Well, after what happened in Wisconsin there's going to be a bunch of threads like this on various boards, plus magazine articles.

Bad thing can happen in the woods too, maybe psychos like the Wisconsin guy, pot growers out West, or meth cookers almost anywhere.

Obviously the best thing is to avoid the situation, the second best thing would be a squad of combat-equipped Marines. Failing that, in a situation with rifle-armed opponent(s) in the woods the best tool would be your own rifle.

But if it came down to a handgun, I submit that the ability to lay down a volume of fire would be a prime consideration. On the other hand, since virtually none of us will ever encounter a situation like that in a lifetime in the woods, portability is an important consideration too.

Concealabilty would be desirable (where legal) to preserve an element of surprise but I figure most folks hunting get ups would make concealing a sidearm pretty easy.

Those familiar with my posts might recall that I have a Smith .357 j-frame Mod 60 that I favor for woods carry. But I'm starting to think that a Glock 19 in 9mm, with two high cap mags might be a better choice.

The Glock because they come naturally to hand for me and the 19 is a prime compromise between shootabilityand portability and with high-cap mags has one of the best firepower to weight ratios out there.

9mm for weight saving and for capacity, I figure within reason, the option of laying down a volume of fire trumps all else.

Stepping up in size and weight from the Glock, perhaps a Beretta 92; a couple of more rounds, even easier to shoot well than the 19, and proven in use.

Birdwatcher

I see your point about being able to lay some fire down but remember that idiot was armed with an SKS which also can lay down fire, a whole lot louder than 9mm. When I'm just bumbling around in the woods I like my .357 simply because it's big enough to take on anythng I'm going to encounter.

I guess now I'll be keeping a wary eye on my fellow hunters.

Shreck... my own closest brush with combat has been the movie "Blackhawk Down" <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> but in that movie (which I assume was fairly true to actual events) what struck me was the speed at which guy's under fire emptied their handguns (two instances IIRC one a 1911, the other a Beretta).

If TSHTF as I described, my own objective would be to get the heck out (if still alive), while leaving enough whistling lead along my backtrail so as to discourage pursuit. Even the bad guys in Clint Eastwood movies can count to six, but nobody can tell how many rounds are left in a high cap.

Another factor would be the type of ammo, specific to 9mm I have found that lighter hollowpoints out of a carbine did not group well past 50 yards, while both ball and 147 grain subsonics delived sub 6" groups at 100. I distantly recall too that an Air Force MP took once out a miscreant at 100 yards or so, presumably with 9mm ball.

The whole scenario seems far-fetched to be sure, but I think I would opt for 147 grain HP's in that Glock, failing that 124 or 115 grain FMJ.

On four legged threats at point blank SHTF range, I dunno that any .357 round would decisively trump a 9mm, especially with the critters we mostly have in the Lower 48.

Birdwatcher

Birdwatcher,

"Covering fire" is a military tactic to allow other troops to manuever. In a one-on-one scenaria, it's just shooting to miss. A guy doens't want to resort to spray and pray if the other guy is shooting to kill.

IMO, the same mentality applies to a gunfight in the woods as anyplace else - fire for effect.

JOG.. I seem to recall a LEO posting on one of these websites that when surprised in an armed altercation the current thinking was to fire WHILE retreating to cover, the ultimate goal being to stay alive.

Even the Brits, the defensive revolver experts of their day, ditched their Enfield and Webley revolvers for the Browning Hi Power.

Birdwatcher

JOG - ""Covering fire" is a military tactic to allow other troops to manuever. In a one-on-one scenaria, it's just shooting to miss. A guy doens't want to resort to spray and pray if the other guy is shooting to kill.

IMO, the same mentality applies to a gunfight in the woods as anyplace else - fire for effect."
___________________________________________________

I agree with JOG. If someone is shooting at you, make your first shot as accurately as possible. "Spray & Pray," and "Hose the Foes," ain't gonna get it when the bad guy is capping rounds at you with a rifle.

Plus, while running and blasting, you're throwing hot lead all over Hell and half of Georgia without any knowledge of wherre theose rounds are ending up. (Innocent bystander's brisket, perhaps??)

And every round you sling down range addressed "To Whomever Might Be Concerned," is one LESS round you have that might just be the round that stops the fight.

Cover is great, if you can get to it quickly, but don't forget that the bad guy might be pretty good with a rifle on moving targets while you're trying to run to cover.

IIRC, it was the famous U.S. Border Patrol Agent and accuracy proponent, Bill Jordan, who coined the phrase, "You can't miss fast enough to win a gunfight."

If possible, put that front sight on center-of-mass as quickly as possible and end the fight!

JMHO. L.W.

I have to agree with these posts. A handgun is a defensive weapon; therefore it's better to haul freight if possible. I shoot IPSC and IDPA and often use Glock handguns for these matches. I mainly shoot a Glock 17 in IDPA. It may only be a 9mm, but it is easier for me to put numerous hits quicker in the A-zone with this gun. I would feel very comfortable carrying a Glock 17 or 19 with two hi-cap mags loaded with Cor-Bon 115gr +P rounds or Winchester 127gr +P+ rounds. I am an advocate of hitting what you aim at on the first shot, but it is amazing how fast one can shoot 30 rounds of ammo in a stressfull situation. I have shot 12 rounds at multiple targets in under 5 seconds in a match with a mag change. The targets varied from 5 yards to 25 yards.

The best advice that I can give you is to pick a quality handgun and PRACTICE, PRACTICE, AND PRACTICE. 9mm is cheap compared to other handgun calibers. If you come under fire, a few extra rounds may help you get out of harms way if you can't find cover.

BS you rambos, I am a retired combat vetran, and me or any one with any sense would never try to out gun a rifle with a 9mm hand gun, In ww1 they replaced the 38 special with the 45 because of failure to kill with the 38, the 9mm is no more than a glorified 38, that some a__hole politition convienced the military to switch, ok enough of that, the best bet if you can after the first shot is fired is either run like hell for cover. if no cover is near hit the dirt, and roll or crawl to a low spot in the ground or any low cover, DO NOT RUN THROUGH ANY OPEN AREA .if you can't get away take careful aim and kill theSOB with your rifle,<< Hubert

The 9mm may not have been worth a darn as a fmj load, but today high performance loads deliver (Corbon and Winchester 127 +p+). As I said, "a handgun is a defensive gun." i.e. to get out of harms way to something bigger.

Hubert hit it far as I am concerned. Yes I carry a handgun in the woods, a 5" S&W round butted 29, but that is for when I can't grab the rifle, and that is going to relieve myself or cooking. The best bet in a case like WI is to seek COVER, then return accurate controlled fire. The difference between COVER and CONCEALMENT just incase you don't know (I can't imagine that really) is the COVER will help protect you as CONCEALMENT only hides you.

So speaks Clint Smith of Thunder Ranch:

"You can't miss me fast enough to hurt me."

Only hits count.

At the Linebaugh Seminar last year, the 40 S&W 180 FMJTC penetrated further than any other non-round nosed handgun round.

I bet they hurt like hell, as well.

Birdwatcher,

If it's time to run for cover, then that's what I'll do - I won't waste any time firing backwards as I go and risk foreheading an oak tree. There's lots of stuff to trip and fall on in the woods.

There's nothing Rambo about my approach - "Chicken Little" would be more accurate. I'd run and if I wasn't being chased I'd keep running. If the bad guy was gaining on me I'd find the best cover I could and fire with as much accuracy as I could muster.

None of this is an argument against the Glock or any other choice, as long as the prime directive is a handgun the shooter can hit with - not magazine capacity. In the woods, I'd tend to go with a revolver with its generally better sights and trigger since the shots could be somewhat longer.

Say, finally a good use for my Para-Ordnance 14-45! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Well here's another post from Rambo with binos <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> and I concede this whole thread might be hot air at its finest.

I edited this one down fron its original length (written very late after we got in from Austin, me zonked with caffeine from the drive).

JOG... I was using figures of speech (prob'ly there should be a smiley face symbol for that), nobody looks backwards and shoots while running.

Given enough distance (like 50+ yards), even aimed pistol fire becomes a sort of "spray and pray", especially under stress, hence my own emphasis on mag capacity.

Even in combat, does one never return fire while heading for cover? Seems to me it would a) put the gun in your hand and b) might distract their aim, especially if they weren't expecting you to be armed.

Sigh! Probably you'd be dead anyway...

Birdwatcher

Birdwatcher,

I don't disagree with your thoughts, I'm just specifically thinking of an encounter in the woods. Other self-defense or combat scenarios definitely opens up the discussion.

I suppose the folks posting on this thread will have a differing mental approach simply due to the terrain they hunt in. If I get a 50-yard lead in Minnesota I'm mostly gone - the woods will provide me a lot of cover for an escape. If I could dive into a nearby cornfield all the better. A "patch" of woods where the Wisconsin shooting took place is a few thousand acres.

My escape plan would go out the window if the encounter happened on a western prairie.

Mainly, just have a gun, any gun, that you are proficient with. Surviving a gunfight is 90% tactics IMHO.

Be aware, consider anyone a possible threat, until proven otherwise. Action always beats reaction, especially if you are in condition white. Know where your nearest cover is.

From what I understand, the victims in WI only had one rifle between all of them...

Don't know about the rest of you, but I can get a rifle in action faster than I can a handgun, and I'm a lot more accurate.
If I can get off one aimed round the fight is over.
If not a pistol wouldn't have helped anyway <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

Tracks,

Clich� but true - the first rule for being involved in a gunfight is to actually have a gun. As Montana Marine points out the victims in WI had one rifle between them. The rest of the firearms had been left behind, which is something we all do around camp or vehicles. Had a few of the victims been carrying Glocks or revolvers the outcome might not have been so terrible.

So, I think Birdwatcher's original question is a great one - what's the best defensive handgun for the woods? The idea being that the handgun will be there when the rifle is leaning up against the hunting shack or back home in the safe.

My inner Rambo hopes that if I�m with a group of family and friends that might be murdered before my eyes, as was the scenario in Wisconsin, I�m going to stand my ground and fight to protect them. In this case the initial distances are short enough where the plus and minuses of various handgun designs doesn�t matter so much � pick what you can hit with.

If the distances open up, I�d prefer an accurate handgun with precise sights and a single-action trigger. I�d hope to seek cover at some distance and shoot whatever piece of the bad guy happens to poke out from behind a tree or whatever. If the bad guy tries to come find me and I�m in a defensive position the odds start to swing my way little. This scenario says �revolver� to me.

Since I don�t feel all that disadvantaged by a revolver up close and feel a big advantage with a revolver at distance, a revolver it would be.

I have mixed feelings about a defense handgun while hunting. I don�t really want the extra weight while I am hunting and I all ready have my rifle and rarely hunt alone. I do however carry most of the time when I am not hunting. If I am up scouting or hiking or snowshoeing then yes I do carry as well. tom

JOG, Good points, except that in such a situation I would prefer the type of handgun I'm most unlikely to carry.
Since I'm much more likely to run across an angry moose than a crazy hunter, I try to carry something with some power when I'm fishing Beaver ponds or just walking around close to camp.
I think maybe a high cap 9mm would be best in case of a situation like the one that happened recently, but what the victims really needed was to be armed with anything. If they all had been armed they might have come out of it alive

I feel very "defended" with my Glock 20 with a full hi-cap. 10mm makes a good round for hunting, too.

Perhaps this killing in the woods will give us Wisconsin residents the leverage we need to get the concealed carry bill passed.

Here is a place to do some reading for you Wisconsin residents.

http://www.wisconsinconcealedcarry.com/

If we dont get this CCW bill passed, toteing a pistol under concealment gonna get ya in deep trouble, when the LAW inforcement discovers your hidden pistol.

When selecting a handgun, it needs to fit your hands, needs to be reliable,and powerfull enough to do the job required. A 9mm would be ok in the summer months, but in winter when people are wearing multiable layers of heavy cloth's, a 10mm or 357 would be preferable for penatration purposes. Most of all, you need to have it with you 100% of the time, if not, chances are you wont have it when you need it most. With all that said, we need to work on getting the CCW bill passed.............. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/help.gif" alt="" />

Re using your rifle to return fire,one thing for consideration-are you hunting with a scoped rifle or open sights? The first thing the Wis. shooter did was to detach his scope,(he knew exactly what he was doing)and then had much faster target acquisition than most hunters with a scoped rifle.If you were able to take cover the scoped rifle may be a good option,but in a highly stressed situation when things are happening at mach 5 I'd prefer open sights. I'd opt for the lightest (and largest cal) handgun you can comfortably carry [color:"red"]and [/color] accurately shoot.I lean towards revolvers so I carry a 329PD in a crossdraw while hunting and a highride strongside everyday. My rifle doesn't bang and rub on it in the crossdraw and its light enough to carry all day.I hardly know its there,which means I'm not going to leave it home or in the rig,because its uncomfortable and/or to heavy to carry. I don't leave home without it. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I carry a Kimber Tactical 45 when woods walking and deer hunting, and am always watching for "threat".
We have Cougars in my area also. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />
Virgil B.

I haven't heard for sure but I'm assuming this Hmong guy was a veteran--not involved in his first rodeo. The hunters who were shot probably had trouble even comprehending what was happening until it was too late. They didn't approach the situation as a tactical problem, nor would most of us before this happened.
I rarely carry a handgun anymore if I'm carrying a rifle, and this won't change that view. Still have a handgun around camp, but I'd much rather deal on some bad guy with a .338 or .30-06 with which I can head shoot him at 200 yards than get into a pistol affray with a homicidal nut.
Think people will be a little more tense in those public land "whose elk is it?" confrontations?

Thank you Jog - You hit the nail on the head.

I don't know how it is in many states regarding carry of a handgun during hunting season other then gun season. In my state if you get caught carrying a handgun during bow or muzzleloader season your subject to fine and seizure of the handgun, suspension of hunting license. This applies to even conceled weapon license holders or if you even have it openly displayed. The squirrel sheriff's in this state don't even let LEO's have a break. Last year I almost caught a fine and lost a J-frame S&W Mdl. 342 while bowhunting in a region of the state where I don't know any of the game wardens. I had to call a judge I bird hunt with, who knows the commissioner to get it straightened out. After the incident in WI. this maybe subject to change.

Hunter1960- "In my state (Tenn.) if you get caught carrying a handgun during bow or muzzleloader season your subject to fine and seizure of the handgun, suspension of hunting license. This applies to even conceled weapon license holders or if you even have it openly displayed.
__________________________________________________

In Idaho, you may carry a handgun openly or concealed, when you are archery hunting and muzzleloader hunting. You'd just better not use it to kill your game animal.

Id. F&G honors your/our Right to self protection. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

FWIW. L.W.

Virginia anounced this hunting season that it is LAWFUL for concealed carry permit holders to be in possession of a handgun during archery and muzzleloading seasons. The code goes on to say that is is unlawful to take game with said handgun during these seasons.

I'm glad VA got this figured out. Several people were having problems including LEO. I hope the other states do the same for their hunters.

I have a couple of observations. The defensive handgun you've spent thousands of rounds with would be a good choice. I carry a .45 ACP similar to the one that did 20 years of military service with me, attended several bullseye and combat matches and generally went plinking with me. I wouldn't feel unarmed with any centerfire handgun I'd hunt deer with. My experience there is .45 ACP/AR, .41 Mag, .44 Mag, and .45 Colt. I have a 10mm Glock, but is "lives" with my wife, so it probably won't go deer hunting with me. I squirrel hunt with a .22 revolver or semiauto. I'd rather avoid and seek cover with this light a defensive tool. Push come to shove, a 22 in the eye/ face just might discourage an attacker. I live in Tennessee too. Frankly, I deer hunt with both bow and muzzle loader with a .45 ACP concealed on my person. I hunt for enjoyment but don't give up my citizenship in the process. I have no plans to shoot any game animal with an "illegal" firearm. I play by the wildlife management rules but protecting myself and my family are first. You can legally hunt certain species with a centerfire all year, including coyotes, possums and racoons. Range and power become issues out in the woods they wouldn't be in conversation "city" situations. I'd say a handgun that wouldn't shoot dinner plate groups at fifty yards would not be my choice. I've never tried the new "ultralight" S&W .44 Magnum revolver, but am tempted. My Mountain Gun at 39 1/2 ounces approaches a .45 Auto Government Model is weight, but not power or reach. The comment on Idaho just reinforces my view that Idaho is a great state to hunt in, and I'll be back again if at all possible.

Put me in MontanaMarine's camp, I've never been very bashful about carrying a handgun when in the weeds. These days during gun season I carry a Colt Delta Elite 10mm, it is reasonably portable, sufficiently powerful and, oh yeah, a variation of the ultimate combat handgun just in case things should go south. I don't do the bow thing, but when next year's muzzle loader season comes around I expect I'll tote a .44 Army clone, which is legal for finishing shots here. At other times I'll carry something a bit smaller and lighter like a Kahr 40 or a S&W 640. Repeat after me: "Officer, state law requires me to inform you that I am in possession of a legally concealled handgun."

I'd pick my beretta 9mm with 2 15 rnd mags using tracer bullets. I'd walk them onto the target...

I'm most accurate with this as I use to shoot IPSC with in in stock class. After pouring 4000 rnds dwn range in a year you get pretty good with it....

I once cleared a set of 16 targets two shots each in 30 seconds with a mag change and on the move the whole time.

In my KS woods, rabid animals and snakes are more of a threat than two legged problems. No bears or big cats. I carry an old 3" SS Charter Pathfinder revolver in .22 mag. It shoots HP's as good as I can and better than any of my short center fires. I sometimes feel that the .22 Mag is under rated as a defence cartridge if accuracy is equated. Good luck.

George

I'm likely to have my Glock 20 with 17 rounds of CorBon 200 grain penetrators or 180 grain soft points, and the other type in a 15 round backup mag. Enough for survival situations and four legged predators, I think.

re: two legged predators - They get to decide where to have the fight, I get to decide how to respond.

"I don't know if they'll go to heaven or hell, but they'll get an audience with Saint Peter this day," vowed Christopher Robin as he spied poachers in the 100 acre woods...

BW;

It almost makes one want to hunt with a fast handling short lever gun with irons. Something like a Jeff Cooper special with a reciever ghost ring site for quick target aquisition.

Dixie... I have two Marlins set up like that; one an old straight-stocked .30-30, the other a .357/.38, both with Williams peeps.

That little .357 comes immediately to mind, quick handling and easy to shoot well. The fact that it takes the same ammo as my 3" Mod 60 doesn't hurt either. Prob'ly be an even better carbine though in .44 magnum.

Birdwatcher

I reload my 357 Marlin with 18 grains fo LIL Gun and a Sper 158 gold dot. velocity is 1900+ FPS, nine in the pipe and one in the chamber.

Home or truck defense gun, and it's not an "assualt weapon."

With Cast Performance 180 grain LFNCGs and 15 grains of the same powder, it's ready for anything.

DW... thanks for the load info. On these forums over the years I have heard of guys who use their Marlin .357 for most everything, up to and including whitetail, I dunno anyone who owns one who doesn't like 'em.

The same seems to be true of the 3" adj sight S&W j-frame Mod 60 of which I own one too. Both the Marlin and the Smith feeding the same ammo (180 grainers sure are a blast to shoot in that little Smith <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />).

Well, pertinent to the topic of this thread I went to a gun show today and checked out a wide variety of autos, couldn't warm up to any of 'em except maybe the full-size 1911's.

"Sigh".... I guess I'm just gonna stick with the ol' trusty Mod 60, five rounds was enough for all of them cowboys with their Peacemakers, 'spect the same will do for me.

Birdwatcher

I agree. It would be hard to beat a Marlin 1895 G with this setup.

Yepper, 9 + 1 rounds of .45-70 handloads delivered rapid fire oughtta get their attention, prob'ly get the attention of the guy holding the 1895 anyway.

Birdwatcher

I've yet to kill a deer with my .357 so I don't mind hauling it into the woods when I'm bird hunting or sniping tree rats etc. You just never know what you're going to come across out in the woods.
The closest I've come to a deer this season was bream fishing and the pistol was in the truck, even though I'd seen several alligators that morning. AHH!
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

HI,
I am looking to a 460 Rowland as I have 45 kimber, great gun, but the change would not be much and it would get very close to a 44 mag load,Kev

kwvinf,
I have a 460 Rowland barrel in a stainless Kimber Classic. It does make a pretty nice setup. The 41 mag is a closer comparable but it is a big jump above the 45 ACP at least on paper. Not sure if the difference is going to make or break a deer shot at 50 yards if the ACP is loaded correctly.

They market these kits as drop in. Mine wasn't and I had to send it to
Clark to fit. They did so at no charge and were great. If you get your Rowland setup, we'll have to talk loads. I've been looking to get some more brass. Clark sells it but it's much cheaper in 500 lots through Starline. If you get the Rowland set up maybe we could split 500 rounds of brass.

Good luck!

I remember a few years back a farmer got in lots of trouble for chasing off some trespasser while the farmer was holding a long gun. It was considered an assault or brandishing I suppose. Maybe thats why the Wisconsin hunters didn't have their rifles with them. I say its better to be judged by twelve than carried by six. I have carried a 4" 629 S&W in a shoulder holster for about 24 years. I'm getting used to it.
Its legal for deer to. In case something happens to my rifle I can still hunt. I don't know to much about gun fights but have read Bill Jordans book, "No Second Place Winnner".
I would much rather get off a well aimed shot with a 44 magnum than a magazine full of 9MM but thats my opinion.
I have been to a few bowling pin matches over the years and will always remember a kid with a Glock who emptied a magazine and left five pins standing. Rapid fire works in the Rambo movies but doesn't impress trained personnel much.
I think after shooting someone it would be a little inconvenient to have to go around picking up brass out of the snow. Just my thoughts.
GWN

Still not sure why you would carry a handgun for self defense when you're equipped with a hunting rifle in your hands. Seems to me you have the ideal tool right there at your finger tips or am I missing something?

I thought that a 44 mag has a lot more power and reach.

Conrad

You generally have to set down your rifle when doing a task that requires 2 hands. Your pistol will always be in it's holster and handy.

Conrad

Glock 21 loaded with 13 rounds of 230 grain Black Talon Ammo. Much lighter than any .44 magnum, excellent controllability for multiple hits, packs enough power to be effective under adverse conditions.



Because some Hmong with an SKS might come hunting you and your buddies after a dispute over a deer stand. Ever try to fire a bolt action one handed?

Now the question arises as to what course of fire would be appropriate for woodland ambush scenarios. Recall that the killer in Wisconsin murders opened fire from about 40 yards away. Perhaps we all fear a psychopath with a rifle opening fire 100 yards or more away.

I would suggest targets (bowling pin, interactive or simple combat silhouettes) set up from 40 to 100 yards from the firing line. Courses of fire SHOULD be timed so as to apply some pressure to the shooter.

In keeping with Clint Smith's OTHER mantra of "keep firing until the target goes away" I suspect there would be a whole new appreciation of high cap mags.

Birdwatcher

Those that did the jungles of S.E. Asia are exempt, they already have the experiance!

Unfortunately, I think that this issue is going to become more important in the future. As private land ownership becomes more contentious, and hunting pressure increases while hunting availability decreases, it's inevitable that tensions will increase and tempers will flare. Now any sensible person, upon learning that they were on private land, would just leave without argument. But encounters I've had in Michigan, and horror stories I've heard from friends in Oregon leads me to believe that common sense is as rare as chicken lips.

That said, the most important aspect of carrying a handgun is the ability to hit something with it. Long ago, I found myself living in a bad neighborhood and owning only an S&W model 10. The key was to be confident enough in my ability so as to not feel unarmed. After several hundred rounds of practice, I felt that I was proficient enough that the fact that it was "only" a .38spl wasn't a hindrance.

In the woods, portability and magazine capacity may be factors, but the ability to hit what you aim at is probably the most important.

Also don't forget they were wearing blaze orange, and the shooter was in camo. This puts the shooter at a distinct advantage.

wasn't it Jeff Copper who said ..
"the first with the most wins" well maybe not his real quote but close :-) ..

my woods carry is a charter arms 44 bulldog .. light hiking.
and hunting sidearm is a Gary Reeder Custom ,, Alaska survivalist ... ( ruger redhawk cut to 3" in 45 colt)
using 325grn Buffalo bore heavy thumper (ouch) ...

but all in all .. a hit with a 22lr beats a miss with anything ..
so carry what you can hit with .. and practice practice practice ..

H_Talon

Yeah - we all know the first rule of gunfighting is "have a gun", but I wonder if we should change the first rule to "have some fight". Seems to me that a group of guys who run towards the shooting unarmed and wearing blaze-orange, when they could do otherwise, are bringing nothing -no fight - at all. They just supplied this guy with more targets.

As with every other situation, the most important weapons are your mind and your will. Beyond that, I don't think the choice of handgun will make a whole lot of difference.

Stop and think about it, the first thing they were thinking was ACCIDENT, not malice of for thought!

I am one of the lucky ones, I always expect the worst, thus am never dissapointed!

Not sure I would totally agree with this. A .357 can take a deer down without too much trouble out to about 30 yards, possibly farther if you have the skill. I know a couple of the local county sheriff deputies pretty well, and they used to pack a 9mm as their sidearm. The primary use of their sidearm in these parts is to dispatch deer that have been wounded by automobiles. Using the 9mm, standing between 10 yards and point blank, they rarely finished the deer off with one shot, even with head shots it would sometimes take a couple pops to finish the job.
They switched over to carrying a .40 (as have most LEA) and rarely do they need more than one shot now to do the job. Most .357 rounds have a bit more pop to them than .40. Not saying this is empirical evidence, but it seems to me that every little bit helps.

Personally, I carry a .357, practice with it quite a bit, and I'm confident that if the need arose it would be enough for my needs. I wouldn't want to go up against an SKS with it, but then again I don't step foot in the woods during deer season without a rifle either.

I always carry a pistol in the hills, wether I have a rifle or not, as it is good grizzly country in my neighborhood. The Ruger 45 Colt SA with 325 gr loads should work fine for anything I need to defend from.

I'm NOT a believer in the high firepower theory of "defense". I think Cooper made a good comment in his "high capacity is great, if you miss a lot" statement. Only hits count. It takes longer to shoot 10, or 20, or 30 misses before finally hitting (if you ever do with shooting like that), than to shoot carefully and hit right off.

Reliability, accuray, and power are on my list of wants on a "defensive" gun.

That pretty well describes my skill level with a handgun.
My best bet would be to fire enough to keep the bad guy ducking while I ran like hell.
Then when I came back with a rifle................. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Malamute - How lame!!!

Those of us who can hit with most shots think 15 hits from one magazine beats the heck out of 6 hits from a revolver.

There is a difference between having a lot of ammo, and being a poor shot. One notes Msrs Cooper and Smith are carrying 7 round mags with a backup.

And, one never knows how many and what type of threat will appear in the woods. Down scoping your ability to respond to multiple threats based on some preconception of how your one or two hits MIGHT effect the outcome of the fight is questionable.

I don't know of a single soldier who purposely goes into a possible combat situation with less than a full battle pack, "because I'm a good shot."

It does not matter how good of a shot you are if there are 8 viable threats, and you have a sixshooter. They win.

IMHO

Snowdog, Cooper didn't tell it all, how about mostly hits and few misses? This means mpre energy transfer, sn the street I prefer 16 rounds to 7 any night. -- no

Mr Walter, a couple more lame points to consider. First, one of the earlier posts was made refering to having a large number of rounds so they could, judging from the context of the post, "hose down the neighborhood" as if this was good tactics. I would point out that in the days when M1 Garands were used in combat (which sounds like you want your hunting trip to be), the standard load was 80 rounds, sometimes with some bandoliers for backup. With the advent of the select fire weapons, the standard load went to 300 rounds, sometimes more, and the hit probability went DOWN. Is this an improvement? Accurate shooting with an adequete caliber will do the job. Who or what are you going to shoot 15 times anyway? It still takes longer to shoot 15 accurate rounds than 6 or 8. In my case, the heavy caliber revolver is more practical because of the grizzly situation. (If you are now going to tell me that a high capacity small or medium caliber auto is a better bear gun that a heavy revolver, I would have to conclude you are not familiar with bear encounters, and are operating on pure theory)

I also tend to shoot a revolver better than an auto. I have shot plate shoots, and hunted with both, I just shoot a revolver better. Revolvers point more natural for me, and most guys I know. I have shot thousands of rounds through 1911's, and tens of thousands through various 22 auto pistols, but was never able to consistantly hit running rabbits, cans thrown in the air, or snap shoot and hit small objects. Your milage may vary. My main objective in being in the woods is relaxation, hunting game, and keeping bears off my tail. If my antique, obsolete revolver doesn't keep me safe, I guess I will just have to suffer the consequences.

I've never heard of anyone being assaulted by 8 assailants while hunting or camping. The situations I am aware of, the bad guys don't like dealing with anyone armed to begin with. They tend to go elsewhere where there is less resistance. Is our hunting trip are we talking about being on in an inner city neighborhood, or out in the woods somewhere?

No disrespect intended, but from the tone of your reply I get the feeling you like to argue a point, rather than discuss and compare notes to learn. I hope this is not the general tone of this forum.

BTW, the murder rate in Wyoming averages around 20 a year, much less for the whole state than most cities of any size. Chicago was just celebrating getting the murder rate under 500 for the year.

My vote would be a very reliable 1911 for "social encouters" of the bad kind. But that's just my personal favorite.

Whatever you are most proficient with would be the best for you. You only win if you live through it!

I don't believe that anyone in a lethal force situation achieves a 100% hit ratio. In fact if we take Cops as a sample of American citizenry most often encountering such scenarios, I believe that their hit ratio hovers around what? 30%?

In woods scenarios we are envisioning the handgun used of necessity as a defensive tool at ranges beyond the norm, increasing the number of likely misses exponentially.

High capacity magazines do not preclude skill.

Birdwatcher

"High capacity magazines do not preclude skill."

No they don't, but they are usually found in pistols designed for short-range encounters. This thread has drifted from the �best defensive handgun for the woods� to more of a general discussion of everyday favorites. Hi-cap magazines are generally included with crappy triggers, imprecise sights, and weak cartridges.

The course of fire you described in an earlier post (bowling pin, interactive or simple combat silhouettes�set up from 40 to 100 yards from the firing line) is actually fairly easy with one change � man-sized targets � forehead to toes. �Easy� also assumes I get to choose the handgun. This isn�t bragging, and those of you that think it is need to make a date with a quality 4� or 6� revolver.

Those of you with the skill to be a threat with a hi-cap pistol at 75-yards would be positively dangerous with the right revolver at the same distance.

I primarily deer hunt with a handgun, which isn�t an indicator of my level of skill � maybe I suck at it. My point is I�ve fired lots of rounds in the woods and from deer stands trying to get a handle on what I can hit and what I can�t. A hunting pard or three are usually along with me and they try their hands as well. Even the worst shooter in the group can raise hell with a deer-sized target at 75-yards with a quality revolver. The level of difficulty goes up dramatically with a hi-cap pistol.

A �hit� on a deer has a much smaller margin than a hit on a bad guy in a woods encounter. We all strive to hit the �pie plate� on a deer to ensure a clean and recoverable kill. My only goal with a bad guy is make him stop shooting at me. Sorry to be graphic, but in the Wisconsin tragedy a gut-shot, kneecapped, or one-handed Vang (the killer) would likely have stopped shooting.

You mentioned the hit ratio for police officers at around 30%. I�ll buy that; except I�ll counter that speed was the overriding factor � not distance.

Good post JOG. 100% agreement here.

Jog,



Backup handguns (I think that's what this concerns) are also pistols designed for short range encounters, since they are typically short barreled guns, seldom going over 6" and most would be 4, 4 5/8, 5 1/2. Anymore and most guys leave 'em at home after a day or two of totin' all that iron around with everything else we tend to carry. And that gets worse with some smartypants coming up with some gizmo I just gotta have. Sure the short barreled guns can hit at yardage into the triple digits, but the guys that can make those shots with a short sight plane typically leave the rifle at home.

I carry a Glock 20 with a 17 round clip for backup duty. I carry it full because I like the balance it gives me. It's not heavy, carries flat to my body and is ugly so contact with rocks don't elicit cursing. It's got a 3.5# trigger that works great if you can master that Glock toggle after the first somewhat squishy shot, if needed. I can hit stuff with it pretty good too.

When the handgun is my primary gun, as in handgun hunting, the whole scenario changes. I might go with a full size Kimber in 460 Rowland, or the 5 1/2" Redhawk 44 mag, or the 8 3/8" 454 Raging Bull. All are scoped or electronically sighted, and deadly to 100 yards or more with a basic to crude rest. Any of these three might go along if I'm feeling sporty, but most likely the 10 1/2" S&W 500 with it's Holosight will be what leaves the truck with me. I have a lot of confidence in it and the terminal performance is what you'd expect it to be.

Does this apply to Hi-Powers too? and is a 9mm to be sneezed at out past 50 yards?



'twould be easier, but perhaps not applicable. Should it be assumed that an opponent would be firing from out in the open?



And speed wouldn't be a factor in the woods? Anyways I expect stress played a role too. Might your own hit percentage decline somewhat if them deer were shooting back?



"Sigh".... fair enough...

Birdwatcher

RickyD,

The concept of a defensive handgun for the woods is already operating on the fringe of common sense. First, the odds of having an encounter with another Vang-type character are remote to say the least. Second, your primary deer rifle or handgun is unavailable Third, the encounter is going to play out in the manner we think it�s going to play out. Finally, if any bullets had been zinging around Vang he probably would have run for it. Vang knew the last five victims we unarmed, and he actually let the two people on the ATV go by because he saw they had a rifle.

So, my choice is based on having really, really bad luck that day.

In Birdwatcher�s opening post he wrote, �But if it came down to a handgun, I submit that the ability to lay down a volume of fire would be a prime consideration.� Even though I disagree, he makes a darn good point. I figure the overwhelming percentage of bad guys are going to run screaming like lil� girls when Birdwatcher cuts loose with his hi-cap while yellin�, �YOU WANT A PIECE OF THIS!?�

BUT, since I�m having really, really bad luck that day I figure my particular bad guy isn�t going to run, or, for some reason I have to stay and fight � friend or family is at risk.

No matter where the encounter occurs, back alley or back forty, tactics play a bigger role than the handgun. In a woods encounter my tactics would be to create space between the bad guy and me, take cover, and make him come to me. If the bad guy shoots me beforehand, well, there ain�t gonna be no made-for-TV movie. If I succeed at my tactics, I want a handgun that lends itself to overcoming the space. Maybe my luck will change and you�ll see me, played by yours truly, right after the �Seinfeld� re-run.

The power of positive thinking has me lying prone behind the base of a tree, peeking out with a 4� S&W M66 .357 Mag rested along the trunk, and I haven�t yet wet my pants. The sights grant me a nice picture to 75-yard plus, the single-action trigger is better than most rifles, and the 158-grain HP bullet is going to raise hell no matter what part of the bad guy I hit or how much clothing he�s wearing. If the bad guy exposes much, this is a shot I can make � assuming my pants are still dry. No doubt, there are bigger, badder, and better revolvers for this scenario, but the inconvenience of carrying the M66 is the most I�d put up with.

I believe my tactics are the smart play. Staying with them, but substituting say�a Glock 20�for the M66 and I get a poor sight picture and a horrendous trigger pull for the task � probably the worst there is for a 75-yard shot at a target with some movement. If hi-caps have a place at all in my fantasy, it would have to have a single-action mode. Also, I�m not sure a guy could shoot his way out of a snot rag with a 10mm. I just said that to see if you�re still reading this far.

Birdwatcher,

�Does this apply to Hi-Powers too? and is a 9mm to be sneezed at out past 50 yards?�

Low blow�you�re gonna make me disavow the Hi-Power in public, ain�t ya? Eyup, if I had to make a shot past 50-yards � the goal of my anti-Vang tactics � the Hi-Power wouldn�t make the cut. The 9mm cartridge wouldn�t be my first choice, but it�s more of elimination by default � I�d be using a revolver.

�Should it be assumed that an opponent would be firing from out in the open?�

I sure hope so. I also hope he�ll feel sorry for me and spot me the first couple shots. If he�s going to be a prick about it and present a small target, it reinforces my decision to use a handgun capable of some precision.

�And speed wouldn't be a factor in the woods? Anyways I expect stress played a role too. Might your own hit percentage decline somewhat if them deer were shooting back?�

Absolutely, speed and stress would be huge factors � not to mention killer deer � but those factors don�t tip the balance in favor of a hi-cap. My stress will be the same no matter what handgun I have, and I�m willing to give up the hi-cap�s speed and firepower in favor of the revolver�s precision � in a woods scenario.

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Ya gotta put those lines about 3/4 of the way down the post for us bass-ackwards types who read magazines from the back to the front. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

OMG beer shot out of my nose when I read that and I wasn't even drinking! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Well heck, rather than being shown to be WRONG on this issue (God forbid <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />) I'm gonna say that, if they are gonna make the odds even longer by hiding, I should get more chances to win, ergo hi caps. Plus, if one happens to be INCAPABLE of much precision (I ain't saying who), the revolver argument becomes a moot point anyway.

Birdwatcher

Birdwatcher,

I hear ya - my best chance could well be a wild-azzed charge to hit the bad guy with a log. Logs rank highly for one swat stops.

Hold on a minute whilst I don my plaid salesman's jacket...

If you don't have a 6" M66 (or M19) in your arsenal, consider giving one a fondle the next time you're shopping. My suggestion has nothing to do with this thread really, more that the 6" K-frames are about as entertaining and elegant as revolvers get (and a great compliment to your Marlin).

The M686 might be a "better" revolver, but its overall feel is quite a bit more sluggish than the K's. Maybe it's the full-lug barrel and the slightly heavier frame, but more likely it's simply the 6" K's are one of those designs that come together - like your 3" M60.

Drilling a paper plate at 50-yards is a piece of cake with any kind of rest. Just use a 6-o'clock hold so the sights don't obsure the plate.

Malamute -

No insult intended. Just saying the ownership of a hi-cap pistol does not make one a bad shot. Neither does it make one a good shot, or better protected if one cannot shoot.

JOG -

I can hit pretty well with my 10mm Glock at 75 yards, and reasonably well at 150 yards.

The Jan 2005 Gunworld magazine has an article on the 4th annual Elmer Keith Shoot, held near Spokane each year. The only targets are at 150 yards. Read the article. It mentions first and second place, I was third out of 40+ shooters.

You're invited. Show me your stuff.

David,

"I can hit pretty well with my 10mm Glock at 75 yards, and reasonably well at 150 yards."

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Yeah, so? Do you hit better with a 4" revolver with adjustable sights in SA mode?

David... what does a 150 yard pistol target look like? Also, what were the rules??

JOG - I shoot a 5" Smith 25-5 45 Colt at the Elmer match for score. I plink with the Glock before the match. I do shoot the Smiths (I have a 4" and a 5") better than the Glock at 150 yards, but inside 25 yards the difference is academic.

Birdwatcher - 150 yard targets only, open sights only. Any caliber, straight-walled cartridges only.

Looks like this:

BTW, a friend sent me this today -

Saw Ted Nugent take a Cape Buffalo on TV with a Glock 10mm

Yesterday I saw a scene on TV that I thought I would never see: Ted Nugent puts a Cape Buffalo down with his Glock 10mm. Not sure the range, probably less than 50 yards. The buff stumbled at the first shot and went down on the second shot, both shots broadside through the shoulders. The buff staggered back to his feet and Ted put several more into the beast's shoulder and the buff could not take anymore and went down and rolled over kicking up quite the dust storm and bellowing a mightly death moan.

Needless to say, it was the coolest hunting kill scene I have seen on TV.

I know that many think Ted Nugent is kind of radical but he is a good voice for our hunting and gun rights and everyone knows where he stands which is more than I can say for many people. Even I change my mind from time to time. Ted is who he says he is.

Wouldn't it have been cool if Ross Seyfried had videoed taking buffalo with his 45 Colts? I know he took atleast two buffs if not more.

CM

Congratulations, David. That would take some good shooting!

I gotta say, I'm not comfortable with that kind of display. It sounds a bit too sensationalistic (is that a word?? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />), to me. The buff deserved better than multiple shots with a marginal (for buff) caliber. I like Nuge, but he gets a bit wild sometimes. Sounds like this was one. But he is original !

Just my take.

Dave... thanks for the pic. That IS good shooting. Presuming that is you in the picture, I'm wondering about the gloves, are you shooting heavy loads for velocity in that .45 Colt?

Birdwatcher

Nah. I like to shoot with winter golf gloves. They are soft and fuzzy on the outside, and have a sticky surface on the inside fingers and palms. Cost $14 a pair vs lots for "shooting" gloves.

The picture is from the year I came in 25th. Last year I laid down to shoot, and moved up 22 places!

BTW, I got the issue of Gunworld wrong. It is the Feb 2005 issue. Starts on page 76. Great shot of a shooter and targets on pages 78/79.

Mr Walter, I concur sir, on your statement regarding high cpacity guns. My intention was to contest the concept some hold that simply shooting a lot will save the day.

Congratulations on your placing in the 150 yard shoot. I've become a fan of long range pistol shooting. Nothing formal, just like to get out in the open and burn powder. We had a steel plate in Arizona we shot at, about 18" wide by 36" high set at 300 yards. Surprising what an "ordinary" pistol can do at that range. We shoot at rocks and sage in Wyoming quite a bit.

This is a real interesting thread. I don't know squat about handguns cept I do own a colt combat commander in 45acp which seems inappropriate for trail defense.

My brain is torn between a S&W 357 revolver, or a 357 sig, perhaps a sig/sauer, or a 10mm.

JOG almost has me convinced, but I do know folks can shoot them auto's at distance. I guess it just takes LOTS of practice as compared to a revolver. My friend at work has a son who is a state trooper in the Peoples Repulic of Maryland. He says them troopers can really fling in them 40's at distance.

I like auto's more because I feel safer on a daily basis having one handy with an empty chamber. I have to think and be deliberate to get it into action, and since I don't live in DC or some other combat zone it works for me.

I am beginning to think, (maybe) that the 357 sig in a sig-sauer might be the best of both worlds, hard hitting, almost a 357 mag and a real accurate platform. I DO like those 4" revolvers though... and I can definitely shoot them straighter- MUCH straighter.

Thoughts???

Dixie,
Understand this is not from first hand experience but form that of a friend and a poster or two on another tread regarding the 357 sig. It seems the 357 sig is fine as long as you use factory fodder. If you are a handloader, you may have some problems with the gun feeding those loads. It seems resizing the case with that little bottleneck adds some complexity for the auto shuckers.

If anyone has good luck reloading for the Sig, let us know what your secrets are.

If I were you, I'd look at the 10mm.

Ricky,

The .357 Sig needs just a bit more TLC during reloading. I wouldn't call it a problem, but I wouldn't recommend the cartridge to a first-timer.

Two ways to avoid problems: 1. Don't exceed the OAL, and B. Pull the pistol's barrel and use it as a case gauge after resizing and for the finished load. A guy doesn't have to check every case, just enough to make sure everything is set-up right.

Case gauges can be purchased, but sometimes that just means the cartridge will function reliably in the case gauge - but not the pistol. Not all barrels are created equal...

Jog,
Thanks! I'll pass that on.

Seems to me that you've answered your own question.

He's pullin' your leg folks!

He carried a Titanium 357 when I hunted with him! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

(sweet rig, it was)

BMT

Someone shoots at me and I will be ducking for cover. Isn't that the basis of covering fire? Even with a rifle, any rounds sent my way will make me think twice about exposing myself. I'm no combat vet or expert, but I think the objective would be to get the hell out of a bad scenario. Sending rounds down your trail while seeking cover seems like a life extending activity. If you have cover, you may have time to assess a situation and hopefully grab a better gun for the situation.

Same philosophy in my house - handgun, then shotgun or get the hell outa dodge and live to fight another day.

Regards,

TM

TM.... sounds good to me <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Lots of experience in law enforcement has shown that only aimed fire is effective. The "spray and pray" tactic results in an empty gun and, sometimes, a dead cop. Forcing one's self to concentrate on the front sight results in hits. If body hits don't work, for whatever reason, then one shoots for the head.
Shoot whatever works for you. E

The best defemsive handgun to carry in any place where you can openly carry is a rifle. In the woods I carry a 22 revolver for pot shooting (not that kind of pot, my aluminum one) and a 358 rifle.

That makes good sense - use what you're proficient with and take the time to aim.

Hoookay,
So the Kimber don't go on every trip to the woods. It goes along 90% of the time. Once in a while the S&W Ti gets to go instead, Usually when taking a hunting rifle along.
For general woods walking(every week-end) I usually take my Ruger 96-22 mag. and the Kimber. If it's raining, i take my Ruger compact -stainless .223 and the Kimber.
I also like to pack a ColdSteel copy of the Randall fighting knife, on my left side. Figure if a couger jumps on my back, the knife might come in pretty handy. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
Virgil B.

I simplified my woods carry mode a long time ago: If I'm packing a centerfire long gun, then I carry my S&W 63 full of long rifle hollow points...Its great for plinking and informal practice between hunts.. ground squirrels hate it!
When black powder or archery or scouting : then I like my Ruger SP101 3" .357. I assume the worst case senario will be a black bear, so I load it with 180gr Black Talons that I've been hording for years. They'll handle anything lesser too.
I find that if it's too heavy or not comfortable to carry, I won't. If I can't hit with it...why bother..? A very small amount of Practical Combat shooting taught me to bury that front sight center of mass and trigger control. I learned about egronomics by trying to carry large frame revolvers and Colt 1911's...no thanks.
If I had to buy a new carry gun, I feel the J frame S&W model 60, 3", adjustable sights and good grips - .357 of course - would be my choice. Its powerful, flexible, light weight and no safety to mess with or slow me down!
In all these years of roaming the woods and streams I've only had two scares. The first one my dog handled. She threw a full blown hissy fit and ran the two guys off....and got to ride front seat all the way home!
The second time , my partners had just left me to prep the drift boat while they shuttled rigs right at darkthirty. As soon as they were gone 3 young thugs walked down to the landing and it became instantly clear - fight or swim! I stood my ground in the boat and showed possesion of the handgun...they grudgingly left me alone. I don't carry that gun anymore, a Jennings J22 pocket auto "jam-o-matic" <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> BT53

I agree with JOG's post. I do not feel disadvantaged by a revolver, and when not at work carry two of them. I carried a Glock as a uniformed duty weapon for two years, and could never rise to a skill level equal to my performance with a 1911 or revolver. (I can shoot my present duty weapon, a SIG 229 DAK, considerably better than I can shoot a Glock.) The ability to hose the foes never appealed to me, as it pre-supposes that the bad guy will be intimidated by projectiles in his general vicinity, when in fact he may not notice them at all, or may disregard them. Only hits count. BTW, I am not flaming Glocks, as I know that some people perform well with them. Perhaps if I had started with a Glock, I would shoot them well, but I prefer either SA or DA.

I didn't take the time to read through all the responses, but I read enough to get the idea a lot of guys are advocating a rifle is best for self-defense. I don't disagree with that thinking, but the nice thing about a handgun is that it's with you all the time, not propped up in a corner, or in a case, etc.

A few years back here in Utah a couple guys were murdered in deer camp by a POS father and son, who wanted their truck and money. I don't know for sure if one of them would've had a handgun that it would've made a difference, but I definately like the odds.

My way of thinking is, I'd rather carry pistol and not need it, than need it and not have it. And for those who don't think the 9mm carries enough womp, would you wanna be shot with one? I sure as hell know I wouldn't.

I prefer Glocks to anyother pistol. Maybe not the prettiest, but they're as reliable as anything. A real simple philosphy in a SHTF scenerio is to move to cover and make your shots count.

GW - I agree 100%. A few years ago I ran across some stat's on the number of sportsmen killed in Alaska while engaged in their outdoor passion. All of those murdered were fishermen, mostly on rivers away from the main stream crowds. They were killed for their vehicles and whatever they had in their possession. Some were probably carrying a firearm and just didn't have an opportunity to use it or balked at the horror of their needed response. Others no doubt, were simply executed by their attacker and never had a chance.
Situational awareness is a biggie too. Be aware of whats going on around you..."why is that guy here? and no fishing pole..etc..He seems very interested in me?"
Finding a handgun that you will actually carry is paramount. Left in the truck does noone but the bad guy any good. Revolvers are pretty much stupid proof and may be the best bet for novice users, while pistols need a bit more training to use, if there is a safety latch to release.
That it was fishermen that were targeted doesn't surprise me. Most hunters are away from the roads, hard to find and armed. Fishermen are not. Anyway, Just my two cents here. BT53

When I'm tooling around in the woods I carry my 700 Ti and a usually have a daypack with basic emergency equipment. A full size handgun and ammo just doesn't work. My backup is usually a Beretta Model 21a .22 lr carried in the front pocket, loaded with Stingers, and I carry two spare magazines in my day pack. The weight of the total package is negligible, and it doesn't interfere with the pack, nor does the rifle bump up against it when walking. The advantage of a small pocket pistol is that you start the situation with a firing grip in your pocket, and I doubt anyone would know I was packing until the muzzle flash went off in their face, followed by 6 more in under two seconds. You just can't do that with a full size handgun without giving yourself away. What I give up in size and "stopping power" I more than get back in "edge." If I'm not carrying a rifle, or for general camping, I like a concealed full size handgun.

The "best gun" for this or that situation threads take up a lot of this sites space. Not that I'm complaining, 'cause I'll jump right in with the rest and it's good to hear/read others opinions on the subject - gives me some things to check out first-hand, and when that means tinkering around with firearms, hey, I'm in.<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Anyway, "best" is subjective, and it really comes down to what you feel comfortable with and what you've decided to carry. For me, that's easy now. Just picked up a nice S&W 642 Airweight .38 Spl +P. Puts 5 under your hand at 15 yards. Now, this ain't competition accuracy, but at halitosis range, it don't matter much whether it's a sub-moa or a 4-moa shooter. This in a clip-on, IWB holster is going everywhere with me. For "field carry", it'll have a CCI shotshell up first, with 4 Federal 110 Hydra-Shok Personal Defense HPs right behind it. Snagless, close to weightless, dead-on reliable, and versatile.

True, I'd rather have something bigger against a bear, but where I'm at, that's unlikely, and a load of snakeshot to the kisser won't do a bear or a man any good in the seeing department. For the no-legged critters, the snake load is it. For two-leggeds, and I sincerely hope that never happens, the snakeshot to the face and 4 HPs for back-up ought to be plenty.

Now, for those out west and up in the frozen tundra where bears are a bit more of a problem, I certainly would up grade. Still, the little S&W is small and light enough to go everywhere, all of the time, and is better than a sharp stick or a 6-weight flyrod against anything with bad intentions. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Blacktail 53....Right on! I NEVER fish w/out a handgun on me. For years it was a 3" M60 (.38+P) then a M42 S&W, now it's a 686 or LW Commander. I had a scare with the family riverside one Nov. here in SW Oregon and was able to get to my BroncoII to reach a Stainless Blackhawk .357. They never knew I put it in my belt but my confidence must have made them uneasy. I learned my lesson about not having it at hand. It's amazing what the "havenot's" will do for a few bucks or your stuff. I had to display a 629 in Ca. one time turkey hunting. I was asleep in the truck in the Mendicino State Forest and they pulled up and shined the lights on us for about 5mins. When I held the 629 up to the window they bailed out fast!
The way I figure it a handgun is like a Leatherman tool that goes BANG....hanging on your belt until you NEED it.....hoping you never will.
Mike.

Displaying a gun like that is called brandishing and a lot of people have been arrested for it. Further more, you alerted the bad guys to the fact that you were armed. Knowing that you were armed would only force them to shoot you If they were really serious about robbing you.

I think that you would have been better off if you had slipped out of the truck and into the shadows where they would have a hard time locating you. That way you could get off the first shot if they tried to mess with you.

Conrad

Conrad

I'd like to contribute my two or three cents worth.

I agree with Conrad. Be armed but never seem to be armed.
I have carried for over 30 years and have never let anyone see my firearm. Why give away your most valuable secret?
Do what the smart cops do - get your self to cover first if possible. If you have to shoot, shoot from cover not standing up on your hind legs like a target.

Second what's the deal here on the best gun. When hunting I carry something serious for self-defense (concealed of course.) Generally a M66 .357. If I want a small bore pistol for plinking I take that too. I am seldom afield with less than two handguns.

They were parked about 15 yds. from the truck with their lights on at about 3 in the morning in the middle of nowhere. I couldn't have easily slipped from the truck without being seen. As far as I'm concerned that truck was my "home" and it all worked out nonetheless.
I agree that the situation could have been handled another way. I have been carrying for 12 years and have never let anyone know it. I'm armed 98% of the time I'm out of the house. I've also learned a lot in the almost 20 years since that incident.
Mike.

I would be suprised if they would do something to you if you got out of your truck and left. You could have got out and walked into the dark where you could safely protect your truck.

Conrad

yeah, but i think waking my hunting buddy up would have been tough....can't leave a man behind!

I don't how many times I've gotten to my hunting location only to find another rig is already there. If I don't know the hunters or recognise the vehicle, then I drive on to my 2nd choice spot and try to salvage the day. If I do know them, then we usually chat it up and go from there. Maybe even hunt together.
I don't feel Coastiechief was wrong it his actions and I seriously doubt that any Law Enforcement folks would have found legal grounds to cite him. That vehicle was his domicile and he felt that he was being threatened by their intimidating actions. They would have too.
It's interesting that none of us knew CC had a partner with him at the time. I am grateful that it wasn't his young son or daughter asleep next to him - that would have raised the threat level bar a notch or two more for me.
After several minutes abuse, our friend CC made a "statement". " I'm home, I have teeth and I won't be messed with! "
That man or men in that other pickup were acting in an unethical and threatening manner. CC made his choice - fight or flight - and then played his hand. It ended peacefully, my hat is off to him.
The thread is "Best defense handgun for the woods?" Not Tactics or law. BT53 <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

There are certainly more talented people here than I! I can't imagine trying to fish while holding a bolt action rifle. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> I can't imagine too many LEO's being real enthused about someone carrying a loaded "deer rifle" out of season either, let alone the general public. Might want to check your state's regulations too. In Ohio for instance it's illegal to possess certain types of ammo or guns when bowhunting, duck hunting, etc. But if lugging a rifle and putting up with the hassle while fishing floats your boat, more power to you.

I'd have to agree with Deputy Norm and others. Not only is a handgun much more convenient and likely to be there when I need it, the rest of the general public isn't going to panic when they don't see me with it, although I'd probably be wearing it openly in truly remote areas.

And for those that have plans of "taking me out" for whatever reason, if I'm carrying a rifle and they have half a brain, they're much more likely to shoot me in the back by surprise, whereas I might have a chance if they assume that I'm unarmed.

When I told my buddy what had happened the next morning he said he never heard a thing!
Next time I'll stoke up the turkey gun. Bigger hole in the "Bidness" end.
I like Deputy Norm's idea though. 2 guns are better than 1. They used to call that a "New York Reload". I figure 9 230 jhp's (and 8 more in the spare mag.)and 6 .22 hp's should handle things well.

I am kind of surprised at the reports that so many sportsmen out went seem to have problems with the "have-nots". I was in LE for 25+ years, the last 15 here in New England and never heard any reports of hunters or fishermen robbed at gun point or otherwise. Break-ins of cabins and vehicles yes, but 1/1 robbery never. How big a problem is it out there anyway?

I have carried in the woods since I was old enough to go into the woods by myself...like age 8. Started with a BB gun and just progressed from there. Rifles are nice but very out of place except during hunting season. They also draw just too much attention.

As to revolver or semi-auto, I have and carry both depending on the reason and the season. Carry whatever you shoot best and WILL carry with you all the time. You are much better off with a M34 Kit Gun always with you than a M29 that gets left in camp.

Bob

I agree with you, RJM. The incidence of crime in my parts is very rare and, if it's anywhere, it's going to be near a developed road or campsite and a property crime rather than a crime against a person. Maybe it's because a lot of the people I see in the woods (locals, anyway) are a part of the armed and polite society. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> As far as rifles go, it is not unusual to see rifles in the woods and vehicles at any time, because coyotes are varmints and can be hunted year round.

I always want to shoot while walking, hunting (who doesn't), fishing, etc, and I find the good old 22LR is best for that. I can take several hundred rounds with me if I want, it's quiet, and I don't spend time at the reloading bench. The approach I take is to always have a rifle and a handgun with me. If I have a centerfire rifle, I take a 22 handgun, and if a 22 rifle, a 45 handgun. If I'm planning a "low threat" day alone, I'll strap on my Bisley Vaquero, riding in El Paso Saddlery leather. Coyotes and rocks beware! If I'm hunting, fishing, or camping in an area where I'll likely bump into people, I carry my 5" 1911 concealed under a shirt. The Cougar population is booming here in Oregon, and while it's unlikely I'll ever be attacked by one, it would be a horrible way to go. It is very rare however, that I can spend an entire day without running into people. People that want to do others harm will be all the more enticed by a remote location w/o witnesses. Don't want to take that chance either.