From what you all have said, and looking at ballistic charts and wildlife logistics, the only two rifles that would really do me any good would be a lever-gun in 45-70/44 Rem Mag/30-30 or an AK. Either would be nice to have anyway, and I love both. Looking at the two possible situations, the human-risk is greater. There are more humans out there, thus there is a greater chance of one of them being evil. Plus, a bear would come singly. And bears can be avoided/deterred by a lot more (or less depending on how you look at it) than just a gun. Loud noises (just talking loudly on the trail is enough ususally) can prevent most attacks/encounters. Humans aren't really like that. If one intends harm, no matter of banging pots will help. Humans could come singly, in pairs, and possibly more. Seeing as how the chance of meeting a bad human is greater than meeting a bad bear, the obvious thing to do would be to err to the side of a cartridge/rifle that is best for a human. Could a 7.62x39 kill a bear? Yes, at close range it could. Would it do it as effectively as a 45-70? No. but, I am more concerned about the humans than bears. I also want capacity. IMO, a long mag hanging down from a rifle is much more imposing than bore-diamter (just my opinion, I've done no scientific studies!! Just that I would be more turned off by a long mag than bore diamter -- At least to a certain degree. I don't care how long the mag is off a .22 for example. But you get my point I am sure). Sure, I might be unreasonable. I might also be wrong about all of this. But hey, can't I at least get a bit of credit for bringing it before all you guys? I know where the experience is!
I know that I am inexperienced in a lot of things, rifle slection is one of them. Like I said -- I don't know it all. (and thank God for that) All of this post now assumes that I will be taking ONE rifle. Two would be nice, but as has been pointed out, I am not taking on platoons of bears and humans. No doubt, the thought of me wanting to take two rifles did make me sound paranoid. But I think that is just me being over-prepared. Being paranoid would make me not go at all. I want to get this right, I don't want to buy and take a rifle that won't do the best it can in the situation. So please, tear down my logic, rip my reasoning!
I want one rifle. One that can effectively take out multiple threats quickly at short range. It must also somehow look threatening enough to deter action. It must have enough firepower to also be capable of destroying a bear withing a few shots at close range.
(See, you guys HAVE made a big enough impression on me to change my idea of what I need. Don't stop now!!)
Thanks again all of you. I appreciate your patience with my inexperience. Have a great one!
Hueco
Dr. Rob, just read you post (wasn't there yet when I posted mine). Shotguns, like the one you talked about -- I agree. Looking at the collective amount of talk on shotguns in this thread, I have decided that it would be the perfect thing. Thanks again all!
[This message has been edited by Hueco (edited April 28, 2000).]