Outside online – how to survive a grizzly attack

A 10 mm round will NOT stop a griz. Even a .44 Magnum is marginal without a well placed head shot. But I would borrow my friend’s Tarus .44 magnum revolver if I were heading into griz territory.

The only semi-automatic pistol (Glocks are semi-auto, I own one.) that would stop a griz are from Desert Eagle and their big .45 D.E. round would do it. But those are true “hand cannons” and are very heavy. Concerning pistols and grizzly bear, to paraphrase Dirty Harry, “Ya gotta ask yourself Punk, are ya feeling’ lucky?”

In the event of a griz attack you may want to look passive by “assuming The Position”. (Drop into a fetal position, bend over and kiss your a$$ good-bye. ;o)

Q. What is the difference between black bear scat and griz scat?

A. Black bear scat has mice bones, nut shells and berry seeds in it.

Griz scat has all of the above plus hiker bells.

Like I said, I’m not a gun person

That author seemed pretty knowledgeable and he was talking to some pretty good sounding authorities

It’s interesting because it’s inconsistent from common advice heard here and other places.

But those are true “hand cannons” and are very heavy.

Yes. I held one once. I think you could find a lighter rifle without too much trouble.

Handguns –

https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/

Based on reading that article I don’t think a rifle would be effective.

Bear attack is usually a surprise.  With a handgun in chest holster, you have a chance of getting it out and using it.  I think a glock 20 is fairly small, although not utralight.  He said to quickly put three or more rounds.  I don’t remember if he said where to put them.  He said to practice.

He also said to practice bear spray.  In the class they have a simulated bear target that “attacks you”.  No one was successful the first time.  He said to practice.

One of Tactic’s instructors actually survived a grizzly attack while elk hunting last year. A bear charged his hunting partner, who immediately deployed his bear spray. Unfortunately, the direction the bear was coming from was upwind, and the spray had no effect on the grizzly. Seeing that, the instructor drew his handgun and shot the bear dead. An investigation the next day ruled that shooting justifiable. The man saved his friend’s life.

The gun? A nine-millimeter Glock. It might be common to read on the internet that you need a huge revolver chambered in an impossibly powerful caliber to stop a bear, but based on real-world experience with bear attacks, Tactic teaches that it’s modern firearms and the modern shooting techniques they make possible that are most effective.

For Eric and anyone else who likes to say it’s impossible to kill a grizzly with a Glock, the above quote from the article provides an account proving it is possible.  Hardened rounds and a large capacity make a Glock very effective in the right hands.

I’ve long repeated the State of Alaska’s advice that no handgun is adequate to quickly stop a large grizzly and that a 300-Winchester Magnum rifle or 12-gauge shotgun with a 1-ounce rifled slug is the minimum suggested long gun.  When I’ve seen medium-sized black bears getting shot (4 times now), they went down pretty quick half the time, with a carefully aimed .308 or .338 but twice (once with an aimed .308, once with an aimed .300-Win-Mag albeit at distance) shrugged it off enough to bolt into the woods a long ways.

Two huge caveats:  These were medium-sized black bears, not medium-sized grizzlies, much less large grizzlies.  They were aimed shots.  Read any account of a surprise bear incident, and people ARE NOT placing the crosshairs just behind the shoulder for a heart/lung shot.

All that said, a poster here on BPL made a reasonable argument for 10-mm Glock 20 ($650, 15+1 rounds, 4.6″ barrel, 39 ounces with full magazine) or Glock G40 ($780, 15+1, 6″ barrel, 45 ounces full) using hard-cast bullets.  At about 800 foot-pounds of energy in a hot round, it is less than a .44 magnum (1500 foot-pounds) and far less than the most common bear-defense rifle up here (.338 at 5,000 foot pounds) or a shotgun with slugs (3100 foot-pounds).  But the pistol is lighter, more compact, can be carried in a chest holster, can be used in close quarters, has far more rounds, is semi-automatic, and if you use hard-cast bullets can penetrate quite deeply.  Three quick pistol shots are perhaps more likely to hit something vital than a single long-gun shot (after which you have to cycle the bolt or pump the shotgun action).

I don’t even carry spray most of the time.  I make noise instead – it weighs nothing and is the most effective safety measure.  The bear attack researcher Dr Hererro looked at hundreds of incidents and concluded pepper spray has better outcomes for the human (and vastly better for the bear) than any type of firearm.

I’m not convinced that this author is any kind of expert about anything. Look at all the hyped up scare stories he writes. And asking a gun dealer for advice on bear encounters definitely biases the argument.

ahhh…  I hadn’t noticed he’s a gun dealer : )

still the article is interesting. There were some real world useful experiences.  It didn’t seem like the point of the article was to argue for carrying a gun.  There are already sufficient threads here and elsewhere where people argue for and against guns : )