Defensive Carry banner

81 - 100 of 144 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,321 Posts
It does not impede it either.
Certainly it does. Even a rifle bullet striking a branch twig will be impeded. Perhaps not by much but it will still suffer to some degree. Once again, my point was heavy clothing and what could be in that clothing. In my SD loads I what the best I can find in the caliber I happen to be using for a given gun. I have to take into consideration things over which I have no control. I see a perp's clothing, body size and structure, and a number of other things to be potential impediments to my chosen caliber and load and I have no control over those.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,760 Posts
Certainly it does. Even a rifle bullet striking a branch twig will be impeded. Perhaps not by much but it will still suffer to some degree. Once again, my point was heavy clothing and what could be in that clothing. In my SD loads I what the best I can find in the caliber I happen to be using for a given gun. I have to take into consideration things over which I have no control. I see a perp's clothing, body size and structure, and a number of other things to be potential impediments to my chosen caliber and load and I have no control over those.
OK, you win. I do the same as I did for a career in LE. I carry the same gun, same load whether I am working in south Texas, San Diego or North Dakota.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
441 Posts
Well, save the last round for yourself....a 9mm is no round for big bear in a self-defense situation and that's what your relying on....can't tell ya how many .357 cal. slugs we've seen lodged just under the skin on big bears, never making it through the strong muscle layer and heavy bone structure of a large animal.....after many years of carrying a Model 19 with Norma Ammunition I finally conceded....it's the 44mag that gets it done with 240 gr. hardcast....everything else is a toss up.
If you look up the number of life threatening encounters with grizzlies/brown bear where the person is armed with a pistol you will see that the success rate for 9mm is 100%....it is for a few different calibers as well.
Granted I personally have never had to shoot a grizzly/brown bear, but have on many occasions taken black bear with no problems.
The numbers are in direct opposition to your anecdotal experiences.

Esse quam videri
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,673 Posts
One could also make a good argument that the .454 Casull Magnum was a true .45 Magnum round. In 1972, it used a triplex powder load and developed 2000 fps with 2100 ft/lbs of energy. I would make a clear penetration of 1/4" boiler plate steel. It have the Guns & Ammo magazine which covers this caliber and load and the 5-shot revolver with launched it. Pretty amazing power.
Why stop, you can shoot a 454 Casul and when you want to step it up and go with a 460 S&W.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,390 Posts
If you look up the number of life threatening encounters with grizzlies/brown bear where the person is armed with a pistol you will see that the success rate for 9mm is 100%....it is for a few different calibers as well.
Granted I personally have never had to shoot a grizzly/brown bear, but have on many occasions taken black bear with no problems.
The numbers are in direct opposition to your anecdotal experiences.

Esse quam videri
Where has anyone gathered all the encounter statistics so that you determined the 9mm was 100% successful? Did it include every one, or every one of one writer's experience? I've never had a real woodsman/hunter recommend a 9mm even for a deer...much less a grizzly or a brown. My % guess is that if you poll 100 EXPERIENCED woodsmen/hunters, 100% of them would say you're nuts to rely on a 9mm against a grizzly or a brown...but that's just a GUESS...not being put forth as fact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,375 Posts
If you look up the number of life threatening encounters with grizzlies/brown bear where the person is armed with a pistol you will see that the success rate for 9mm is 100%....it is for a few different calibers as well.
Granted I personally have never had to shoot a grizzly/brown bear, but have on many occasions taken black bear with no problems.
The numbers are in direct opposition to your anecdotal experiences.

Esse quam videri
That's known encounters. If you can startle a charging animal out of its rush, then the odds are good you will live. Most predators are like people, they want to win with little to no cost of damage to themselves. It's the ones that are more determined that make the bigger and heavier rounds better. Angry bears can be like drugged up people. Unstoppable outside of massive physical trauma or death.

Like others here, I have been very close to bears more than once in the woods and never had any problems. The thing is, the more contact I have with them, the more likely my luck is to run out with being safe. Outside of the largest bears in the state I know my .357 mag round will kill them. At least fast enough to probably keep me alive too.
 

·
Registered
Northwest Oregon
Joined
·
15,830 Posts
I owned 5" and 8 3/8" S&W 460 magnum revolvers. They were a handful for recoil. Not only was the recoil stiff, but they also torqued in your hand making follow-up shots more difficult. I sold all of my S&W revolvers with internal locks. I now own a 7 1/2" Ruger Super Redhawk .454 Casull. The recoil is manageable for me. A friend has an original 7 1/2" Freedom Arms .454 Casull. We took them to the gun club one day and had a shoot-off. We both agreed the Ruger Super Redhawk is much more pleasant to shoot with full power loads.

Super Redhawk (1024x768) (2017_01_22 17_26_42 UTC).jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pete63

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,580 Posts
badbod & flintlock My reply was related to FLINTLOCK 62 ( mudding the waters reply ) of his brite idea of a 357sig was a good idea for a Woods Walk . Understand ?? The 357sig is nothing special was my point . Not better or as good as the 40sw he already has . I hunt with a 357mag or 44mag too so Bad Bob , Big Deal ! But I have killed a couple deer with a 40sw when the show up under a tree stand .
Glad you think my idea is brite! I bet you think I’m as dumb as a rock.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
441 Posts
Where has anyone gathered all the encounter statistics so that you determined the 9mm was 100% successful? Did it include every one, or every one of one writer's experience? I've never had a real woodsman/hunter recommend a 9mm even for a deer...much less a grizzly or a brown. My % guess is that if you poll 100 EXPERIENCED woodsmen/hunters, 100% of them would say you're nuts to rely on a 9mm against a grizzly or a brown...but that's just a GUESS...not being put forth as fact.
I'm an experienced hunter. Most "experienced" hunters will tell you a 223 is too small for deer, yet given the right ammo it will blow a 2" hole thru a deer. Hence me not caring so much about "conventional" wisdom as it is colored heavily with anecdotal experience and "my hunting buddy says" or "my daddy said" nuggets of knowledge.
I will look up the study and post it here later.

Esse quam videri
 

·
Registered
Northwest Oregon
Joined
·
15,830 Posts
I know nothing about shooting bears with a handgun.
I DO know from previous experience that an M60 will flat out take down water buffalo. :yup:

Accuracy through quantity! :yup:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wavygravy

·
Registered
Northwest Oregon
Joined
·
15,830 Posts
I don't care about anecdotal evidence, internet consensus, Jell-O tests, or statistics. A native woman killed a polar bear with a single-shot .22. That doesn't mean I would go polar bear hunting with a single-shot .22.

I will carry a .357 magnum, .40 S&W, .45 ACP, or 10mm for urban self-defense. I will carry a .44 magnum in black bear country. I will carry a .454 Casull in brown bear or moose country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,390 Posts
If you look up the number of life threatening encounters with grizzlies/brown bear where the person is armed with a pistol you will see that the success rate for 9mm is 100%....it is for a few different calibers as well.
Granted I personally have never had to shoot a grizzly/brown bear, but have on many occasions taken black bear with no problems.
The numbers are in direct opposition to your anecdotal experiences.

Esse quam videri
You said the above:

The author said this "...Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/#ixzz5eUf3J8d5
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @AMMOland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

I engaged in a search for instances where pistols were used to defend against bears. I and my associates have found 37 instances that are fairly easily confirmed. The earliest happened in 1987, the latest mere months ago. The incidents are heavily weighted toward the present, as the ability to publish and search for these incidents has increased, along with increases in bear and human populations, and the carry of pistols."

In ONE article, the research of ONE author turned up 37 cases. Of those 37 cases, the success rate of the ones where the shooter used a 9mm was 100%. That represented FOUR whole cases.

The author also stated "...cases that are fairly easily confirmed." That is not claiming what you stated. That's my point. Limited, skimming research reflects what can happen...one article written with that kind of research does not translate to 100%.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
441 Posts
You said the above:

The author said this "...Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/#ixzz5eUf3J8d5
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @AMMOland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

I engaged in a search for instances where pistols were used to defend against bears. I and my associates have found 37 instances that are fairly easily confirmed. The earliest happened in 1987, the latest mere months ago. The incidents are heavily weighted toward the present, as the ability to publish and search for these incidents has increased, along with increases in bear and human populations, and the carry of pistols."

In ONE article, the research of ONE author turned up 37 cases. Of those 37 cases, the success rate of the ones where the shooter used a 9mm was 100%. That represented FOUR whole cases.

The author also stated "...cases that are fairly easily confirmed." That is not claiming what you stated. That's my point. Limited, skimming research reflects what can happen...one article written with that kind of research does not translate to 100%.
Argue all you want. Just find some where the 9mm wasn't effective and then we can begin the actual debate.

Esse quam videri
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,390 Posts
Argue all you want. Just find some where the 9mm wasn't effective and then we can begin the actual debate.

Esse quam videri
Your cited author is the one who's disputing your original statement...I merely pointed it out...the research, if any is done, is yours. Had you stated "...in one study I read, the limited research of one author turned up four times where the 9mm succeeded.", there wouldn't have been anything to question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
441 Posts
Your cited author is the one who's disputing your original statement...I merely pointed it out...the research, if any is done, is yours. Had you stated "...in one study I read, the limited research of one author turned up four times where the 9mm succeeded.", there wouldn't have been anything to question.
So all you have to do is find one instance where a 9mm wasn't effective and my previous statement will have been wrong.
If you can find four instances that will bring the percentage to 50% and we can continue the debate.

Esse quam videri
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,390 Posts
So all you have to do is find one instance where a 9mm wasn't effective and my previous statement will have been wrong.
If you can find four instances that will bring the percentage to 50% and we can continue the debate.

Esse quam videri
As I already said, any further research will be yours to do. You posted a statement as fact that didn't seem right...I researched and found what I thought you'd read...and asked for your cite. You provided the cite, and your author didn't say or claim anything close to what you stated. He used four stories that were, by his own words easy to come up with, and was completely factual about the results. Your own source disputes your statement. There is no debate.
 
81 - 100 of 144 Posts
Top