Hasn't there been enough facepalm in this thread yet?

The Powers That Be have decided that automatic weapons are only acceptable in the hands of certain people (either law enforcement, military, or those with enough cash to obtain the proper background checks and tax stamps)

An "assault rifle" is not an option for Joe Blow on the street, no matter how much our asstarded media would like you to believe.

Further, when it comes to ballistics, heavy and slow wins for penetration versus light and fast, every time. The transition from above the sound barrier (in air) to far below it (in fluid) is quite turbulent, as has been mentioned, and modern intermediate cartridges like 5.56 NATO and 7.62x39 do NOT penetrate sufficiently. Further, if a bear is charging you, the skull has a large, flat area where the brow is - bullets, especially light ones, will be ricocheting off, if you get them off, and if they manage to even hit in that area under stress.

In all cases, Joe is limited to semi auto. Joe has to make every one of the few shots he'll get off count, which pretty much means the most deeply penetrating round he can fire comfortably, under stress.

Let's end the IMI and light rifle round fanboyism - this is not their field. It's not even close. IMI is almost unknown in the rifle world, because they barely make rifles. There's what, the Galil and the Tavor, and they're barely-if-at-all available to civilians? There are dozens of other companies, international and domestic, that make rifles to suit these needs, and IMI just isn't one of them. Sorry, but their pistols are not exemplary either. They're not bad, but not holy-cow wonderful either. Check CZ, HK, Steyr, hell - almost anyone else, and there are a plethora of weapons of equal or greater quality.

This thread is full of fail. Sorry SF, but there's no point in dragging this out any further. Please reread the posts from informed members, here and elsewhere. There is no debate.

Generally speaking: Automatic weapons are useless for civilians.

Civilians seem to desire the least useful automatic weapons: M4, MP5, Uzi, etc.

You dont need to be in the army to apply knowledge with common sense.

I certainly have taken on board the comments that assault rifle bullets may not pierce the heavy layers of fat and muscle on a bear... but we are talking about taking shots at his fragile skull, not into his huge body.

The assault rifle has two big advantages over a more powerful single shot rifle

1 - an inexperieced shooter (like me) might not be the best shot under pressure - as you alluded to in your comments before editing them... with a rifle I might have one shot, which I might miss... with a Galil assault rifle I can spray the bear with multiple shots aimed at his head - which is far more likely in fact to kill the bear than a single shot that might be 50/50

2 - also, bears sometimes operate in groups... if two or three bears attacked even a skilled hunter with a single shot rifle would be screwed... the man with the assault rifle again can take down these beasts with a pray of armour piercing bullets - perhaps they are not able to pierce the bears huge body, but certainly they can easily kill with head shots. The fact you can take multiple shots in seconds means you are far more likely to get a kill shot than a single well aimed shot.

Like a sniper, if you are hunting and have a scope and all the time in the world to take a single well aimed shot, a more powerful rifle might be best... but for self defence for the above reasons the assault rifle would be best.

The Galil is the best assault rifle because of its superior quality to the M16 and AK47. In the situation of facing a lunatic bear attacking you if your gun jams you'd be done for.

Someone please lock this thread already.

In responce
 

A weapon is only as good as it owner. With that being said, Pepper sprays, Hand guns and even Cattle prods will not save you from a bear if you do not know how to properly use them. Take the time to learn about the weapon that you choose. Take the proper training courses. Learn the FACTS about events that happend like the one that you mentioned. Never take hearsay as the gospel, no matter who it's from. As for the matter that was mentioned about Guns in populated areas, Since man has walked this earth there has been bloodshead. Strange Famous, You said, "But ANY time you're in range of a wild bear he is a threat. Any human being isnt a threat in the same sense." You are very mistaken my friend. A bear is only protecting it's self and it's kind. Humans on the other hand need little to no reason to kill you. Bears unlike in HollyWood are passive aggressive, they do not want to confront you no more than you do them. Humans will confront you no matter what. You also stated, " In society the law protects me (or at least aims to)" OR AT LEAST AIMS TO, is all to ture. YOU ARE THE PROTECTOR OF YOUR FAMILY NOT YOUR GOVERMENT. In a break in by the time the cops are called and get there 15 to 25 minets have passed. That is enough for the person to kill your whole family and leave befor the cops ever get to your home. A gun is no diffrent than car, they both have to have a human in control of them in order for the to work. Facts are all that matter. So insted of listening to the news and takeing their word for what happens in your little world, GET COLD HARD FACTS. Good Luck and GodSpeed....

....you are not going to make a head shot on a charging bear. It just isn't going to happen unless you are Annie Oakley and lucky to boot. The area you need to hit is about the size of a grapefruit and is protected behind a lot of bone. Any thing but a spot on direct shot will likely glance off....especially with a lightweight round.


The bear will be moving way too quickly and the shot is far too difficult. With a heavier round, even if a body shot doesn't instantly kill the bear you will likely put it on the ground by breaking it's shoulders, etc. A head shot will only work if you sneak that round into the brain as a lightweight round just doesn't have the penetration necessary for anything else (the rest of the important stuff if hidden behind 11 inches of bone).

Bears are typically alone, they are not particularly social and I have yet to hear a story about a 'pack of bears' attacking someone. At worst it will be a mother and her cubs.

If you are competent enough to make a head shot with your semiautomatic rifle you would have no problem working a lever action rifle, the pump on a shotgun, or a bolt to reload a more appropriate round should follow up shots be necessary.



I can't help but think that you are being deliberately antagonistic because your common sense isn't.

You might as well be trying to convince a NASCAR Driver that he needs to race your '95 Nissan Sentra ricer because "common sense" makes it very clear that your ground effects adds like 50 horsepower.


http://www.skullsite.co.uk/Brbear/brbear_lat.jpg

i laughed a bit at the headshot theory myself. i just dont want to post because everything that needs to be said has already been said...two or three times.

Come on, bears do NOT have 11 inch thick skulls.

Their skull might be thicker than a human's, but not thick enough to protect it from armour piercing bullets.

yeah, an armor piercing round will penetrate the skull....if you can hit the damn thing.

imagine this: you're walking through the brush and hear limbs snapping and the pitter patter of big feet. you turn around to see a bear tearin' ass in your direction, 20ft or so away.

do you think you're going to whip out your weapon and line your sights up with his weaving, bobbing, hungry face?

if i were in a such a situation, id probably point to the brown mass and empty my weapon in a panic.

Armor piercing rounds are not what you think they are. In 5.56 they will penetrate about 1/2 inch of steel which, while impressive, will only happen when the hit is direct. When you shoot something at an angle you are very likely to skip the round off.

For example, I have skipped 5.56 green tip rounds (they have a tungsten steel penetrator though they are not full tungsten, light armor piercing if you will) off car windshields when I was firing at the driver from an oblique angle. I have to note that this was part of a class at a range deliberately set up to demonstrate what does/does not work against vehicles and the people inside them. I have skipped rounds off car hoods, doors, drywall, etc.

If that same round won't penetrate 1/8" thick auto glass when it hits at an angle, what makes you think a much thicker bear skull would behave any differently? The odds of hitting that skull in the small region where the round would impact perpendicular to the plane of the skull and penetrate is very, very small as the area is probably about the size of a golf ball (or the eyes, of course).

Oh, and FYI, armor piercing rounds are some of the least lethal rounds on the battlefield. People who have the choice avoid them unless they expect to be fighting armored opponents.

If it were me the brown mass would likely be in my shorts, so that wouldn't help...

yup, you want some soft points. something that expands like Learys mind on acid.

It is my educated opinion that a phased plasma rifle in 40 Watt range would be an ideal piece for bear control. The hot-as-a-star bolt projectile, after leaving the magnetic cone propulsion unit and covered in its this ionic sheath at the muzzle, would simply evaporate the entire skull of the furry fiend.

So many opinions, so little facts. Lions, Tigers and Bears; Oh my! Head shot, hummm, where to start? Two Bore, 700 Nitro Express, 577 T-Rex, I could go on and on. As for a bear charging you from less than 150 ft. your dead if you try to make a head shot. They do not tell you to play dead for nothing. Most people are not trained properly, thus they have no idea how to make it out alive. Learn the facts it's a life saver. "A pint of sweat, will save a gallon of blood." The guns that I have listed above most people can not afford and do not need. A good Bear spray and a 7.62x54 rifle is all you need. So befor you go Rambo in the woods do real research.

Clue me in... what does this necessitate?

Yuppers. That's why professional guides practice every day, with rifles that kick like horses and cost $5.00 per round and up; so that they -can- make those kinds of shots. Anybody else...well, you might get lucky, but unless you've taken your stomper out and done 20rds/day practice with it for a loong time, a head-shot on a charging bear will be next to impossible, esp. under stress.

I dunno...7.62x54R is identical to .30-06 ballistically, which'll certainly kill a bear with proper shot placement (behind the shoulder quartering-away, under the collarbones quartering-towards), but is hardly what I'd be after as a charge stopper, where you need Papa Bear dead (or at least wishing he was) RIGHTNOW. Two different sets of requirements there. For dealing with a Grizz at close quarters, I'd want the meanest/nastiest/mother-stabbinest/father-rapinest rifle or heavy revolver I could effectively shoot.

If a bear is charging you it's most likely because the two of you were wondering through the woods and crossed oneanothers paths unknowingly. A rifle will be of no use to you then. The bear spray is your only chance of deterring it. Even then there are no guarantees. That is why I say learn how to use the spray properly, which intels checking the expiration date, making sure it will spray at all etc.. The Dunedan, you said, "For dealing with a Grizz at close quarters, I'd want the meanest/nastiest/mother-stabbinest/father-rapinest rifle or heavy revolver I could effectively shoot." Fact is a S&W 500, Taurus .454 Casull Raging Bull and guns of the like you can not control. One shot and a prayer is hardly what I would call effective. That is why I put the spray befor the gun. There are other more pressing matters to consider such as fight or flight syndrome. Learn the facts people. "A pint of sweat, will save a gallon of blood." I'v camped out around bears enough to know that the spray works, I have never had to use it myself however I know people that have. Yes they are still alive and well. Facts, facts, facts people that's what saves lifes.

Uh... the .454 Casull in a full-sized steel revolver is controllable (not comfortable, but useful) and could easily supplant the .44 Magnum for the bear-stopping sidearm role in the near future. Taurus really made their name a few years ago with the Raging Bull and it's a damn fine big bore revolver.

...

We can play scenario tag all day with this thread. I'm not interested in some He-Man circle jerk from a bunch of guys (myself included) that have never actually seen a bear in the woods. Dispelling the StrangeFamous gun myths is really what this thread developed into after a few initial WTF? movements.

You do not know that. I have shot both of the weapons you describe and, while I would not -want- to fire them, I can do so effectively. I much prefer the .460 S&W to the .500.

There are people out there (though I don't number myself among them, simply for lack of practice) who are capable of being much, -much- more effective than one shot and a prayer.

Of course Bear Spray works, otherwise it wouldn't be on the market. However, like people-pepper-spray, it only works some of the time. Adding a suitably powerful rifle or revolver to the mix gives you increased defensive options, which is always a good thing.

If rifles and heavy revolvers were "no use," they wouldn't be carried. Nobody -wants- to hump 5-7 extra pounds through the laurels if he can help it: if firearms were useless, they'd be left behind. Simple. Nor would there be a plethora of stories such as the below, authenticated through Snopes.com. Notice that these gentlemen did not reach for bear-spray, and that their rifles were not "useless."

http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/bearhunt.asp

As you said, research.

I find the M79 to be an effective bear repellent tool.

That's not the blooper, dude, it's your avatar. The bear takes one look at those eyes and says "fuggit, I'mouttahere!"

Crimson Ghost'd!

...

Good call, Dunedan. Nothing puts the fear into wild animals like the awful scream of abrasive '70s punk music.

Epic.

Somewhat useful contribution:

Get Bear Smart Society - Bear Facts

Ugh I hate to restart this bear thread, but I randomly came across this link saying that a .40 pistol brought down a bear, maybe it was a fluke ...

Bear killed with .40 caliber handgun - Alaska - Sleepless in Midland

I hear you should wear bells and carry bear pepper spray... also know how to identify signs of bears being in the area like identifying their poo... its easy... its the one with little bells in it and a peppery smell....

Well a poisoned stick can bring down a bear... the question is of time and repeatability. I think we can safely say 9mm or under isn't going to be a good bet though it'd technically be possible. A .40 isn't a .50 but its not too bad either. I don't think we have enough data to reliably say one way or another. Could have been lucky...might not be a bad choice. Not many people can practically carry and shoot reliably a .50 while under pressure and still hit a moving target. .40s, .44s, and .45s are going to be what most people would have as a realistic backup piece for bears.

I'd think .44 mag would be the best all around unless you're good with a .50.

And what .40s, .45s, and .50s are you guys talking about here? Seems like video game / action movie knowledge.

Most people can't carry and shoot a 9mm under pressure or hit a moving target while relaxed.

Do we really have to say .40 cal S&W, .45 ACP..? And for .50 there isn't much of a standard, I think S&W makes one, I know there's one specifically for grizzly, I think it has the name in it.

Dude you are so annoying sometimes, no ones toting video game knowledge. I may not know as much about specific guns as you but I grew up a hunter and probably know more about bears and hunting safety. And there's a reason its a backup piece, no one has said to go hunting a bear with a .44 mag.

Yeah, its hard to shoot big hand guns, duh. I'd still rather have a .44 and have a 40% chance to hit than a .22 with a 80% chance to hit. I still don't think a 9mm is going to cut it. Truth be told though that's what we carried as a backup piece on our hunts. Course we also drank beer too, neither was the brightest thing to do...

<- grew up a redneck

Would an M60 work against a charging bear? Stationary with you prone so that there is not as much chance of missing.

Pffft not if the bear was in a bunker with a grenade launcher! See we like to arm the bears first, give them a taste of human blood, turn them into godless killing machines, then hunt them. Makes it more fair.

See? This is why it pays off to ask people in the know first. Had I carried my M60 into the wilderness, I'm sure there wouldn't be anything left of me but a pair of smoking boots. Fuckin' bears.

I'll have air support on speed dial just in case from now on.

I think a RPG-7 firing a HEAT round is the most effective small arm against any attacking animal.

Naw the AMR-B7 is clearly the most effective.

The UberCannon craze perpetuated by S&W, Ruger, Taurus and others is mostly masturbatory. .500 S&Ws on the X-frame are completely ridiculous. It's a rifle without a shoulder stock. Granted, advances in frame designs / materials and cartridge technology have really pumped up hunting handguns in the last 2 decades. Look at .454 Casull, for example. For many, it represents a new standard for big bore hunting revolvers.

Let's assume this is bear country where actual bear-sized bears exist... not the dog-sized critters that run around outside DC. Bears are harder targets than humans... they have stronger skulls and more muscle mass. Nobody in their right mind would use a 9, .40 or .45 to stop a bear. Unless the noise and flash of firing the peashooter scares the bear, you'd be pretty much screwed versus a charging bear even if you score direct hits at "oh shit" pistol range. People have been killed even after delivering mortal wounds to the creature with large bore rifles.

And I don't get your caliber / accuracy percentage thing here. Odds are you'll get one or two shots. This isn't a firearm capacity string, it's point and squeeze. Accuracy is accuracy. This isn't relative to any other weapon. It's been my experience that the first shot out of a H&K USP .45 is just as accurate as the first shot out of a Walther P22... the operator is the weakness, not the gun. A .22 may prove to be more accurate of the course of 50 rounds, but the UberCannon should be just as accurate with the first two shots. We wouldn't spend $1800 on a BFR if it couldn't hit worth a shit, right?

The best backup piece on a hunt is your buddy's rifle, not a handgun. A .44 Magnum is a good compromise if you choose a handgun.

I don't think this has anything to do with your qualifications as a modern day slayer of animals and/or consumer of alcohol and tobacco products.

...

Odds are you can scare the bear off with bright colors, making big arms, screaming, a whistle, bear spray, etc.

And for those who miss the obvious: Don't fuck with bear-tots.

Yeah I know, that was just in response to your specific response. And I'd rather have my buddy w/ a rifle *and* my handgun personally... The percentages weren't meant to be accurate or anything, just saying I'll take the biggest available within reason. If I sprain my wrist with a .50 on the first shot and miss...fml.

I guess I know a shitton of hunters out of their minds then :) (which they may be) cause none of them own a .50. And a backup pistol is better than a backup knife.

Umm you called me on my knowledge and claimed I got it all from video games. I simply said its from real life and I don't think you know shit more than I do about what might stop a bear.

Once again we are practically giving the same damn advice and you seem to have some bug up your ass about me and keep calling me on stupid shit.

M240B.

...

Wouldn't surprise me. Dumbasses are plentiful during hunting season... it's why Busch makes camo beer cans. It's why Remington auto rifles have 10 round aftermarket magazines... because the 2nd round of .30-06 wasn't enough. First day of hunting season sounds like the Normandy.

Going into the woods with a 1911 or a Glock on your hip as your "bear defense backup" is foolish.

I find it hard to believe that these plaid-covered, Skoal-sucking individuals don't own a .44 Magnum.

It's practically required by law in some counties. Hell, even I've got one. It's way ostentatious.

Is that an anti-bear version of an M60?

Agreed about the dumbasses, but wtf should they carry as backup? Hairspray? Backup means backup for a reason. I mean, a 2nd rifle? That's not really a backup for logistical reasons. Of course nothing is as good as a high powered rifle, but what else ya gonna do? I could see an argument for the .50 but that doesn't seem to be what you're arguing.

I am curious as to why you keep fire extinguishers in your home when the fire brigade is just a couple of blocks away "protecting" your home?

Well, I live about 300 yards from the Fire Station as it goes,and I dont have any fire extinguishers in my house whatsoever.