9mm v. grizzly

Gunsite bear medicine (?)

Quite a few years back, I was having a similar conversation regards general handgun stuff and the subject of bears came up. One fellow, who had been out to Gunsite (orange?), made the comment that bear medicine as advised by that outfit was hard cast .357/158 LSWC. There was no follow on conversation, as we got called back to whatever official thing we were doing at the time. That had to have been 15-20 yrs ago.
 
44 AMP said:
In my world OSS (in capital letters) is the abbreviation for the Office of Strategic Services. the clandestine organization that became the CIA after WWII. In your world, its clearly something else.

Every short 2,3,4 (or more) letter combination has multiple meanings, dozens possibly much more, depending on context and what group is using it. "Text speak" on phones has its own set, so does each industry, the military "runs on them", and "etc."!!

And that's just in English. Add in other languages and any "letter code group" can have hundreds of possible meanings.
Click to expand...
That's what "OSS" has always meant to me, too -- Office of Strategic Services.

This is another example of why I wish people would stop using acronyms on the Internet -- especially acronyms they've invented for themselves. It saves them a couple of nanoseconds in typing time, and results in unknown numbers of readers wonder just what the heck is being said.
 
Just a few points...

1. No one, including a bear, wants to get shot by a 9mm, and they're smart enough to associate muzzle blast with bullet pain.

2. I grew up with revolvers and a 357 Mag was my first "real" firearm - I am much, more accurate with my 9mm than I was with the 357 double action and can shoot many, many more shots with it, both warning shots and shots to hit.

3. If I were carrying bear protection in my hands (not slung on my shoulder), sure I'd rather have a 12 gauge, but if I can't have that I'll carry what I shoot quickest and with appropriate bullets.
 
If you dropped the salmon, would the bear go after the salmon or you?
Click to expand...

50/50 I'd say it depends on the bear. The salmon isn't running away, so its either stop for the easy snack now, or come back for it after they're done with you! :D

I'd guess it would depend on if the bear was just hungry, or pissed. :rolleyes:
 
Forte S+W said:
After a whole eight shots. Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding here, but it is to my understanding that DRT is an acronym for Dead Right There, meaning on the spot in one shot.
Click to expand...
No, it simply means "Dead right there", period.

There are too many variables at play here for that to be owed solely to his proficiency with the firearm.
Click to expand...
Results...period

What does that have to do with his proficiency with the 9mm BB load? It was his first time ever taking it out on the field with him, ergo his experience is completely irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Experience is never completely irrelevant.
Given his experience, do you honestly believe he put zero thought into his choices?
Given his experience, do you honestly believe he just ordered a box of the BB, loaded it in his mag, then went to Ihop for some Rooty Tooty Fresh 'N Fruity?
 
agtman said:
'DRT' is a synonym for 'OSS' - meaning 'made dead' by a 'one-shot stop.'
Click to expand...
I first heard the term back in the 70's
It was being used by medics over the radio to indicate the state of an individual involved in an MVA.
Dead right there, period.

Over the decades, I've never heard it used in any other context except "dead right there"...
Accidents, shootings, fires, etc.

This is the first Ive ever heard anyone ascribe only gunshot, let alone a specific number of them.
 
I have only spent 1 day in the remote wilderness of Alaska. We were 70 miles from the nearest town, by float plane. It was more of a business trip than a fishing trip. But we spent the afternoon fishing. The guide had been in business there for several years, and knew the area and wildlife fairly well. We discussed bears as we were preparing the boat. He took us out, unarmed. We saw 1 set of bear tracks. I never felt unsafe, but I was very aware of the possibility of an encounter with a bear.

If that trip had been a bear hunt, I wouldn't have stepped out of the cabin without seeing a large revolver or a rifle in the guides possession. Hunting a bear means that you are intentionally getting close to bears with intent to harm. Therefore the bear will have reason to defend itself. For the most part a fishing trip is very unlikely to be a bad bear encounter. As was previously mentioned, drop the fish, that is most likely the reason for the bear moving toward you.

It is my personal opinion, and you may take it however you want to, that the effective difference between 9mm and 44 mag against big bears is very small with hard cast bullets. Bullet construction is the difference between good bear defense in any handgun caliber. Light hollow point bullets would not be effective for bear in either caliber. Bullet placement is the critical part of the equation. Any bullet in the foot is less fatal than one in the head or chest. Penetration, at the proper location will be required to be effective. Diameter of the bullet is less important than having made a hole through vital parts. Be it a .355 diameter hole or a .429 diameter hole the end result is the same.

To answer another question posted....If the guide is confident in his choice of 9mm, and it is hard cast, not hollow points. I would be comfortable going with him, with my friends and family. Fishing, not hunting.
 
big al hunter said:
To answer another question posted....If the guide is confident in his choice of 9mm, and it is hard cast, not hollow points. I would be comfortable going with him, with my friends and family. Fishing, not hunting.
Click to expand...

I understand the point you are making. But there is a big difference between 9mm and 44mag hardcast... maybe triple the power, which would benefit you greatly if you are charged with no warning from a short distance. I know which one I'm never taking. This bear did not DRT, it manuevered quite a bit, flailing and swatting and eventually ran off and collapsed.

And I am not trying to argue, but many people have been ripped apart for reasons other than being on a hunting trip. People get mauled, buried and pooped on by the big bears, not because they are hunting them, it is cause the bear closed the distance on them... for reasons only known to the bear.

And I do not ridicule anyone who goes unarmed. I traveled the Dalton a few times up to Prudhoe Bay and talked to many of the bicyclists that are armed only with full body mosquito nets while they ride and they have all had a completely different mindset than myself. I've also come across frantic hikers begging for help. But I do understand that not everyone has to be armed to the max all the time and they can have just as great a time. Not minding if your family or friend's goes with a guide who appears competent with a 9mm isn't a death sentence, but it could be. That is enough for me to stick with my gut, but I'm not going to disrespect anyone who thinks otherwise.
 
@American Man
I understand the point you are making. But there is a big difference between 9mm and 44mag hardcast... maybe triple the power, which would benefit you greatly if you are charged with no warning from a short distance.
Click to expand...
Just curious - did you read the Ammoland link with 37 handgun handgun-bear shootings?
 
Jaywalker said:
@American Man
Just curious - did you read the Ammoland link with 37 handgun handgun-bear shootings?
Click to expand...
That link is not new. I get the stories. Am I supposed to be convinced that a 9mm is just fine for brown bear defense? I'm not. There could be a 1000 more stories of one shot one kills of brown bears with a 9mm and I'm still not going to pack a 9mm in AK or the NW... unless I go to Sam's Club.

Have you been next to a brown bear? I have. I find it hard to believe that it is a good idea for someone to intentionally rely on defending against a brown bear with a 9mm. Are there people out there that do?... apparently so. I won't be one of them and if someone wants to that is up to them. I wish everyone the best of luck out in the woods.
 
I wouldn't depend on a 30-30, and that's twice as powerful as a 44 Mag. I just don't think it's a good idea to depend on "power," short of a shoulder-breaking rifle/shotgun round. 9mm, 40, 45 aren't much more than an extension of bear spray that you can "spray" into the wind. For me, though, they're better than revolvers.
 
I wouldn't depend on a 30-30, and that's twice as powerful as a 44 Mag.
Click to expand...

No, its not twice as powerful. Fired from the typical carbines a 150gr 30-30 will have approx. 1900ft/lbs and a 240gr .44 Mag will be in the 1500 ft/lb range.
That's approximately 400ft/lbs difference.

The .30-30 is more powerful but only less than 1/3 and no where near twice as powerful as the .44 Magnum.

9mm, 40, 45 aren't much more than an extension of bear spray that you can "spray" into the wind.
Click to expand...

Apparently the 9mm "spray" was enough to kill the grizzly bear in question. No idea what the wind was though....:rolleyes:
 
9mm, 40, 45 aren't much more than an extension of bear spray that you can "spray" into the wind.
Click to expand...

Apparently the 9mm "spray" was enough to kill the grizzly bear in question.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

And a blind squirrel gets lucky once and finds a nut. So what? It doesn't change the probabilities against it.
 
Fair point about the 30-30, but it is more powerful than the 44 Mag, and I wouldn't use a 30-30 on purpose, so why would I think there was a qualitative difference between two lesser-powered cartridges?

This all reads like the old arguments, .45 ACP vs .357, then .45 and 9mm. I get that bears aren't human-sized, but I understand a lot of Alaskans have moved from revolvers to semi-autos, some to 10mm, some to .45 Super, and some to 9mm. Having grown up with revolvers, I can understand that - I'm much more accurate with a semi-auto than a revolver, and I get many more rounds, both to warn and to shoot-to-hit. My choice of bullets is the Lehigh Xtreme Penetrator. If I have enough time I'll buy a G29 10mm and install an Overwatch Precision Tac trigger. If I don't have enough time for that I'll carry the 9mm and not worry much about it. Whatever I carry, it won't be a revolver, as I sold the last .357 and .44 Mags 30 years ago.
 
Jaywalker said:
Fair point about the 30-30, but it is more powerful than the 44 Mag, and I wouldn't use a 30-30 on purpose, so why would I think there was a qualitative difference between two lesser-powered cartridges?

This all reads like the old arguments, .45 ACP vs .357, then .45 and 9mm. I get that bears aren't human-sized, but I understand a lot of Alaskans have moved from revolvers to semi-autos, some to 10mm, some to .45 Super, and some to 9mm. Having grown up with revolvers, I can understand that - I'm much more accurate with a semi-auto than a revolver, and I get many more rounds, both to warn and to shoot-to-hit. My choice of bullets is the Lehigh Xtreme Penetrator. If I have enough time I'll buy a G29 10mm and install an Overwatch Precision Tac trigger. If I don't have enough time for that I'll carry the 9mm and not worry much about it. Whatever I carry, it won't be a revolver, as I sold the last .357 and .44 Mags 30 years ago.
Click to expand...
I don't see this as a .45 ACP vs .357, then .45 and 9mm.

This is not even a semi auto vs. revolver debate.

I see this as a 500/460S&W, 454 Casull, 44mag, 10mm VS. 9mm.

You can make this a semi auto vs revolver debate, but you probably won't find a lot of critics of the 10mm, other than it may not be someone's first or second choice.
 
. I see this as a 500/460S&W, 454 Casull, 44mag, 10mm VS. 9mm.
Click to expand...

If we were discussing hollow point or soft lead nose bullets I would agree. But we are discussing hard cast.

While ballistic gelatin is not a perfect match for flesh and bone, it is a good way to compare different cartridges and bullets. Compare gel tests of 454, 44, and 10mm to 9mm with hollow point rounds and you will likely find that the 9mm gets around 12 to 20 inches of penetration. The others will do better, 454 and 44 will probably be close to 30-36 inches. I don't have a 10mm, so I haven't studied it. My best guess is that it will be between 9mm and 44 mag.

If you search for the gel tests of the same calibers with hard cast lead you see much greater penetration. Some of the tests I found show 9mm hard cast penetrating over 5' of gel. It does this because the bullet doesn't expand like a soft lead bullet.

All it takes to kill any animal on the planet is to put a hole in the vital organs. If you trust a 454 to do the job, and the bullet is a hollow point, then a 9mm with hard cast may penetrate to more of the vitals and do a better job.

The 9mm may not get 5 feet of penetration on a grizzly, but the vitals aren't that far in anyway.
 
logic

I would agree that hunting the great bears, and hunting game in areas that have numbers of great bears, has an increased level of risk over a fishing trip. Obviously, you are seeking the critter, putting oneself in closer proximity. And it the event of a shot, there is the chance of a wounded animal. Then there is the circumstance of you have an another game animal down (say a moose?) the the bear comes in to the kill site.

But beyond that reasoning, I would think whether you have a salmon, a Nikon or a picinic basket in your hands, any encounter with the big bears revolves not around what you are doing, but where you are doing it. The bear perceives a threat to itself, it's turf, or its cubs, and the trouble begins. Or, maybe you are just lunch. What your intent is does not matter to the bear, it's what it perceives.
 
As for Shoemaker being a real guide and carrying a 9mm semi-auto gun, I would like to point out a couples reasons why the choice of 9mm semi for bear defense may not be the best choice for other people. I should note that the gun type and caliber aren't wholly significant here.

1. Comparatively speaking, Shoemaker is more of an expert on bears, bear hunting, dealing with unruly bears, bear behavior than most of us. That gives him a huge edge in dealing with bears over most of us.
2. We don't know why he carries a 9mm. It may be, like so many other people's decisions for self defense, the smallest caliber, and smallest lightest gun he is willing to carry into the woods for self defense. This may be more of a decision about convenience of carry rather than self defense. As a guide, dealing with his stuff and all the stuff of his clients, carrying something like a big ole' .454 Casull or other large frame, larger power handgun just may not be in the cards for him. In short, he may be carrying what works best for him in his situation, not because it is the best choice for self defense against bears.

The 9mm semi worked for him in his situation. That is 100% great. If you are working from a different framework than Shoemaker, that setup may not work as well for you. By comparison, Jerry Miculek can make 1000 yard shots with a handgun. Me, I will would use a rifle. Just because somebody else can do it doesn't mean I can or that I can as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top