With Handguns Allowed in National Parks, Why are we still having deaths from bears?

While a handgun might prevent injury in some cases, a bear may be on you before you can get the gun into action. In addition, no handgun can be a sure thing if a bear attacks.

Be as ready as you can, but if everyone carried a handgun or bear spray it would not prevent all injuries/deaths by attacking bears.

I have a friend who was hunting in Alaska with a .300 Win Mag, and his wife a .270. A bear surprised them, mauled him, and although both shot the bear ran off and was never found.My friend recovered. Don't rely too much on the power of a handgun or your ability to stop a bear with it.

Jerry
 
Another interesting fact is that the bear ran off after NINE shots from a .45, and was later found dead.
There's a pending investigation into the justification of the shooting.
 
Just up the road from here in Glacier National Park we had another one yesterday. Grizzly killed a 26 year old hiker on a well traveled trail. Second one this year for us. Most all visitors are not armed and probably wouldn't be even if they knew the danger. That said, very, very few grizzlies up this way are ever stopped by a handgun. Not one in the past 15 years and 11 deaths.
The very great majority are stopped by Counter Assault, made right here in Montana specifically for Griz. Many states consider it illegal because the likleyhood of a human being face sprayed and dying from the stuff is high.

Even in Montana its considered a deadly weapon if used offensively, and if it's defensive you'd better have a great explanation, a sympathetic district attorney and an easy jury.
 
I'd say that the vast majority of people going into public parks are NOT carrying handguns and have no desire to do so.
Click to expand...

That, and a similarly vast majority get their knowledge of wildlife from Disney movies. News flash: Bears don't talk, dance, or otherwise act like Baloo.
 
With Handguns Allowed in National Parks, Why are we still having deaths from bears?
Click to expand...
Because higher populations of bears, more interaction between people and bears, because people are soft and tasty and because the deadliest thing most people carry is the attitude all bears are like Yogi Bear. By the time they find out he isn't Yogi they discover the mosquito repellent they carry is ineffective against bears. Call it weeding the gene pool.
 
To get this out of the way up front, I am very happy that we can now carry in National Parks, and I do exercise that privilege. That said...

A gun is not a magic talisman. Even in skilled hands, a magnum revolver does not have wonderful odds of quickly stopping a charging bear. Beats having nothing, but provides no guarantee.

The gun won't detect the bear for you. If you don't detect the bear, and it attacks, your odds of successfully employing the gun get even worse.

Article said this last victim was attacked at his campsite. For all we know, he was asleep. (A boy scout was killed a few years back, after a black bear ripped into his tent and dragged him out into the brush. I remember reading the article, but don't recall the location for that one.)

Guns are not alarm systems.

Guns don't properly secure food items.

There are many more factors in wilderness safety than just guns.
 
I think this thread contains a whole host of reasons why this country needs to rethink its "bear policy" or policy on dangerous animals in public parks. I see no reason for my tax dollars to help support an overpopulation of dangerous carnivours at Yellowstone or any other public park. IMO, the tourists would be safer & probably reasonably satisfied with a more bear-limited park environment. Certain areas could be fenced (maybe with some electric wires too) off for bear habitation by collared & trackable bears. While i personally would love to see them use some of those SciFi collars that explode when a perimeter is crossed, i would be satisfied if the tracking system alerted rangers to collect any bear that left the designated bear mauling area. Additionally, a cull is overdue is some areas, particularly some park areas.

If anybody wants to camp in the designated bear mauling area, have them sign a waiver & proceed at their own risk.

In areas that cannot be reasonably bear-limited, people should be strongly encouraged to carry some kind of firearm of reasonable bear-limiting size, perhaps a 12 guage pump or a .44+ handgun.
 
Today, 07:52 AM #23
zfk55
Senior Member

Join Date: December 24, 2009
Location: Montana
Posts: 240
Just up the road from here in Glacier National Park we had another one yesterday. Grizzly killed a 26 year old hiker on a well traveled trail. Second one this year for us. Most all visitors are not armed and probably wouldn't be even if they knew the danger. That said, very, very few grizzlies up this way are ever stopped by a handgun. Not one in the past 15 years and 11 deaths.
The very great majority are stopped by Counter Assault, made right here in Montana specifically for Griz. Many states consider it illegal because the likleyhood of a human being face sprayed and dying from the stuff is high.

Even in Montana its considered a deadly weapon if used offensively, and if it's defensive you'd better have a great explanation, a sympathetic district attorney and an easy jury.
__________________
Latigo

www.swissproductsllc.com
Click to expand...

Do you have a link for that? I tried to find a confirmation and couldn't find one.

Thank you,

Alaska444
 
I think this thread contains a whole host of reasons why this country needs to rethink its "bear policy" or policy on dangerous animals in public parks. I see no reason for my tax dollars to help support an overpopulation of dangerous carnivours at Yellowstone or any other public park. IMO, the tourists would be safer & probably reasonably satisfied with a more bear-limited park environment. Certain areas could be fenced (maybe with some electric wires too) off for bear habitation by collared & trackable bears. While i personally would love to see them use some of those SciFi collars that explode when a perimeter is crossed, i would be satisfied if the tracking system alerted rangers to collect any bear that left the designated bear mauling area. Additionally, a cull is overdue is some areas, particularly some park areas.

If anybody wants to camp in the designated bear mauling area, have them sign a waiver & proceed at their own risk.

In areas that cannot be reasonably bear-limited, people should be strongly encouraged to carry some kind of firearm of reasonable bear-limiting size, perhaps a 12 guage pump or a .44+ handgun.
Click to expand...

How about better yet - we just stay out of their backyard and leave them alone? Maybe we should close Yellowstone to people...........:rolleyes:
 
People still die because they are ignorant. They have that mentality it can happen but most likely not to me so I am fine. I wish there was some way we could make this nation more pro firearms. Instead of antigunners who whine because a black gun was used and it was scary so it needs to be banned. The more people familiar the less of a problem firearms would be for people in terms of comfort and accessability. Im tired of people saying "No, I dont like guns. I don't like them at all they scare me." People are afraid of what they dont know and most anti gunners have never handled a firearm much less gone shooting. I have taken two people shooting with views like I described. After both of them left the range they started talking about how fun it was. Then they usually said something like sorry they were being close minded, and target shooting is fun. Then when we are driving they inquired about how to go about getting a liscense and they want to get into the sport themselves. They end up wanting to carry as well, after they see that I have 2 guns on me they had no clue about. Sorry about the pro/anti firearm stuff
 
Handguns are inherently not the best choice for bear defense but if one is to consider carrying a handgun for this purpose it better be something stout like a 460 Rowland or a 44 Magnum or more powerful and even then one better realize the brain in a bear is lower in the head than most people would think...

I would also recommend bear spray as a precursor to the use of deadly force against a bear and in all ways obey the law..
 
TailGator said:
I'd say that the vast majority of people going into public parks are NOT carrying handguns and have no desire to do so.
Click to expand...
That, and a similarly vast majority get their knowledge of wildlife from Disney movies. News flash: Bears don't talk, dance, or otherwise act like Baloo.
Click to expand...
Darn, Tailgator, you beat me to it. I think there's a lot of truth to this -- I've heard this more than once when, say, out on the tundra with a bunch of people, watching, say, a couple of hundred caribou come down a hillside... There's always someone who says, "Ooh -- it's just like a Disney movie!" :mad:

MLeake said:
Guns are not alarm systems.

Guns don't properly secure food items.

There are many more factors in wilderness safety than just guns.
Click to expand...
And this is the root of the problem. Most people are uneducated about wilderness safety, and not much interested in learning. Carrying a gun isn't likely to help someone who doesn't know how to travel in bear country to begin with; I'd worry, in fact, that it may impart a false sense of security -- that "magic talisman" thing..."

Apart from the "Disney" factor, too many people just assume that someone else will make sure they're safe. There was a case some years ago in which a hiker was mauled by a bear in Yosemite N.P., after sneaking in to the park by a back route in order to avoid paying the fee for a backcountry permit. He (or his family, I forget right now whether he survived) sued the NPS on the grounds that the trail by which he entered the park illegally wasn't posted for bear danger.

orangello said:
IMO, the tourists would be safer & probably reasonably satisfied with a more bear-limited park environment.
Click to expand...
And the bears would be safer and reasonably satisfied with a more tourist-limited park environment.

The primary goal of the national park system isn't to provide tourist attractions; it's to preserve large chunks of the natural environment, and the plant and animal species native to those chunks, in a more or less "unspoiled" state. The needs/wishes of tourists (and of the folks who profit from park concessions) should be way down the list...
 
This man did not have bear pepper spray or a firearm
Click to expand...
But he did have snack bars in his back pack altho no evidence the bear was after them but why would a bear just kill a guy?

I saw a vid of a guy in a car in YNP he was tossing a donut at a grizz male, the bear ignored them tho so guy gets out of the car and heaves a donut at the bear. That bear got up and grabbed him by his head and took him away, his kids and wife watching..

Cant fix stupid..

We hile in YNP every other year, seen 3 or 4 bears from a distance, we headed the other way. Buffoloes will hurt ya too, they move fast even tho they look slow and dim witted. Heck I seen a full grown cow leap over 6 foot fences, them animals will fool ya if you dont know what they can do. A full grown grizz can move at 35 mph too.

My bud in SD got his bear, a kodiak, on kodiak island, steve has a badly scared face too, almost lost his life on that hunt.
 
If you are in bear country in a tent, take a few extra pounds and set up an electric fence. They do work in many instances. Don't go camping alone and observe camp rules for avoiding bears. Lastly, if all of that fails, have a gun and pepper spray. Pepper spray won't be much use with a bear coming through the wall of a tent. This is a sad case and a terrible way to die. I don't envy this man's death at all.
 
Some reasons:
- many hikers are anti-gun and would ridicule anyone they saw carrying a gun

- more and more hikers are going ultra light and cut pencils in half to save weight let alone carry a chuck of fighting iron

- many hikers don't even carry a compass or water with them, let alone some means of protection

- National Park personnel and posters downplay or discourage use of firearms for protection and emphasize "they will leave you alone iof you leave them alone (and if they don't it is your fault somehow)"

- Most people do not carry a firearm or even own a firearm

- Even if you have a firearm, you have to see the bear in time, not spend your reaction time pooping your pants, operate your handgun correctly under stress, hit a vital area on a charging bear (if not charging then NP will look down on you shooting it), have enough gun and bullet to be effective

One armed person has a limited chance of repelling a bear. Two armed people in the party attacked stand a much, much better chance. The more people on the trail that are amred the more likely a person would not have to fight alone. But some trails at some times are fairly empty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top