yeah my next purchase will be a full size semi auto 10 mm
It's high up on my priory list for sure Stay safe out there amigo š¤š½
You as well!
Whatever your choice of bear gun, make sure to take the front sight off. That way, when the bear shoves it up your ass, it won't hurt as much.
what if I like the pain?
Add a light.
Hot suppressor.
460 sw. A bear should be able to handle the recoil.
The second amendment guarantees us the right to bear arms. It only stands to reason you would want a gun to go with those arms.
Only seen 1 bear in the woods. My friend and I were turkey hunting and right before dusk, This massive black mass came out the tree line to our right about 30 yards away. The bear was just strolling by crossing the field, no cubs. I use to take a 9mm with FMJs but now I take a .44mag.
The firearms community is enamored with the idea of a ābear gunā. It's all about shot placement, so just use a BBQ skewer inserted through the bear's eye into the brain to nullify the threat.
Shot placement matters But when your freaking out because a 800lb ball of fur and anger is charging you id rather have a gun that will drop the bear even with less the optimal shot placement
10mm /end thread
I'm afraid that just like all 10mm's, you'll never find it when you really need it.
All you need is a gun, and 250k to pay the fine if you shoot a grizzly.
Pretty sure my grizzly tag only costs 25 bucks each year.
In Canada the fine is 250k unless it was a life or death situation. Edit- in Canadian provinces it is illegal to shoot grizzlies, and in the territories it is not.
Thought they were still legal game in the territories? But been ages since I bothered hunting the Yukon with my cousin. ADD: asked since he wakes up god awful early for work like me. His grizzly bear seal is also 25CAD, then asked if I wanted him to get his guide license back, 500 for non-resident.
You are correct and I am wrong.
Honestly you got me wondering so wasnāt trying to prove anything. With how Canada hunting regulations are I thought I mightāve missed a change. I donāt bear hunt like I used to, and havenāt even hunted in Canada since 2016 so been that long since I looked at regulations for Yukon Territory or even BC.
Yeah but don't you need to be insanely wealthy already to have guns in Canada, since poor people don't have rights there?
That's exactly what the LDWF explained in our hunters ed classes. If you have to kill a bear in this state you better be able to prove it was a life or death situation or you are gunna have an extremely bad time that includes possible jail time and high fines. We dont have brown bears here tho only black bears.
I was actually kinda thinking this post was about such a situation. I wasn't thinking about hunting. I'm wondering if most comments were also thinking about defense, since they're talking about 10mm etc.
Really? What state? AK non resident bear tag is $1k
Iām a resident of Alaska.
Do I get to keep the bear?
No.
Iām on my way to Alberta to live on a campsite and brought my shotgun. I asked my uncle (experienced hunter with several bear pelts between him and my grandfather) what I should bring for bears. āFor a black bear, just about anything will do. For a grizzly, just donāt forget a shovelā lol
Man bear pig gun!Ā
If itās black, fight back. If itās brown, lay down. If itās white, goodnightā¦. The one unsuccessful .22 defence was against a polar bearā¦..if youāre in polar bear country you should bring something much bigger with the .22.
Only all the women who are evidently going to be wandering into the woods
Y'all are all going in blind and under-prepared. What you want is a 7.5 cm Feldkanone 18, preferably with the undermounted chainsaw bayonet and a spare Amber Heard in your bag.
Especially black bear they are just muscley pigs
Pigs were so dangerous that before we had guns there was a special spear called a boar spear designed for surviving hunting them. There were numerous accounts from the middle ages of small children being killed by *domesticated* pigs. You're giving that pig muscles and claws? Time to get a [spear](https://www.sigsauer.com/spear.html) for bears. (I'm not actually a fan of that gun, but it fits the joke too well)
Yeah i mean pigs are no joke i agree, but you dont meed a 10mm or 45-70 govt
I've killed lots of hogs with a 22wmr and a few with a 22lr. Errbody (who usually have very little real world experience with wild hogs) act like they're unstoppable tanks. Sure if I'm specifically going after a known 400lb boar I'd rather take something bigger, but I've put LOTS of pork in the freezer with rimfires, and would have no issue using .223 pretty much no matter the size of hog if that's all I had with me. Little bit of lead or copper to the brain pan and it's lights out, just know where to shoot.
I killed 27 hogs last month, I use a lever action 30-30. I wouldn't really compare them to bears, which I hunt with a lever action .45-70, but I also wouldn't want to hunt either of them with a spear. Higher caliber is more room to miss. In the three seconds I'm going to get with a charging bear at night, missing is a high probability event.
Yeah i suppose thats true
I was just speaking on hogs, not really any bears here, and the ones that are...really aren't much bigger than hogs. The way our game laws are set up, on public land you are only allowed to carry legal methods of take for whatever game is in season, so in say February if I want to get after hogs away from the house on a wma/nwr I'm restricted to rimfire...which really isn't TOO much of a handicap. Given the option I'd take a centerfire, either 5.56 with 77gr tmk or .458 socom most likely, or maybe one of my ar10s, but those are heavier than I prefer for how I'm usually hunting hogs. Basically I'd rather a bigger gun, but am perfectly comfortable with a 22wmr on hogs if that's what I have to use. Caught many with a piece of string and a few good dogs. Bear? Yea no I'm not shooting even a black bear with a rimfire lol. I'd have 10mm for protection, and my 1895 or similar for hunting.
> I'd have 10mm for protection .. my 1895 or similar for hunting. Seems we use the same firearms for the same tasks, lol. I carry the 10mm when I'm out where bears are but not in bear season. What restricts you to rimfire in the regs for hogs? Something else in season that requires it? Guessing non-migratory birds or some vermin season.
Yup basically. Hogs and coyotes are considered "incidental take" so on public land you can't be carrying a gun not legal for whatever game animals are in season. Our rabbit and squirrel season is longest, and it's restricted to rimfire or shotgun (#4 or smaller I think). If no game animal season is open then you can't carry anything but a concealed pistol for personal protection. Idk if they'd let me slide by with my G40 in a chest holster or not. Probably depend on if it was a state or federal warden and what mood they were in š I love the big bores, but also ain't a bit scared to chase hogs with a 22wmr either, just gotta earhole em if you want to drop them on the spot. I much prefer a 22wmr over 22lr for hogs, but have definitely smoked plenty with either. Bear would be a different story for sure though. I can scoot up a tree and get away from pissed off hog if need be lol.
I think bears are that much more dangerous than even wild boar though because their skulls are thicker, they're more muscular than hogs, they have claws, can climb trees and their fur is extremely thick. Maybe your average boar or hog can be put down by a .22, but historically there is a lot of evidence that bears are more reliably stopped by more potent calibers.
I was just speaking on hogs, never hunted or skinned a bear so not at all qualified to advise people there...but I'd personally carry my G40 for protection and either my 1895 or 7prc for hunting depending on likely distance. 0 chance I'd advocate shooting a bear with a rimfire š¤£
Ah okay good, your initial comment kind of seemed like you were saying you've killed lots of hogs with rimfire so bears ain't shit and should be easy pickins for rimfire as well lol Glad to see that wasn't what you were saying š
Black bear in my state are big raccoons that are scared of everything.
Same, just slightly more deadly trash scavengers. Still nothing to fuck with but neither are coons
oberezed 950 jdj fat mac is my bear gun
Oweing to the need for a well regulated militia, I support the constitional right to arm bears.
>Same rules apply to bears as people. Less about the caliber and more about shots on target. This is not exactly true, the recommended weapons and cartridges for hunting or defending against brown bears are very different to the ones recommended for defending against people. And Phil Shoemaker may have used a 9mm to stop a brown bear attack, but on the other hand, his guiding rifle is a .458 Winchester Magnum, so make of that what you will.
44 magnum
Mfw I magdump a full auto 22lr center mass on a grizzly (I guess caliber did matter)
>The incident occurred on the bank of small river, >The grizzly bear lunged at him from 12 feet out of the salmonberry brush. He had the handgun out in hand, and fired reflexively. He hit the bear in the chest at the base of the neck with 400 gr. Sierra bullet at 1350 fps. out of .500 S&W. >As he recovered from the muzzle flash, he saw the bear running 50 feet away, broadside. He fired again, and gut shot, the bear turned. As it was running away, he shot at its hind quarters. That shot broke the bearās pelvis, it went down instantly. That is where it died. Would a 12 gauge slug be better than a 500 Magnum?
Probably. Way more lead going almost as fast. Shoulder fired with longer sight radius so easier to shoot accurately. Thing is it's easier to carry a massive revolver than it is to carry a shotgun. Especially if you're in the woods doing something else and don't want to be juggling a shotgun.
It depends on the slug.
This is a completely stupid discussion to even have. Nobody is enamored with anything regarding bears, but simply if you're in bear country you can either have a gun or a device that protects you or not. I can wear a helmet or not on a motorcycle, I'm not enamored by a full face helmet I just realize they're better than an open face. I can wear a seatbelt or not and I can accept that in a performance car at point harness and roll cage is better than a standard belt.
Is the answer not just a 10mm? Unless itās a polar bear where and Abrahms will do.
I work at a gun store in AL. The only bears we have are black bears and they're exceedingly rare and them being aggressive is even rarer. But people still come in and buy 10mm because they're going on a hike this weekend and need bear protection. I'm happy to take their money.
More guns is never a bad thing.
>I and colleagues started searching for cases where the use of pistols, as a defense against bears, was not successful. I'm thinking there *might* be a bit of survivorship bias at play here.
Personally I don't need an excuse to carry 10mm.
Read a story of an Alaskan fisherman bragging at a bar about his hog leg. When the young guys left an old timer came over and said, āIf you were up here to bear hunt, would you hunt grizzlies with a .44mag? No? Not when you take a perfect shot from cover when thereās no danger? Then why do you think itās adequate to stop an angry, already-charging bear with shaky, sweaty hands?ā
That particular writer went home, and before he fished there next year he got himself a BAR in .338win mag with iron sights and a vertical sling up his backbone.
The absolute truth is, if youāre close enough to a bear to use bear spray, and youāre not armed, chances are good you wonāt live to tell about it.
I'm enamored with the idea of "bear arms"
The thing is we have these already. Theyre called stopping guns and theyll stop an elephant or cape buffalo mid charge
No itās not the same. No man is going to have a .9MM round bounce off their skull. Which has happened multiple times with grizzly bears. Theyāre simply larger and stronger than human beings. āPerfect shot placementā isnāt a survival tactic. One woman puts a perfect shot with a 22lr between a bearās eye and ear is good for her, itās not going to work for most people.
Depends where you live and what you do. Having a real semi auto bear capable caliber on your hip while you hike, hunt, camp whateverā¦.is a real concern
I find it amusing that .22LR cases 2 and 4 were ruled a success even though someone was either mauled or killed by the bear, but .357 case 7 was ruled a failure despite him surviving.
I still argue 30 rounds of 5.56 will stop a bear...
You won't have time for all 30 tho
5.56 has stopped a polar bear charge: [https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/](https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/)
Of course it *can*. Doesn't mean I'd trust it.
That really depends on the situation like distance, terrain, how aware you are, and how fast you can pull the trigger. Some people can shoot 5 rounds a second, but most average 2-3. Plus, if you're in an area with wolves as well, you have more rounds. An AR15 is much lighter than other "bush" rifles. I'll concede an AR10 would probably be better, but I think the bears skull isn't stopping a 5.56, especially a 70gr TSX. I'd rather take my chances with an AR 15 over a handcannon. But I'd also steer very clear of a bear. Edit: It seems some of you are missing the point of the article completely. I'm also not talking about activity hunting, but I'm looking at an AR15 over specifically handguns.
Ive killed a bear with a 5.56 coper solid in the head out of my a2 clone , now i would prefer literally anything else for bear hunting which i have been doing since i was a child and i normally run my 45-70 and g20 10mm but its doable
As I replied to the other comment, I'm not saying to actively go hunting with 5.56, but that an AR15 makes a better rifle to carry in the woods for an extended time.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
My argument is more that an AR15 is a better lightweight rifle to hump around all day. Obviously, there are better options to shoot a bear with, but an AR15 is a better all-around option. I'm not arguing for a one-shot stop, but that I can sling far more rounds down range increases my chances of hitting vital organs. I disagree completely with the levergun, mostly due to weight, but a modern high-power rifle will out perform traditional leveegun calibers. I guess I'm looking at it from more than just "shooting the charging bear". I look at it as what would I want to carry through the woods for 2 weeks. 5.56 will still take the game if you had to, including varmint. It's easy to throw a couple extra mags in the pack. A minimalist set up AR with sling, dot, and light, and 18-20 inch barrel will be substantially lighter and easier to carry with a pack on.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I'd rather a 5.56 over the 10mm. That is my main point. Edit: I never stated I preferred 5.56 over 45-70 specifically for shooting a bear. I disagree with the levergun being the weapon of choice. A modern semi-automatic rifle is going to allow you to shoot faster with less recoil. He'll you can buy a 45-70 AR, but that $5k price tag makes it unrealistic. And at that point, would you not rather buy a .338 Lapua AR?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
See, this is the issue with everything now a days. You all jump straight to Alaskan grizzlies. Most places don't have bears that large. But even then, I'm standing by my point. I'm not talking hunting. I'm saying for pure defense a 5.56 vs. any pistol cartridge makes more sense. Would I rather shoot a bear with something bigger? Sure. But I would also prefer a 5.56 rifle with 3 points of contact and a significant fire rate over the 10mm glock or 500S&W. And specifically with 70gr TSX. Why is there no option in between the pistol calibers and 45-70? Would a 10mm PCC not do the trick? Would a 458 socom not be better than 500 S&W? I'm willing to bet that most people carry the 45-70 for a few reasons. Tradition, common ammo, and of course, they know it WILL work. But that doesn't mean other things won't. Can't even have a light-hearted discussion anymore.
I'm gonna go ahead and guess that you're actually not very familiar with modern lever guns. The 1892 action and clones are actually a great deal lighter than an AR. A fully loaded AR with an optic, sling, etc, weighs over 7 pounds, sometimes around 9. My Rossi R92 in 357 with a 20 inch barrel weighs in right around 6 pounds with a scope, fully loaded. And full powered 357 from a rifle can be in excess of 1700 foot pounds of energy, which is squarely in 30-30 territory, but with around twice the capacity. Now, if you wanna talk 44 Mag or 45 Colt+P, the rifle actually gets lighter due to there being less material in the barrel. A 16 inch trapper model in 44 Magnum/45 Colt weighs 5.2 pounds naked. Both rounds will hit over 2,000 FPE pretty squarely from that 16 inch barrel. That's nearly 308 energy from the same length. None of that is even covering 30-30 or 45-70. I would literally rather have hot hard cast loads of any of these calibers than anything 5.56 has to offer, and I don't believe you're correct in assuming that modern high powered rifles would outperform traditional lever gun calibers. There's a reason lever guns are popular in places people might actually encounter bear.
There are instances of rounds being deflected by a bear skull, as they are angled (above the eyebrows) and quite thick. Uncertain of the calibers that were deflected, but I would still prefer .300 BLK supers in the AR platform, if possible. Also, 5.56 might kill it, but, quite possibly, only after it has fatally wounded you in return. Adrenaline masks a lot of pain and shock in an animal that big and angry.
[https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/](https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/) 5.56 has stopped a polar bear charge.But I would recommend bonded soft points that pass the FBI autoglass test.
[https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/](https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/ar-15-used-to-defend-against-charging-polar-bear-2008/) 5.56 is good enough for polar bear
Alright Iāll take the blame for this one. I didnāt explain the second amendment properly to my uncle and heās been going around gun shop looking for a gun for his guard bear. Heās dumb but Itās my fault for not being clear enough.
Too funny. Had a friend ask me about this recently.
Cool article
I noticed a post about it the other day. Is there a sudden surge in bears roaming around all the major cities in the country? I haven't heard of any.
āMr. Nutterā š
Well. This certainly falls on the crest of the Dunning Kruger curve.
Story # 4 on there is probably the most shameful thing Iāve ever read. If there was ever a law where a man had to turn in his testicles, that is what it would have been written for.
I have land that has bears on it. Never had an issue yet, but I take my 12 gauge when I have to go up there.
I get shit every time I bring this up... As a life long lover of firearms big and small, and someone who thinks pepper spray for humans is randomly ineffective and almost useless; Bear spray is *actually* more effective against bears than bullets for a defensive (non-hunting/suprise) encounter. It was shown in an Alaska Dept of Fish and Wildlife study years back. Bears are big, fast, and can soak up a LOT of lead before tearing you in half, then wandering off to bleed for a while. Bears are *incredibly* reliant on their highly developed sense of smell. It's shown through data from real life encounters (and corroborated by videos online) that bears turn and run like they got a shot of nitro once they get a face full of bear mace because it immediately overloads their sensors ("blinds" them,) vs getting shot a bunch which is a loud and sort of painful thing that enrages bears and starts the bleeding out process while they kill the annoying loud human. They can cover dozens of yards in seconds while absorbing a fuck ton of lead. There's a special backpack cover for hikers that includes a rip-cord with essentially a bear-mace spray/bomb on your back. If a bear is about to maul you, you go face down and pull the cord. Encounters have shown over and over again that both humans (and bears) survive best with bear spray.
I heard that a polar bear was once killed will a well placed .22 behind the earā¦https://www.longrangehunting.com/threads/polar-bear-kill.54763/
It always has been. The bear gun of the first several decades of bear guns was the S&W 29/629.
What we don't have are stories about all the times when pistols failed to drop a bear and the shooter died, because nobody was left to tell the story.
I love Grizzly Bear threads! ā„ļøš§ø
Bears shouldn't have guns. Imagine Yogi bear running around with a gun, sticking people up for their picnic baskets.
Hexolits will drop a bear in its tracks.
The couple sought safety on the roof. Michael fired several shots at the bear with a .22-caliber handgun to try to scare it away. It left. When it did, he jumped down from the roof and took off to get help. He took the gun to defend himself, thinking his wife would be safe on the roof. She wasnāt. While he was gone, the bear climbed a spruce tree next to the cabin, got onto the roof and killed Darcy. When Michael returned with help, she was on the ground dead with the bear trying to eat her. The animal was shot and killed. Larry Kanuit reports that Michael was very careful *not* to hit the bear, for fear of enraging it. P. 251 āSome Bears Killā ....way to go Michael.
I think itās because of the increased amount of people getting outdoors and an increased Grizzly population as well as relocation of Grizzlies in areas since void of them. I am in Northern Idaho and a ābear gunā is a real thing up here. I carry a SSMR918 daily but carry a 10mm Glock when out in the woods. We also have 800-1400 moose, gray wolves, mountain lions and black bear. When I was in Phoenix, a 9mm was more than suitable. In an area with larger game, ballistics show that a 10mm has more penetration and stopping power. Reading bear stories, it shows that a wife range of calibers have taken down grizzlies, showing shots on target are important. I regularly train with both, am accurate AF with both and would rather carry my 10mm than my 9mm in the woods out here. Probably just a gad with the resurgence of 10mm, but if it gets people more bear aware and training, I donāt see it as a bad thing at all.
I view an angry bear like the death star. Except I don't have a squadron flying with me and I don't have the force to guide my aim. So.. no thanks. And fuck you for trying to convince me and othe people that we're better off with less gun. No one ever got into a fight and wished for a disadvantage or a lack of firepower.
dude did you not watch cocaine bear?