Some downplay the handgun as being less accurate than the rifle! If one is actually being attacked by a bear, most anyone should be able to get at least one shot placed pretty accurately, as the distance will be measured in a few feet …. Not 20 plus yards, where the accuracy benefits lean toward the rifle! JMO. memtb
I can say without question, that even at a few feet with my heart pumping out of my chest, I can shoot a long gun better than a handgun and control it better to get another somewhat accurate shot off. BTDT.
To the thread in general, I think it is also important to state that people who work in and around bears, to include ADFG, USFWS and even a lot of local LEOs in Kodiak and such carry shotguns with slugs for bear defense. Why? Maybe it is cost or ease of use for somewhat inexperienced personal. Maybe, it is proven effective. I dunno but that is what all field going personnel that I have crossed paths with in the interior west and Alaska are issued by their agency for bear defense, myself included.
T Inman;
Good morning to you my friend, I trust you're seeing the sun as we are down here - which is rare for us in winter - and you're well on this second Friday of the second month.
As far as I know here in BC shotguns were issued to CO's and RCMP at least. The CO's now have an AR10 .308 but still might have a shotgun for stuff like the Lightfield Smurf Blue plastic dowels? Again I'm not sure sorry.
My gut feel on why they've issued shotguns is a combination of fairly low initial cost, relative ease of training, availability of less than lethal options and possibly the shorter distance the projectile will travel. The CO's will deal with a whole bunch of problem bears in relatively populated areas.
That said T - years ago when I went down the rabbit hole testing different slugs, I corresponded with a chap up in Churchill, MB who was a bear herder. Now who he herded bears for has either vanished from my memory or he never said, but as you know Churchill had and still has issues with the occasional grizzly but the problem bears were traditionally polar bears.
It was somewhere up there where a couple polar/grizzly hybrids have been shot.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...olar-bear-hybrid-killed-canada/84816934/Anyways this chap who went by the handle "Boomer" and had some really, REALLY close photos of bears, was a firm believer in Brenneke slugs. He and a couple other posters opined that the Canadian loaded Challenger slug shells which use the Italian made Guilandi slugs were likely on par with the Brenneke as far as penetration. The posters who seemed to be the most experienced with actually shooting something with slugs were very adamant that all slugs were not created equally.
That all taken into account, an Alaska 'Fire poster here Klikitarik reported shooting a grizzly with Brenneke slugs and he wasn't that impressed at all so there is that.
As a brief aside on the Lightfield Smurf slugs, I can report that one was fired in if not anger then at least in a general state of ill will towards this idiot cinnamon we had hanging around the neighborhood and I was able to hit it at about 60yds just with a Truglo fiber optic bead. The bear didn't seem to like it but I'd say that was about the extent of it's effective range.
The neighbor who I was hazing the bear with, reported that when he'd hit a different bear last spring with one - at a distance measured in feet - that the bear was able to perform a gymnastic routine which would have resulted in at least a podium placement at the Olympics.
Anyways T, just a few random thoughts on your posts, some of which might be useful and some just marginal at best.
Have a great weekend my friend.
Dwayne
