Frank237
Absent Comrade
On the other current bear thread, on one of the web sites posted on it, advocated using bear spray to ward off bears, but then went on to say that in 56% of all maulings of humans by bears, bear spray was used. They did not list how often the usage of firearms failed in preventing loss of life & injury. So they admit that the spray failed more than one half of the time.
In the same thread, one guy who was attacked (the OP), chose to use his bear spray instead of his firearm & suffered serious injuries.
No one will know if he would have been able to drop the bear & stop the attack if he had wisely used his firearm instead of the spray... but this was another clear instance of the spray failing.
If he had relied on his handgun, he would have at least had a chance...like the game warden did who was forced to use his revolver to fight off & kill a bear they were relocating. The bear was killed by what appeared to be a S&W mod 66 .357 mag., while it was attacking the warden.
I'd rather take a chance on using a firearm than hoping that what's really nothing more than a large can of Mace will deter an animal bent on seriously harming me or those I am with.
I'd like to know how many who used bear spray, in the statistic you cited...employed it properly? I'd bet that saying you simply sprayed it....maybe into the wind, or when the bear was still too far away. Certainly skews the data.
And regarding the Montana FWP Warden who killed the bear with his issued M-66 four incher. He was very lucky. His first five shots (125 JHP's) did little damage...insufficient penetration. His last shot went in the lower jaw of the bear and into the spine IIRC.