Amen, brother.
Somebody tell me if I'm off base, but isn't the placement of a shot into a relaxed, stationary or slow moving bear with it's side presented toward the shooter vastly different than a charging scenario? The (admittedly unlikely) charging 250 pound blackie is irritated or angry and can easily cover 75 feet in about 2.5 seconds (20 mph) or less. That means scant seconds, if that, to unholster, acquire the target and place a stopping shot with an underpowered round into a heavily armored, rapidly bobbing target presenting a minimum cross section. So a super pistolero with nerves of steel directs a .45 ACP pill directly in the bruin's eye. Game over, right? Nope. The bear brain rests above and between the eyes. There's a mauling coming up. I'm not arguing that a bear charge can't or hasn't been stopped by .45 ACP. I am arguing that the odds of stopping the bear are so low that they make .45 ACP a poor choice, especially when cheaper, more effective means (UDAP pepper spray) are available.
Somebody tell me if I'm off base, but isn't the placement of a shot into a relaxed, stationary or slow moving bear with it's side presented toward the shooter vastly different than a charging scenario? The (admittedly unlikely) charging 250 pound blackie is irritated or angry and can easily cover 75 feet in about 2.5 seconds (20 mph) or less. That means scant seconds, if that, to unholster, acquire the target and place a stopping shot with an underpowered round into a heavily armored, rapidly bobbing target presenting a minimum cross section. So a super pistolero with nerves of steel directs a .45 ACP pill directly in the bruin's eye. Game over, right? Nope. The bear brain rests above and between the eyes. There's a mauling coming up. I'm not arguing that a bear charge can't or hasn't been stopped by .45 ACP. I am arguing that the odds of stopping the bear are so low that they make .45 ACP a poor choice, especially when cheaper, more effective means (UDAP pepper spray) are available.




Comment