How fast? Imagine having this much time to grab your firearm. No time to even stop and think about what to do next.

I think a couple points to remember.....if a bear is hell bent to attach you, and its 30 yards or closer, before you see it, all the guns/spray won't be doing you much good. Studies clearly show spray is WAY WAY better than a gun. In the clip above Eichler and friends saw the cubs in plenty of time and he had his hand on the gun before mama charged. Just about all the "bear attacks" where spray is used and SUPPOSEDLY deterred the attach....that bear was not hell bent to make a kill/attach.

Bottom line is you just have to hope you don't surprise a mama with cubs or a bear with a kill nearby. I'm doing lots of research on that area of Montana and most local hunters say the same....come hunt grizz country but just be careful and use common sense...except the ones that use grizzlies to scare non residents out of an area.

I'll take my chances with a jury, I'm shooting!

Very few people are ever convicted of shooting a bear in a claimed self defense situation. If reported, there will be an investigation, no doubt, but even if you are convicted, you will likely survive the federal penalty much better than being mauled by the bear.

I’d never need a jury. If I had a reason to shoot a bear he’d stay right where he fell. Why report anything like that?

You damn straight!

I'd much rather be judged by 12 then carried by them.

And to those talking about having an unloaded gun??? WTH good is an unloaded weapon?
SMDH If I have a weapon on me, which I do about 99% of the time, the magazine full and there is one in the hole ready.

There was a reason we used to kill all bears and wolves on sight, dump mankind into the eco system and we no longer have a need for them.

Who said you would report it? In many cases, there are witnesses, like with the hunters in the above video. Somebody is apt to talk. Or, as with a lot of criminals, the person doing the shooting is apt to talk. If you ever watch Lone Star Law, you will see that it isn't uncommon for this process to work like that.



I have been through a lot of bear attack information and looked at the studies. There is a decided bias in both sides of the studies on how the data get interpreted. It is a lot like the arguments between two different cartridges. People pick out the traits they like best and claim superiority for it. I would argue that the claims of bear spray being more effective is because of the category of "aggressive behavior." This is not the same thing as a charge and attack but can include charges and attacks. Aggressive behavior could be a bear that is simply in the middle of a trail and growling or by a bear that is simply too close (moving through a campground full of campers). When you read the individual case studies, some of the aggressive bears stopped by bear spray were stopped by guys using bear spray with the confidence of being backed up by one or more buddies with firearms (oil fiend encounters come to mind). Bear spray doesn't work well in high winds and effective range is reduced even in lower winds. Colder temps also reduce spray canister pressures and hence cut spray distances, sometimes quite significantly. For grizzlies and polar bears, there is the legal aspect of being able to use bear spray as a deterrent before it is legal to use a firearm.

Bear spray and firearms each have their place. It is really hard to tell from summarized data which is actually more effective. Sprays often get used in situations where firearm use would not be warranted or would be illegal. The campground example is classic. Park rangers will haze an "aggressive" campground bear with bear spray, and call the use a success, but would never have considered using a firearm for the same task, right? So does that bias the results? Sure.

If you look at Dean Weingarten's content published on Ammoland.com, you get the impression that bear spray is an abysmal failure and that firearms, in particular, handguns, are the way to go. However, in looking through his "analysis" of the data and how he categorizes situations, what he considers a success or failure is VERY biased. For example, if a bow hunter encountered an aggressive bear, attempts to stop it with bear spray and the bear "charges through the spray" and harms the bow hunter who eventually drives away the bear while being mailed by using the bear spray, this is a FAILURE of the bear spray for not stopping the attack. A similar situation where a hiker shoots at a charging bear, gets mauled and shoots the bear while getting chomped and manages to drive away the bear, this is a SUCCESS of the pistol for stopping the attack.

It really is all about situational context and how you sell the arguments.

Good post.

Personally, I would prefer having at my disposal, the kinetic energy of a .40 caliber bullet traveling at well over 1,000 ft/sec, than that produced by a few ounces of a liquid traveling a small fraction of that speed. One is far more capable of stopping a 600 lb animal, while the other "might" only discourage him from coming any closer.

I read a study on bear spray cannister pressures and spray velocity. At best, you get about 19 meters per second for the initial 0.4 second burst and then the velocity drops and stabilizes at about 3 meters per second velocity. Bear Spray is quite slow.

scakebuster I think you do not realize how those bears are documented and how hunter activities are kind of tracked in grizz country in the lower 48.
Someone will know you were in the area and that dead bear will get found. Not as simple as not reporting.

Yes, I agree with protecting yourself but bears have been shot when they posed no real threat to people and those folks paid dearly for their take, heavy fines and could get jail time, for a bluff charge.
https://www.powelltribune.com/stories/casper-man-pays-25k-for-accidentally-killing-grizzly-bear,17152

This article shows how even a .22 can take down a grizz.. The only time I've been in grizz country I had my 10mm on my hip or my 300wsm as my hunting rifle at the ready.. It is really un nerving when the GW for your late winter bison hunt tells you "we still have active grizz on the refuge, have your spray handy." Grizz get your carcass or animal if they want it. We have no recourse on that issue.

Well all know a .22 can kill a grizzly, LOL, even if the judge didn't. This person did not shoot the bear in self defense. It was obvious by his statements that he was hazing a bothersome bear. No bluff charge was mentioned. From the article... “The bear never charged him, never bluffed him, never came towards him.”

His attempt was to keep the situation from turning into one where he had to defend his life and he stupidly shot the bear pre-emptively.

Another question....what in everyones opinion would be a more deterrent of a charging bear....spray or a gun being shot in the air or ground? I ask because....I've made my decision for me and its spray but my son says he wants the gun. Well...he has what most have, a 9mm. For human self defense a 9mm is the way to go with modern ammo (Imo) Could a 9mm with the right ammo stop a bear attach? Shooting into the air/ground to warn a bear the caliber obviously doesn't matter. Shooting a bear if you can while he's chomping on you again I'm thinking a head shot caliber won't matter....trying to weigh at all in.

First encounter/application spray is upper 90’s% effective, second application it’s <50%, third it’s useless

Numerous articles backed with facts on effectiveness of a 9mm. I’d look at hard cast ammo such as https://www.buffalobore.com/index.php?l=product_list&c=155 or Xtreme Penetrator® Solid Monolithi from Underwood(what I use in Griz county in 357sig). If you hit head congrats, but reason for hard cast is to make it to vitals

I highly encourage you to buy two cans of bear spray, and deploy one so you are familiar with the spray cone and it’s range.

If I’m not bivy backpacking in I’d carry spray and side arm. Packing in I’d probably just carry side arm in chest rig. If you are carry your side arm/spray attached pack to hip belt, remember you have no weapon or spray when you take your pack off.

Will 9mm stop a bear attack. Often, yep as will many other pistol calibers. Dean Weingarten of Ammoland has pointed out in his biased reports of pistols in many calibers (including 9mm) repeatedly proving effective in bear defense (black, brown, grizzly), even by tourists.

https://www.ammoland.com/2020/03/up...ack-93-cases-97-effective/#axzz6tWgEAoTr

I mention that Weingarten is biased in his reports because he does not use the same standards for evaluating bear spray performance as he does pistol performance. Bear spray is considered a failure if a bear is sprayed and still attacks a person, even if more spray eventually drives off the bear. Pistol performance is considered a success even if the bear attacks the person after the person shoots it, and then the bear is driven off or killed with subsequent shots. Weingarten is not a fan of bear spray.

If you go back and find the original accounts, you can see where various pistols in various calibers certainly have worked, but Weingarten's versions tend to be a much more pistol-friendly version of events.

I think the solution here is to never go alone in bear country and always make sure you can outrun whoever is with you.

My friend was there yesterday. Yes, they are out and are serious predators. Bear spray in Parks, 12 ga w/ slugs if I don’t have a rifle. My rifle instructor in the service stressed that pistols are only good for killing people, and fighting your way to a rifle. I still believe him!!

your instructor s correct on pistol

revolvers are another

back then he didn't have access to revolvers like the .460, .500 of today

I'll stare down any size grizzlies with one of those in hand

Pistols are no good? Dean Weingarten has data to the contrary. Do y'all have data for the pistol failures?

I am not actually challenging you so much as also believing that pistols should be a less than good choice, but I can't find much in the way of contrary data.

Believing is one thing. Real world results may be another.

I’d much rather have a 500 S&W than a can of bear spray any day,, call me silly..

Agreed!!


But honestly, I'd rather not ever be in that situation to find out.
I've no doubt a sizeable handgun can stop a grizzly but the bottom line is for one shot to stop it, it has to be put in the right place. Hell, I've seen a mad boar hog about 200 lbs just get madder being shot with a 9mm multiple times in the face. While my BIL continued to piss him off even further I put one .22lr into his skull and dropped him like a sack of potatoes.
And before anyone gets to hyper here, I'm damn sure not suggesting a .22 to protect yourself from a mad bear. I'm simply saying that to stop a 500+ pound bear you better put the bullet exactly where it needs to go or one swipe of the paw and you'll likely be shredded cheese!

Call me silly, but I would rather have a 12 ga slug gun or large caliber rifle than a pistol/revolver, but pistols and revolvers seem to work as well.

I agree, if we’re choosing weapons in general I’d rather have a 20mm Vulcan strapped to by back spraying the woods as I ran away

I would hate to try to unholster that in a bad situation, plus that's like strapping a 65mm spotting scope to your chest or hip. My back hurts thinking about. Hats off to the guys that can unholster and accurately get a few shots off. I know I can't. Tried practicing with a 454 and it was a train wreck.

After getting in a pissing match with a cat in mountains, I've really changed how and what I carry. You have far more warning with a human then a bear. Just a thought.

Daniel Boone would wrestle a bear and then date his sisters.