bdgackle
Member
I know this is a tired topic, but I have a question that I hope is different enough from the cliché to provoke an interesting discussion. Basically, when it comes to guns and brown bears and self-defense, the following seem to be general consensus:
1) ALL handguns and most (or all) rifles are basically inadequate to stop a charge quickly enough to save your life.
2) The bear can be stopped if you put a round in its brain… but shooting it anywhere else will not stop it fast enough to save you.
3) If you are stuck with a handgun, the big bore magnums with a heavy, hard cast bullet are the best choice, because you need deep penetration for tough hide/muscle/fat/bone.
So… my question: what advantage does that deeply penetrating bullet actually give you in this scenario? If shots to the vitals don’t do enough damage to stop the animal, then it seems like reaching the vitals is pointless. You either hit the brain, or you don't -- and that determines whether you live or die. It's kind of a pass/fail test.
I don't understand how the big revolver buys you any margin. Is the additional penetration required just to get through the skull? I know that big bears have gone down with a 22LR… but is that just luck? Would we expect the tiny little bullet to bounce right off the skull most of the time?
I am emphatically NOT arguing that we should run around carrying 22’s… people with actually experience in this area recommend bigger stuff, and I defer to their judgment. I’m just having trouble with what appears to be a contradiction, and I was wondering if someone had any ideas -- I'm clearly missing something here.
1) ALL handguns and most (or all) rifles are basically inadequate to stop a charge quickly enough to save your life.
2) The bear can be stopped if you put a round in its brain… but shooting it anywhere else will not stop it fast enough to save you.
3) If you are stuck with a handgun, the big bore magnums with a heavy, hard cast bullet are the best choice, because you need deep penetration for tough hide/muscle/fat/bone.
So… my question: what advantage does that deeply penetrating bullet actually give you in this scenario? If shots to the vitals don’t do enough damage to stop the animal, then it seems like reaching the vitals is pointless. You either hit the brain, or you don't -- and that determines whether you live or die. It's kind of a pass/fail test.
I don't understand how the big revolver buys you any margin. Is the additional penetration required just to get through the skull? I know that big bears have gone down with a 22LR… but is that just luck? Would we expect the tiny little bullet to bounce right off the skull most of the time?
I am emphatically NOT arguing that we should run around carrying 22’s… people with actually experience in this area recommend bigger stuff, and I defer to their judgment. I’m just having trouble with what appears to be a contradiction, and I was wondering if someone had any ideas -- I'm clearly missing something here.