Originally Posted by sbhooper
I haven't ever been around bears, but have hunted where they live without incident. My question is why do people think that a handgun is more effective than bear spray-which, by the way, is 90+ percent effective from everything that I have ever read.

It is pretty easy to say a pistol is better, if you have never used it and are not absolutely confident in your abilities. Bear spray, is easy to master and effective when used APPROPRIATELY.

I would sure like to see a study of results compared after reading all the input from the Wyatt Earps on here.


Bear spray has a ton of advocates, mostly for bear safety (not human safety from bears) and the claims are often beyond ridiculous. One ad I saw included the claim of turning bears from attacks at as much as 50 yards.

The wind direction can make it completely useless, and that wind direction just happens to be the single most important direction... you are far more likely to stumble into a bear at close range if that bear is unable to smell you first.

Big emphasis on APPROPRIATELY so you should understand there are a ton of things spray does not do.

Not all bears are going to be turned by spray. Young insecure bears testing the waters are the most likely to need spraying and the most likely to leave because of it... but it is way too fickle to be relied on only.

And 90% is not going to give me a warm fuzzy feeling in areas where I might easily see 100 bears in a day...

A firearm pointed with the same APPROPRIATELY caveat will work virtually 100% of the time.

Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.