The 10 MM as a Bear Gun

[Malamute]

A glock is perfect due to being utterly reliable...

Was this intended to be humorous?


Folks, keep in mind, the heaviest 10mm loads are running a 220 gr bullet at about 1200 fps (Buffalo bore loads). That's slightly under what a black powder 44-40 loads does for velocity (200-217 gr @ 1300 fps).

Just to keep things in perspective.

Those are also the loads that one person had trouble getting to function reliably in the the almost a dozen glocks he and his wife owned, and which glock told him wasn't a warranty issue because they were outside the performance envelope of normal 10mm ammo the gun was designed to use. Hes not a casual or hobby shooter, he shoots a LOT. It may be that some people shoot a magazine or two of the expensive stuff and call it good, he probably has shot cases of the stuff and may have a different view of whats "good enough" from having shot quite a bit of it. It just didn't work reliably in any of his glocks. None of this is to say it wont work in yours or your neighbors, but I certainly wouldn't trust my life to it without shooting a couple hundred trouble free rounds at least. If one is unwilling to do that, then I question their take on reliable woods loads for bears.

 

[1stmarine]

Was this intended to be humorous?

It can be anything you want it to be.

 

[Panzerschwein]

A Glock 20 loaded with H3 (hot, hard, and heavy) ammo wouldn't be bad. I'd prefer a "fo-fo" magnum but still a Glock has it's advantages. The Norwegians carry Glock 20s loaded with Norma rounds for defense against polar bears.

 

[Deaf Smith]

Where did you read that handguns will only penetrate 1 inch in a bear?


Howard Hill killed an elephant with a bow and arrow back in the 1950s.
Deer and larger animals have been killed with a 22.
This does not make the bow and arrow or a 22 the best choice of weapon any more than a bear being killed with a 30-30 makes it a good choice for bear protection.

Take a peek at what Bear guides carry for big bear protection for when a client screws up a shot and the bear charges.
These guys are not relying on a 30-30 to stop the charge of a 1000 pound carnivore.

Def, have you ever been really close to a large bear?
Have you ever witnessed a bear charge?
Have you ever actually seen a charging bear killed?
I have, and it wasn't killed with a 30-30, it also ran over 100 yards after being shot.

You keep pushing what I believe to be a dangerous point of view.

Do you have any actual experience in this field or are you cherry picking published reports and excluding the ones that do not support your opinion?

Steve

Well Steve, not a bear change but I've been charged by a horse (we raised them and took on an abused one that hated MEN as the one who abused the horse was a man. It tried to run me over when I went to feed him.) It was a very hair raising experience and I would have killed the critter right there if my wife had not stopped me. I hated that horse.

Howard Hill killed an elephant with a bow and arrow back in the 1950s.
Deer and larger animals have been killed with a 22.

So, Steve, were they charging? No?

Steve, if you research this forum and find where I have torn apart OC's arguments on Bear Spray (and shown the research by Tom Smith was flawed) you will see how I look upon this matter.

BUT, if you would read the post I have on this thread (just a hint, there are several like #2, #10, #24, #28, #38) I posted about using a 12 gauge (but many others would do.)

The 30/30 is an example to show bears are not tanks. They can be killed with lots of guns other than elephant rifles. And killed while charging. Fact is a 30/30 will go right through a bears noggin and the Canadian who shot the bear said in the article that if he had used one of his bear guns (he had more powerful ones for that) they would have been to slow to get into action. He felt his lever action saved him due to it's ability to be put into action fast. In fact one now has been killed (charging) with a AK-74 (not 47 but the 5.45 AK-74.) Even one killed charging with a S&W 3954 9mm!

And yes, all were charging.

And Steve, guides use very powerful rifles cause they are libel if the hunter gets hurt. So they use an excess of power to defend OTHERS who may be at a distance when attacked.

Deaf

 

[OC-Trainer]

Steve, if you research this forum and find where I have torn apart OC's arguments on Bear Spray (and shown the research by Tom Smith was flawed) you will see how I look upon this matter.

Sure ya did, Deaf. The only thing that you've "proven" (in the other thread and in this one) is your willful ignorance and unconscious incompetence on the subject.

Willful ignorance:

The practice or act of intentional and blatant avoidance, disregard or disagreement with facts, empirical evidence and well-founded arguements because they oppose or contradict your own existing personal beliefs
Depending on the nature and strength of an individual’s pre-existing beliefs, willful ignorance can manifest itself in different ways. The practice can entail completely disregarding established facts, evidence and/or reasonable opinions if they fail to meet one’s expectations.Often excuses will be made, stating that the source is unreliable, that the experiment was flawed or the opinion is too biased. More often than not this is simple circular reasoning: “I cannot agree with that source because it is untrustworthy because it disagrees with me”

Sound familiar? Count how may times you've done this in this thread, and in the thread below:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/you-worry-about-bears-read-this.809627/


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Willful_ignorance

 

[9mmepiphany]

I knew it was a mistake to allow a handgun vs. bear thread to go beyond the first page.

I would not personally trust any handgun against a charging bear and would rather have a good Bear Spray to dissuaded an overly curious one. But as in many things, you have to make your own choices and live with the consequences

We're done with this one