• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

If you had to chose between weapons

KansasMustang

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
1,005
Location
Herington, Kansas, USA
imported post

I would never go into the woods without my .44 mag Ruger Redhawk as a backup. I reckon the 44 mag would do some heavy persuadin' to any critters that'd desire you for a meal.
 

25sierraman

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
144
Location
Alexandria , Virginia, USA
imported post

2ndammendment wrote:
In all honesty, I'd probably opt for a hi-cap mag in .45, probably the full size xd holstered weak-side.

Strong-side would be a 500 mag. that should take down whatever charging animal that has gotten too closethat hasany size to it.

I don't think I would need a rifle, because anything at scope distance: A) might not even know you're there, and B) will probably give you enough time to find your escape route.

...oh yeah, and plenty of extra mags and ammo! :celebrate
PSHHH! i just strap a MK-19 to my back and ankle carry an M2 .50 cal just in case. My wife is the A gunner with all the extra ammo she carries an AT4 :cool:. just kidding by the way. I usually just carry some bear spray and a 357 to make me feel better whenever we go hiking. The closest i came to using the spray was this past weekend when an unleashed rottweiler came out of no where and started growling. The owner wasn't far behind but i didnt see him at first and man did that take the pucker factor way up.
 

Alexcabbie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
2,288
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, United States
imported post

.44 mag, .500, spray.....

None of it is gonna help the Redskins against the Bears come fall.

Personally I've never been in grizzly country, but should I encounter a hostile one, then no matter what I carried for defense I would likely need a change of pants in my kit, too....:lol:
 

Don Barnett

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
451
Location
, ,
imported post

When carrying a revolver to protect yourself against bear, you only shoot five shots at the bear and leave the last shot for yourself, when the bear is still coming.
 

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
imported post

rugerdon wrote:
When carrying a revolver to protect yourself against bear, you only shoot five shots at the bear and leave the last shot for yourself, when the bear is still coming.
I am fairly certain a .500 could do a pretty good job of stopping a bear.

Anybody here ever knock down a bear?

25sierraman wrote:
PSHHH! i just strap a MK-19 to my back and ankle carry an M2 .50 cal just in case. My wife is the A gunner with all the extra ammo she carries an AT4 :cool:. just kidding by the way. I usually just carry some bear spray and a 357 to make me feel better whenever we go hiking. The closest i came to using the spray was this past weekend when an unleashed rottweiler came out of no where and started growling. The owner wasn't far behind but i didnt see him at first and man did that take the pucker factor way up.
Jeez. Us commo dogs are multiplying around here.
 

slowfiveoh

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
1,415
Location
Richmond, VA
imported post

Tomahawk wrote:
slowfiveoh wrote:
I am fairly certain a .500 could do a pretty good job of stopping a bear.
Not if you miss.
Well....I am fairly certain the majority of us would hope that didn't happen, and attempt to aid the probability of hitting, by aiming. :D
 

Flintlock

Regular Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
1,224
Location
Alaska, USA
imported post

ArcticF7SnoPro wrote:
The picture of the Brown Bear was on the way down from Iceberg lake as we were heading up to Ptarmigan Pass. Approximatly 20 yards away. We also encountered a Grizzly and its two cubs on the way to TheWall on the backside of Logans Pass.
I apologize in advance for nitpicking, but the bear pictured is not a Brown Bear. It is easily indentifiable as a Black Bear that is brownish incolor.
 

Flintlock

Regular Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
1,224
Location
Alaska, USA
imported post

ArcticF7SnoPro wrote:
Those of you worried about a Moose in the wild, this is from the trail on the way to Inspiration Point in Grand Teton National Park. I was only 10 feet away from him and at no timedid Ifeel the need to shoot it.
I am not suggesting that you should have shot this Moose but your post may lead one to believe that they are docile. I have, in fact, been charged by them on 6 different occassions but havenever by a Bear.

The circumstances in each instance did not end up warranting any gunfire either but they were still close calls.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

Ca Patriot wrote:
If you are truely want to protect yourself from 4 legged threats in the wild you will need a rifle.

If you want a half measure of safety then carry a handgun. In reality it will only be protecting your nerves and not your safety.

I have spent much time in Alaska and Montana and California hiking, fishing and climbing. I would say 99% of people dont carry anything in California and Montana

The only place where I think it is necessary to carry a gun is Alaska.

As far as weight goes, I dont believe a rifle is unreasonable to carry in the wild. I believe my 12ga weighs 8.8 lbs and my 30-06 weighs the same. A handgun weighs about just under 3 lbs I believe. If you are truely concerned about your life then the 5 extra pounds should be worth it. Remember that the average overnight hiker is going to carry about 35 - 40 lbs so if you need to save your life then find a way to cut some weight out of your overall package.

If you arent an overnight hiker then I would think a rifle should be an acceptable amount of weight to carry.

So in conclusion, its my opinion that a rifle is the only thing strong enough to reliably save your life from a 4 leg threat.
frenchdl wrote:
Bear spray is many times more effective than a gun in most
"unexpected" bear encounters.
More effective than bear spray is learning how to deal with Grizzlies in the backcountry. You say you go every summer and if this is the case you should really familiarize yourself with the proper course of action in a bear attack. Pick up some trusted literature on the subject and you will see there is not to much mention of carrying guns, instead knowing what to do, and how to avoid bears is much more important.

Stay safe, and if your seriously concerned about bear attacks leave the gun at home, and learn the "true" methods of staying safe with bears. If you concerned about animals of the two legged variety, then carry on my friend.

An interesting contrast in advice here. A power approach vs. amoreorganic philosophy.

Force vs. knowledge.

Brute technology vs. communion with nature.

Domination vs. respect.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

Tomahawk wrote:
HankT wrote:
Ca Patriot wrote:
If you are truely want to protect yourself from 4 legged threats in the wild you will need a rifle.

If you want a half measure of safety then carry a handgun. In reality it will only be protecting your nerves and not your safety.

I have spent much time in Alaska and Montana and California hiking, fishing and climbing. I would say 99% of people dont carry anything in California and Montana

The only place where I think it is necessary to carry a gun is Alaska.

As far as weight goes, I dont believe a rifle is unreasonable to carry in the wild. I believe my 12ga weighs 8.8 lbs and my 30-06 weighs the same. A handgun weighs about just under 3 lbs I believe. If you are truely concerned about your life then the 5 extra pounds should be worth it. Remember that the average overnight hiker is going to carry about 35 - 40 lbs so if you need to save your life then find a way to cut some weight out of your overall package.

If you arent an overnight hiker then I would think a rifle should be an acceptable amount of weight to carry.

So in conclusion, its my opinion that a rifle is the only thing strong enough to reliably save your life from a 4 leg threat.
frenchdl wrote:
Bear spray is many times more effective than a gun in most
"unexpected" bear encounters.
More effective than bear spray is learning how to deal with Grizzlies in the backcountry. You say you go every summer and if this is the case you should really familiarize yourself with the proper course of action in a bear attack. Pick up some trusted literature on the subject and you will see there is not to much mention of carrying guns, instead knowing what to do, and how to avoid bears is much more important.

Stay safe, and if your seriously concerned about bear attacks leave the gun at home, and learn the "true" methods of staying safe with bears. If you concerned about animals of the two legged variety, then carry on my friend.

An interesting contrast in advice here. A power approach vs. amoreorganic philosophy.

Force vs. knowledge.

Brute technology vs. communion with nature.

Domination vs. respect.
Oh boy, here comes Hank, ready to latch onto any argument against use or carrying of a firearm, again! Where's the popcorn?

I didn't make an argument to not carry a gun in GNP. I would think it would be normal to carry a gun there. For you. For me. For anyone who could lawfully do so.

Why do you miss the point, Thawk? So often, I mean...
 

25sierraman

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
144
Location
Alexandria , Virginia, USA
imported post

slowfiveoh wrote:
rugerdon wrote:
When carrying a revolver to protect yourself against bear, you only shoot five shots at the bear and leave the last shot for yourself, when the bear is still coming.
I am fairly certain a .500 could do a pretty good job of stopping a bear.

Anybody here ever knock down a bear?

25sierraman wrote:
PSHHH! i just strap a MK-19 to my back and ankle carry an M2 .50 cal just in case. My wife is the A gunner with all the extra ammo she carries an AT4 :cool:. just kidding by the way. I usually just carry some bear spray and a 357 to make me feel better whenever we go hiking. The closest i came to using the spray was this past weekend when an unleashed rottweiler came out of no where and started growling. The owner wasn't far behind but i didnt see him at first and man did that take the pucker factor way up.
Jeez. Us commo dogs are multiplying around here.
hehe yea it seems we are. please tell me youre not with the 51st.
 

Brian D.

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
937
Location
Cincy area, Ohio, USA
imported post

Given theoptions offered in the first post I'd go with the .44 magnum revolver. My choice is the Glock Model 20 in 10mm. Happen to have one of the 6" hunting barrels for mine. It would give a little extra velocity, and make the gun no harder tocarry around. Plus it has the virtue of being a bit flatter and more compact than a large frame wheelgun.
 

ArcticF7SnoPro

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
29
Location
Plover, WI,
imported post

I apologize in advance for nitpicking, but the bear pictured is not a Brown Bear. It is easily indentifiable as a Black Bear that is brownish incolor.
In my neck of the woods, flat land USA a Brown Bear and a Black Bear are pretty much consideredthe same thing and a Grizzly is just a Grizzly.
 

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

HankT wrote:
I didn't make an argument to not carry a gun in GNP. I would think it would be normal to carry a gun there. For you. For me. For anyone who could lawfully do so.

Why do you miss the point, Thawk? So often, I mean...
Well, Mr. T., I stand corrected. Sorry for the fuss! :celebrate
 

.45acp

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
333
Location
Salt Lake City, UT
imported post

If I was to carry a pistol; It would the .44 Superblack Hawk stoked with 300gr or heavier hard cast hand loads.

With that said, if I was truely concerned about 4 legged critters (especially Bear or Mountain Lion) the nod would go to a rifle. A lever action 45-70 stoked with stout hard cast 405 gr or 420 gr bullets is short, light and has more power than any pistol out there. You'll also get off more acurate shots than a pistol. Hard cast bullets will give more penetration than jacketed HP's or Soft Points, and in the kind of situation you are concerned about, you'll want to drive a heavy bullet end to end if possiable, as many times as you can in the split seconds available.

Just my opinion because I have a .457 mag in the 1895 Marlin and have shot most of the pistol and revolver rounds cited in the thread.



Steve
 
Top