Grisly stopper????

[Lawdog]

Redhawk1,

I guess Tred Barta was the biggest fool of us all, he used a long bow and wooden arrows to hunt Grizzle.

As stated this thread is about a "Grisly stopper" and not hunting situations.  Even Fred Barta had men backing him up with rifles when he was using his long bow.  I believe you'll agree that there is a BIG DIFFERENCE between hunting bears with a handgun and stopping a charging bear with one.  I too, like many others, have hunted Black Bears successfully with handgun and archery equipment(long bow, recurve, and compound bows).  Big difference in being able to take your time to pick the spot you want to hit and being in a hurry to stop a bear.  Hunting bears and defending yourself are two different stories.  Lawdog
 

[Lawdog]

Now that you mention it I think Fred Bear used wooden sticks and sinew to take at least one Polar Bear.  Now in the scheme of things I think a Polar Bear is without doubt the nastiest of all the current living creatures on earth.  Makes a big bore handgun seem real sane now doesn't it.

Yes Fred Bear was successful in finely claiming a Polar Bear as an archery trophy.  But only after he ad shot three or four others that he couldn't claim as archery trophies.  These he had to drop his bow after shooting them and grab a rifle to defend his life.  Pope & Young rules state that if it has a bullet hole in it you can't claim it as an archery trophy.  Lawdog
 

[S.B.]

Thanks Redhawk1. The stand up comics wear me thin when a serious discussion is taking place. I read posts like this to learn, not be entertained. This thread did get off topic, in my opinion. I would like to have an honest answer from the guys who profess to know about these things, where should the person being attacked aim for, brain, heart, cervical vertebra(nerve center)?

[Redhawk1]

S.B., you got that right.  

I am sure everyone here agrees that the biggest rifle you can shot well, is the best for a grizzly stopper. But not always will the rifle be right next to you. All I know is I would rather have the biggest handgun with me instead of a knife or an empty hand.

Lawdog, I know there is a totally different situation from hunting and having to defend yourself. But it gets old hearing that a handgun is useless. Ask the guys that are still walking around after they used there handguns to ward off a bear attack. But even in some situations a rifle would not work, for instance if you don't get a chance to take a shot.  :eek:

[oso45-70]

Whew!!!..............Joe...................

[Qaz]

"Lawdog, I know there is a totally different situation from hunting and having to defend yourself. But it gets old hearing that a handgun is useless. Ask the guys that are still walking around after they used there handguns to ward off a bear attack. But even in some situations a rifle would not work, for instance if you don't get a chance to take a shot."

 Redhawk, it is not a bear attack until the bear touches you or is within a few yards and not stopping. I had a black bear charge to about 25ft and stop, it made its point, but I was not attacked. If I had a handgun at the time I could have shot him when he stopped, I didn't hear him until he was 20yrds away and I didn't see him until he was almost stopped in front of me. So see, anyone can say that they stopped a bear attack by shooting into the ground or into the air. You will never know if he meant business until you are nose to nose.
  No a pistol is not better than nothing. All accounts of a grizzly attack that I have heard or read, the survivor said they rolled to their stomach, put their hands over the back of their neck, and tried to stay as still as possible, or they just gave up and quit struggling and the bear lost interest. I would imagine even an atheist would be praying at this time. You rarely hear of the people that fight back, because 99.9% of them are dead.
 Any one that thinks any of the large caliber handguns will keep you safe in the woods against a big bear that wants to kill you, think again!

Qaz

[S.B.]

Qaz, again, I think you've grossly misjudged the content of this post. To give up means to let the bear do as it pleases. To fight, any way you can means a slight chance of survival. I don't believe any of the responders has said a handgun is the answer to bear attachs? Only that it's better than your bare hands or commercial gimmics(bear spray)? A parralel situation could be a woman being attacked, no sencible self protection instructor would suggest she let the attacker do as they please, rape, slash, beat her until they are happy about this situation. It sounds like most here have the same opinion, common sence is the BEST bear protection, did you miss that part? If you were to have your way, on a handgun forum, you'ld talk about letting things happen without a defense instead of using available defenses? Let's change the situation a little as you have. It's not you being charged by the bear, it's your infant child or wife. Still think you'ld say "roll onto your stomach and cover your neck,just lay there he'll quit chewing soon"?

[Qaz]

S.ba. I have misjudged nothing in any of the posts. If a person looks at case history of bear attacks, you will see that most big bear attacks are to defend a kill or to protect cubs, unprovoked attacks are almost unheard of and almost never just to eat you. History will also prove that in almost all cases, the person survived because they did nothing once contact was made.
 Among bear biologists, it is believed that the young male black bear weighting between 150-250lbs is the most dangerous because periodically they have been known to hunt a person down for the sole purpose of eating them. It is the belief that if attacked by a black bear your best recourse is to fight back. Records show that more people have been killed by black bears than grizzlies.
 You can not make the comparison of a woman being attacked by another person and that of a bear attack, different reasons, different out comes.
 I agree that common sense is the best deterrent and the one that should be used. You are reading more into the written text than is there.
 I do know that a wounded bear is more dangerous than one that isn't whether it is at 100yrds or 1yrd.
 Your reasoning about an attack on my wife or child is not logical or reasonable. In that case a big bore hand gun would be welcome because now I have time to aim and shoot! Even if it is only for 1/2 to 1 second, I will unholster the gun, take aim and shoot. I don't want to shoot my wife or child by just firing as fast as I can and letting the bullets go every where, but I wouldn't knowingly put them in that situation anyway. Since I live in an area with the highest concentration of black bears in the country( Shenandoah National Park), I tell them to fight like hell. If it was a grizzly, cover up and pray.
 Since I live in the country, my family is used to being around big animals that can hurt you and we all try to avoid it.
 Go back and reread the first couple of posts, the title is "grizzly stopper". To me that means "bang and drop" on a animal that weights 800+ pounds and is full of adrenalin at full stride. Sure, you may make a 1 in a million shot and drop him, but you can't count on it. Ask how many people would hunt a brown bear with a handgun with no back-up? A 375, 416 or 458 Lott, I think you will find some takers,even if it is foolish. There is no production handgun round that is a "Bear stopper". I am a realist, not a dreamer!

[Lawdog]

Lawdog, I know there is a totally different situation from hunting and having to defend yourself. But it gets old hearing that a handgun is useless. Ask the guys that are still walking around after they used there handguns to ward off a bear attack. But even in some situations a rifle would not work, for instance if you don't get a chance to take a shot.  :eek:

Redhawk1,

I have talked to a number of guys, mostly Indians in Alaska, that have been attacked by bears.  Both Black and Grizzly.  A few have had handguns but most not.  In the incidents of where they did have a handgun they never got the chance to use them.  I most every case the bear was on  them before they could reach for their handgun.  After the bear had them down they all reported that the bear would attack any body they saw move.  I have seen so-called reports of where people have defended themselves with a handgun.  Many have been cited for killing a bear without cause.  I stand by what I have said in that most cases you will never get the handgun out of your holster.  Even if you do, most won’t be able to hit a bear charging.  I don’t care how much you practice or how good a shot you are.  It’s a well proven fact that most people don’t shoot well under stress.  Lastly do you really believe that while laying on the ground fighting off a Black Bear you’ll ever even get to use your handgun?  OK, I’ve had my say and I won’t bother you any more.  Lawdog
 

[Redhawk1]

Man, I have got a headache just thinking about some of your comments. It is time for me to get out of this conversation. You all hunt they way you want and do what you have to do in bear country and I will do it the way I have before. It is obvious none of us can agree on this. I am just glad the guys I hunt with don't think like some of you guys. I'm picking up my marbles and going home.. :bye:

[jro45]

If my only option is to us my handgun. It would be my 500 S&W and I would shoot for its eye if it was coming at me and hadn't reached me yet.

[wyocarp]

If my only option is to us my handgun. It would be my 500 S&W and I would shoot for its eye if it was coming at me and hadn't reached me yet.

You might want to plan on putting a bullet in it's nose as well because they are supposed to be able to smell their way to you also.

[crow_feather]

The results of different actions, (from numerous shots with a 44 mag to hitting the bear on the nose with binoculars) has caused so many varied reactions from attacking bears that you have to say that they are as unique as the people that they attack.

I think a mother protecting her cubs might be more of a problem than a bear that was startled and is defending itself.  

If I have the chance, I think my first move will be to see if there is a safe tree that is close by.  If forced to defend myself, I believe that I will take my shots kneeling, if possible, as there is less chance of missing the moving target.

I would also want an iron sighted hand gun, 454 Casull caliber, with the hot loaded Freedom Arms bullets.  I would prefer the Super Blackhawk because it carries one more bullet.

Because peper spray is not 100 per cent effective, I would rather use my time attemting to stop the bear with lethal force.  It's a gonna eat lead afor it eats me.

C F

[DakotaElkSlayer]

http://espn.go.com/outdoors/hunting/s/h_fea_bear_brown_AK_handgun_J.Oltersdorf.html

The above link is a story about a guy who goes to Alaska on a grizzly hunt with a 500 S&W.  After reading the story, I am now wondering if pepper spray would be a better deterent...  As backup, he had the pilot with a 500, two guys with 338 mags, and a guy with a .45-70!!! :eek:

Jim

[Redhawk1]

http://espn.go.com/outdoors/hunting/s/h_fea_bear_brown_AK_handgun_J.Oltersdorf.html

The above link is a story about a guy who goes to Alaska on a grizzly hunt with a 500 S&W.  After reading the story, I am now wondering if pepper spray would be a better deterent...  As backup, he had the pilot with a 500, two guys with 338 mags, and a guy with a .45-70!!! :eek:

Jim

OK you use pepper spray, I'll use my 500 Mag.

[DirtyHarry]

Check out the mailbag for this story.. http://espn.go.com/outdoors/hunting/s/h_fea_bear_brown_AK_handgun_mailbag.html
Some interesting comments from readers,
(of course you have the usual suspects from the left and right coast with their tree hugging  fanaticism)
Plus the author has a final say as well..

[Qaz]

I enjoyed the article, it was very interesting to say the least. I understood the original post to mean what caliber hand gun is a grizzly stopper. I and several others were criticized for reading the post to mean "under attack". After reading this article, I think it lends even more support to my original thoughts on the subject. It took 12 shots at 15yds to kill the first bear and the two shots from the 45-70 were the ones that actually put the bear down. The second bear at the river took at least two from a 500mag and one from the 338mag. Does any one want to guess which round killed that bear? If we base our decision solely on this article, the only logical conclusion would be that no hand gun caliber is sufficent for grizzly. We all know that every hunt presents unique circumstances in which everything happens. The same person may repeat that hunt and make a quick kill.
 If I were to choose to hunt one of the great bears with a pistol, it would be a S&W 460, the 500mag would be my second choice. If I was using a handgun for bear protection, it would be a 44mag because I can handle the recoil and get back on target more quickly than with the big mags, a 357mag may be even better. Either will be fine because no pistol will drop him in his tracks and I can get the most bullets in him in the shortest period of time before I get mauled!  

 One last thought; This article reminded me of the people that hunt elephants with AK-47's and shoot the animal 25-30 times to kill it. From an ethical stand point, I don't see a difference!

Qaz

[RollTide]

I found this article very interesting.  This topic is about stopping grizzly, and 2 were stopped in this article, albeit (wisely) with rifle backup which had to be employed in both cases.

I was surprised about what the author DID NOT say.  Where did the bullets strike the bears? What was the depth of penetration? What vitals were hit? What was the effect of the bullets on bones and tissue as it passed through?  Even in the flurry of all the excitement, it would have been realtively easy to sit down with all shooters after the fact and get at least a rough estimate of where each shot was aimed, and examining the body of the bear would have given a rough idea of the effect of each shot on the physiology of the bear.  This was a great chance to glean a lot of information about handgun round perfomance in a real life situation.  I hope it wasn't wasted and I wish the information had been published if it was collected.

That being said, I found it interesting that neither bear charged.  I don't know if that was just the luck of the draw, so to speak, or if the 500 S&W made enough of an impression on the bears that they were not able or willing to charge after the first shots.  Bears are sort of notorious for taking solid hits with powerful rifle rounds and still charging or running off.  It may have just been fortunate (for the hunters) that the second bear chose the water for an escape route, which slowed it enough to allow the followup shots.  I would have done exactly what these hunters did.  I would have kept shooting until the bear was on the ground for good.  THAT is the ONLY ethical thing to do when hunting dangerous game IMHO.

Roll Tide

[Redhawk1]

The article was very interesting, but before anyone says the 500 Mag did not do it's job and needed rifle back. The same can be said for Big bears hunted with large caliber rifles. There have been bear the run off even when hit with a large bore rifle and it was no different than with the 500 Mag. Not all animals drop in there tracks, especially big bear. I would say they used good judgment any shot the bear with the rifles to make sure no one got hurt. Would the bear of dies from the shots from the 500 Mag?? Probably but no one waited to find out and I still think they did the right thing.  

[Qaz]

As Rolltide said, it would have been nice to have found out exactly how the 500mag bullets performed on a large heavily muscled animal. I received enough information on its performance when the bear was shot 10 times at close range and it still had to be shot with a rifle, both bear had to be shot with a rifle. The only way I would use a pistol to hunt bear is over dogs.
 I think the author said a lot about the round when he said they were 15yds from the bear and he heard the terrible sound of his partners hammer falling on an empty chamber. He must not have had a lot of confidence in the round to even have had that thought.
 If 10 rounds of any firearm will not kill an animal, you need a bigger gun!!

[Redhawk1]

As Rolltide said, it would have been nice to have found out exactly how the 500mag bullets performed on a large heavily muscled animal. I received enough information on its performance when the bear was shot 10 times at close range and it still had to be shot with a rifle, both bear had to be shot with a rifle. The only way I would use a pistol to hunt bear is over dogs.
 I think the author said a lot about the round when he said they were 15yds from the bear and he heard the terrible sound of his partners hammer falling on an empty chamber. He must not have had a lot of confidence in the round to even have had that thought.
 If 10 rounds of any firearm will not kill an animal, you need a bigger gun!!

If you also read, the one guy with the other 500 Mag really did not know where his shots went, which in my mind, counts for not proper shot placement. But I was not there and can only get the information from what was said. We can speculate all day long and go back and forth and none of use could be right. So I guess it is kind of pointless.

So I guess in your book, no one should bow hunt for big brown bears either. No knock down power there either.    No matter what you chose to hunt brown bear with, a back up shooter with a big rifle is the smart thing.  :wink:

[45-70]

300,000 volt taser.  Bear will most likely be on ya quick, should be some oppportunity to stick that thing in his hide and let er rip!  Let me know how your friend makes out...

[Mannlicher]

One thing to 'bear' in mind, is that an adaquate hand gun is almost as heavy as a pump shottie, and in my opinion, unwieldy.
.454 Casul, .480 Ruger, HEAVY loaded .45 Colt.  Even these will be marginal.  If you really, really feel the need, then don't scrimp.

[Lawdog]

Check out the mailbag for this story.. http://espn.go.com/outdoors/hunting/s/h_fea_bear_brown_AK_handgun_mailbag.html
Some interesting comments from readers,
(of course you have the usual suspects from the left and right coast with their tree hugging  fanaticism)
Plus the author has a final say as well..

The main thing to keep in mind is the story is about HUNTING Grizzly Bears with a handgun.  Not stopping one that is charging you.  Two totally different situations completely.  No doubt that a .500 S&W can take a Grizzly Bear under hunting situations but trust any handgun to stop a charging Grizzly Bear is being foolish in my opinion.  Too many variables.  Lawdog
 

[Redhawk1]

Check out the mailbag for this story.. http://espn.go.com/outdoors/hunting/s/h_fea_bear_brown_AK_handgun_mailbag.html
Some interesting comments from readers,
(of course you have the usual suspects from the left and right coast with their tree hugging  fanaticism)
Plus the author has a final say as well..

The main thing to keep in mind is the story is about HUNTING Grizzly Bears with a handgun.  Not stopping one that is charging you.  Two totally different situations completely.  No doubt that a .500 S&W can take a Grizzly Bear under hunting situations but trust any handgun to stop a charging Grizzly Bear is being foolish in my opinion.  Too many variables.  Lawdog
 

Lawdog, although we agree on the Grizzly Bears with a handgun hunting, we just don't agree on the 500 Mag as a stopper.  

[oso45-70]

The main thing to keep in mind is the story is about HUNTING Grizzly Bears with a handgun.  Not stopping one that is charging you.  Two totally different situations completely.  No doubt that a .500 S&W can take a Grizzly Bear under hunting situations but trust any handgun to stop a charging Grizzly Bear is being foolish in my opinion.  Too many variables.  Lawdog
  [/quote]

Lawdog, although we agree on the Grizzly Bears with a handgun hunting, we just don't agree on the 500 Mag as a stopper.   [/quote]

Redhawk1

I have been watching these posts for some time now and it seems like its you against the world when it comes to the hand gun for protection against a charging bear. In a hunting situation where you are calling the shots your 4"500 S&W Mag will probably do the job, But in a situation where the bear is already mad and on the run the last thing you want in your hands is a side arm of any kind. Even a small 300 or 400 pound Black bear is a hand full when he is at full charge. And for the charge of a grown Grizzly the best you can hope for is some one with a capable rifle and is cool enough to get the one shot thats going to save your Butt.I hope this information is recieved in the spirit its given      
............Joe...........

[Redhawk1]

The main thing to keep in mind is the story is about HUNTING Grizzly Bears with a handgun.  Not stopping one that is charging you.  Two totally different situations completely.  No doubt that a .500 S&W can take a Grizzly Bear under hunting situations but trust any handgun to stop a charging Grizzly Bear is being foolish in my opinion.  Too many variables.  Lawdog
 

Lawdog, although we agree on the Grizzly Bears with a handgun hunting, we just don't agree on the 500 Mag as a stopper.   [/quote]

Redhawk1

I have been watching these posts for some time now and it seems like its you against the world when it comes to the hand gun for protection against a charging bear. In a hunting situation where you are calling the shots your 4"500 S&W Mag will probably do the job, But in a situation where the bear is already mad and on the run the last thing you want in your hands is a side arm of any kind. Even a small 300 or 400 pound Black bear is a hand full when he is at full charge. And for the charge of a grown Grizzly the best you can hope for is some one with a capable rifle and is cool enough to get the one shot thats going to save your Butt.I hope this information is recieved in the spirit its given      
............Joe...........

What a lot of you fail to realize is, yes I understand that a rifles would be better, and like I said before a better choice over a handgun. But for the thousandth time, what happens when a rifle is not handy. What happens when you are in your tent, a rifle is not easy or almost impossible to maneuver. There are situations that a rifle is just not available. Sure we can all say common sense is best and to not put yourself in a bad situation, but stuff happens.  You guys can talk tell your blue in the face, I will always have a handgun on my side in bear country, do I believe it can stop a charge, your d@m right I do.  

[Lawdog]

Check out the mailbag for this story.. http://espn.go.com/outdoors/hunting/s/h_fea_bear_brown_AK_handgun_mailbag.html
Some interesting comments from readers,
(of course you have the usual suspects from the left and right coast with their tree hugging  fanaticism)
Plus the author has a final say as well..

The main thing to keep in mind is the story is about HUNTING Grizzly Bears with a handgun.  Not stopping one that is charging you.  Two totally different situations completely.  No doubt that a .500 S&W can take a Grizzly Bear under hunting situations but trust any handgun to stop a charging Grizzly Bear is being foolish in my opinion.  Too many variables.  Lawdog
 

Lawdog, although we agree on the Grizzly Bears with a handgun hunting, we just don't agree on the 500 Mag as a stopper.  

Now we agree.    :-D   It's just that I have been around handguns all my life and seen them used in all sorts of situations.  In stressful situations, which trying to stop a charging bear would be classified as stressful, the vast majority of shooters just don’t shoot well.  You may very well be the exception to the rule.  I wish you all the luck in the world and hopefully pray you never have to put your shooting skills and your .500 S&W to the test.  Lawdog
 

[RollTide]

Since this is a topic about a "grizzly stopper" in a handgun forum, I would have to say that I don't believe ANY handgun is a RELIABLE grizzly stopper and only the largest rifles (375 H&H and up) in the most expert hands could actually be called RELIABLE "Stoppers" in a defensive situation.  When I asked JJ Hack about this issue, that is basically the answer I got.  Just look at what guides in AK carry.   Now black bears is another story, but for grizzly bears, handguns, even hand cannons, are NOT in the reliable grizzly stopper class.  

Can a handgun stop a grizzly attack? YES

Has it happened? YES (even with a 9mm)

Often enough to bet your life on a handgun alone when other alternatives are available? NO

Often enough to merit carrying a handgun in addition to your long gun? YES

Would I always have a handgun in addition to my long gun in grizzly country?  ALWAYS

Would I ever depend on a handgun alone for grizzly protection if an appropriate long gun was an option? NEVER

Opinons vary, but that is where I stand on this issue and I think that is where 99% of the folks I have seen in these discussions stand.  I love handguns and big ones, but in a life or death situation that is no time to prove theories, it is a time to rely on proven results and hope you are fortunate enough to have things fall your way.

Roll Tide

[Lone Star]

Tell us how you really feel corbanzo.   :-D

I hunted deer on Kodiak in the Fall for 27 years, saw plenty of brownies every time, was false charged a few times but never had to shoot one.  It's their land, we are just visitors.  They don't want to kill us (heck they won't eat humans), just protect what is theirs.  Keep away from their young and their food and most will leave the area when they finally identify you.  

I'm sorry you're so terrified of bears, and that you believe that Alaskan villagers don't know anything about bears - believe me they do, they have lived with them for generations.  But just like with people there are "bad" bears too.

Yep, you're right, we Americans have the right to be afraid of our shadows just like the French.....  :-D