9mm bear loads

[OC-Trainer]

The Bear Spray is made to protect bears not humans. LAR Mfg. Division of Remington arms Salt Lake City, Ut. They are primarily a Military contractor. Like the Colt Python, the Pre-64 Winchester the German Luger etc. all became to expensive to manufacture.
Any of these discontinued firearms are selling for very high prices. I am not familiar with the prices of Collector's cans of Bear Spray.

Ok, so you can't support your claims. Maybe you shouldn't talk about things that you have zero experience with.

 

[Dog Soldier]

OC why do you need to make your points with personal attacks.

 

[Rule3]

Thanks for the links. Especially the US Forest Service tests

I did not read it in depth yet but it seems that the 12 gauge with slugs is not really as effective as one may think?? (per this article)

I think the Maine Game Wardens carry shotguns for black bears?

The information on handgun calibers pretty much sums up what works and doesn't work for Brown bears, and the 9mm ain't even tested!

How about the 10mm for Polar Bears? Issued to Danish Patrols in Greenland

 

[Orcon]

The best way to render dangerous game less dangerous, in respect to firearms, is via massive damage to the central nervous system. Many hunters can tell you about heart/lung shot critters that still had 30 seconds to a minute of life left before expiring. 30 seconds is a long time when you're being mauled. I would want a cartridge capable of, on a head on shot, producing wide wounding from brain through the vitals and maintaining a straight wound track in a platform that is easy and fast to deploy. That means a heavy, hard cast bullet with a wide flat meplat in .44 caliber and up, moving at moderate velocities. But dont take my word for it, look at what Randy Garrett has to say about it. http://www.garrettcartridges.com/defensive.html


I think it can be agreed upon that the best course if action is avoidance, disengagement and lastly deterrence.
What is up with this renewed bear defense trend, anyway? Are bears the new zombies?

 

[ArchAngelCD]

At least this time it wasn't until the third page before the thread went bad. Why do these threads always blow up? (and why do I look at them lol)

 

[OC-Trainer]

At least this time it wasn't until the third page before the thread went bad. Why do these threads always blow up? (and why do I look at them lol)

Disagree. Clearing up the bologna and actually providing emperical data on the subject matter makes the thread good.

What makes threads like these bad, is when folks continue to post internet myths (like that silly sign), hearsay, and make baseless claims, instead of actually posting something of substance.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Disagree. Clearing up the bologna and actually providing emperical data on the subject matter makes the thread good.

What makes threads like these bad, is when folks continue to post internet myths (like that silly sign), hearsay, and make baseless claims, instead of actually posting something of substance.

I didn't mention anyone in particular. If you took it personally that's on you.

 

[OC-Trainer]

I didn't take it personally, I just disagree with your statement and reject its premise.

 

[Orcon]

Maybe they should change that sign, cause history tells us it is the other way around.



https://www.researchgate.net/profil..._in_Alaska/links/02e7e538de22de7a17000000.pdf

I suppose it depends on whose version of history you're willing to believe. The Smith et al AK study suffers from a oversampled injury and firearm failure rate. Not to mention this little nugget:

"However, we found a difference in the outcome for bears with regard to firearm use: 172 bears died when people used their firearms, whereas no bears were killed when firearms were not used."

Awww, poor bears.

http://www.bearbiology.com/fileadmin/tpl/Downloads/URSUS/Vol_11/Miller_Tutterrow_Vol_11.pdf
The 1999 Miller-Tutterrow study shows a 98.5% injury free rate with brown and 99.2% injury free rate with black bears. But yeah, history and all that.


My response to all the "guns don't work on bears" people:

 

[OC-Trainer]

http://www.bearbiology.com/fileadmin/tpl/Downloads/URSUS/Vol_11/Miller_Tutterrow_Vol_11.pdf
The 1999 Miller-Tutterrow study shows a 98.5% injury free rate with brown and 99.2% injury free rate with black bears. But yeah, history and all that.

Not sure what that link has to do with this thread, but it's kind of hard to be injured by a bear when you are sniping them from inside your home, isn't it?

For both species, most DLP bears were killed when the shooter was at home or in a dwelling

So you are comparing apples to oranges.

 

[RussellC]

At least this time it wasn't until the third page before the thread went bad. Why do these threads always blow up? (and why do I look at them lol)

Cheap entertainment anyway. With any thread, I read the first post, go to posts by those I know and respect, the rest is on the cutting room floor.

Russellc

 

[murf]

everyone has their own agenda. hijacking the thread with "bear spray" is what did it here.

murf

 

[Walkalong]

We've wandered a little, and four pages is plenty for what 9MM for bears. I thank y'all for being civil.