Can anyone explain the logic of carrying a single action pistol for bear medicine. I would have thought that you would want to be able to use the pistol one-handed if need be, and I feel that double actions lend themselves to that. I'm not judging anyone, just curious.

First, you can use a single action pistol one-handed. Just watch an old "Gunsmoke" rerun. I suppose a double action would be a little faster.

But if your concern is what to do while the bear is eating your one hand, why would anyone use any rifle other than a semiauto for bear? It takes two hands to operate a bolt action or lever action.

Accuracy is WAY more important than the amount of lead in the air!! I shoot both of my D/A bear/halibut revolvers(480 Ruger/44mag 629) single action anyway, one handed to boot?

Have a Good one!!!

Logic? 1. It is always on your hip, never leaning against a tree. 2. It is easier to manuver in tight spaces such as a tent. 3. It is not as slow as you think it is. 4. It makes me feel better.

That is my best reason too. It makes me feel better.

Single actions can most definatly be used one handed.

Navyhunter,

I don't think it is logical to carry a single action pistol for bear protection. You might find yourself in a situation where you could get off that second shot and a double action is just a little faster.

The big singles such as the Casull and custom Blackhawks are great hunting tools but the Redhawk and S&W are better for protection.

My 458 with a 20" barrel is my first choice for protection.

Regards,

Mark

One would be lucky to have the time to fire one round during a charge at close range, at least that's what people who have survived bear attacks have said. In fact, most often than not, by the time one becomes aware of a charge the bear is already too close. I "feel better" with a Freedom Arms single action .454 Casull, because that's what I have become familiar with.

I know of at least one case where a bow hunter killed a brown with his .44 Magnum revolver. The bear was already on top of him chewing and scratching, and somehow he managed to pull out his revolver and shoot it one time on the bear's neck. If I well remember, the bullet didn't break the neck, but it blew a big hole through the jugular vein, and the bear collapsed and died. He walked for help several miles, as he bleed profusely. The way I see it, a handgun use for defense would be a last moment action, and at very close range.

Ray,

You're right, I don't think people really understand just how fast these bears are. The last I heard they have been clocked at covering 100 yards in less than 4 seconds....that's fast!! I don't know to many people that could take more than a couple accurate shots at a charging bear while crapping themselves. Even with a double action pistol, you still have to hit just right.

I think the biggest misconception about double action revolvers is that shooting double action is less accurate then shooting single action, true only if you don't practice shooting DA. If you do practice shooting DA, you can be as accurate, and sometimes more accurate than shooting SA. The tension of holding the trigger back before the final squeeze makes the gun more stable. The only time I was able to hit a 200 yd ram 5 for 5 was shooting my 480 DA.

I think the SA preference was due to first, real big DA's not being available, and gun-writer tripe about SA's being better. I think it's similar to the advice of using shotguns for bear defence, a popular choice, but not necessarily the best. I'd also say the vast majority of people carrying handguns for bear protection aren't sufficiently competent in their use. I'll include myself in that group as I haven't put in the practice I need as of late.

Having only shot one bear in my life (6 foot blackie) and that with a S&W 686 in self-defense mode (bear came running in full-bore to a fawn bleat call) I can tell you that I "instinctively" shot the handgun in single-action mode. Why? - because that's the only mode I ever shoot it in when practicing, so it never ocurred to me to shoot double-action mode.

Also, double-action revolvers generally have better trigger release in single action mode than single-action revolvers.

Why do you want your protection firmly attached to your body? Plenty of rifle hunters have been seperated from their rifles and packs when blind-sided by a bear. Once the bear has you down, you're best not moving much. Crawling over to your rifle or pack will only invite more abuse or death - this is what I've heard first hand from guys who have had this happen to them. Me thinks you could get your hip-holster revolver out with a lot less commotion and pay your respects to Bruno.

Just my $0.02

personaly, I like my semi auto, I can fire 15 rounds pretty damn fast out of that glock 29

I recommend [and use] a S&W 4" 44 mag. In Bear country I carry Garrett's Hammerheads or Federal Cast Core. I wear the revolver in a DeSantis crossdraw holster AT ALL TIMES.
I carry this revolver always when in the field. In snake season [in Texas] I carry the first two chambers loaded with CCI shot shells. They work very well for grouse rabbits and squill[sorry about that, just could not resist. I do like to eat small game.] I carry 2 speedloaders on my belt.
My wife does the same thing.

HI,

TSTURM, I like what you said pertaining to halibut, I will be in AK,SE this august, and will be moving there within a year god willing,or when my attorney gets off his ass.The halibut is something alot people do not think about when coming to stopping them when or before they are in the boat,Kev

HI,

By the way I have a SS Bisley converted into a 500 Linebaugh, Clements,Kev

I was very fortunate to stop this "charging" halibut with my .44 mag. I stopped him (actually, it's a her) in its tracks with a single shot. I was aiming between the eyes, but in the heat to the moment, I was off a bit. She went about 150# "on the hoof."





o.k., o.k. I admit that the gun was not holstered at the time of the "charge"

I understand why carry a pistol. I have one myself to fend off unwanted visitors in the field. Super Redhawk in .454 seemed right for me. I was just wondering about single action. True, I do usually shoot it SA, but the ability to simply squeeze out rounds is comforting. If a bear were gnawing on my hand I'm not sure I would think to cock the pistol. But that's just me.

I carried a revolver for many years on a daily basis. I own and shoot both single actions and doubles. I have trained many a person and law enforcement officer with them. A double action is faster for the first shot and follow up shots.


The reasons being is there is less hand movements into getting a double action to shoot then a single action any time you add movements you slow youself down. If one wants to learn to shoot fast the place to start is with McGivens book Fast and Fancy Revolver Shooting.

After spending hundreds if not thousand of hours and many 10000's of rounds of ammo perfecting my speed draw. Double actions are just plain faster to get into action then single actions. Single actions can be fast but a double man with the same training well beat the single action guy.


That said I carry a Ruger Redhawk in 44 mag and Ruger and Smith and Wesson double action revolvers for self defense.

I think what you feel comfortable with and what makes you feel better has a big impact on all this. Frankly, I feel a whole lot better carrying my .416, but when I don't have it, I carry a .454 Casull. No, I can't shoot it with one hand, my hands just aren't big enough, but it does make me feel better.
And yes, I agree it is absolutely amazing how fast a bear can run. I've never been charged, but I have seen them run. Doggone impressive.
FWIW, about the stupidest I've felt regarding bears, was a bunch of years ago, on a fishing trip to Illiamna, there were bears everywhere, including sows with cubs, some of other fishermen were doing stupid things like trying to run the bears out of their fishing holes, and we camped overnight in a tent, and all we had was a 40 S&W. I didn't sleep a wink. At least it was a Glock; maybe 13 or 14 bullets would have had an effect.

I know of Two people shot brown bears last year on the Kenia River, both glocks, one 10mm the other 9.

All the lead in the world ain't worth a squat if you don't hit what yer aimming at.

I currently carry a custom Super Blackhawk in 44 with 310 hard cast hand loads that I keep beating up, so I am switching to a Glock 10mm, 15+1 of 41 mag equivalant, with the flashlight mount makes it only one thing to grab in the dark and besides who cares if you beat up a glock?

Enjoy

If you can get a 293 grain hardcast to go 1275 (My 41 mag load 4-5/8"bbl) Then I would think the 10MM would be as good a choice as many. Otherwise a 200 hardcast at 1250 might be good in the 10MM.

I am looking at the 45 colt taurus tracker 4". I think a 250-280 keith style at 1100+ would make a potent lite fishing pistol.

One thought on really light pistols. The most brutally painful revolver I've ever fired was a 2" titanium 357 mag. It was way more painful than even Monte's 4 5/8" 500 Linebaugh blackhawk shooting 440 gr loads.

A revolver is good because it is always on you, but don't go to the extreme of lightweight to the point it is an unshootable gun. If I was looking for my idea of the ideal compact bear gun, it would be a 5" 480 SRH. There are also moon clips available for quick reloads, but if you didn't sort things out with the first 6 shots, I doubt more will help.

To those with the DA's, practice shooting them DA! It doesn't take much practice be become proficient shooting DA, and when you're keeping your shots on a paper plate at 35-50 yds, you're there!

"The only use for a handgun is to fight your way back to your rifle, which you never should have left behind to begin with": Clint Smith.

I like my Ruger SP 101 357. Yeah, yeah, it doesn't have the umph that your Casuls have, but it isn't hanging it's 5 lbs. way off my belt, pulling my pants down, grabbing every bush in the vicinity, and refusing to allow me to sit in a camp chair, either.

I carry my Ruger inside my pants. It's never in the way. It's always within reach. It's there to get the bear off of me. Then I'll crawl (bleeding and broken) over to my rifle, leaning against the tree, and if the bear comes back, I'll kill it.

If I might offer an opinion here, it would be that I don't think a handgun is worth a $hit when it comes to defense against a bear. With that in mind, I have a bit of advice that was not covered here. If you insist on carrying a handgun for defense against a bear attack, always remove the front sight before venturing forth into bear country. You do not want a front sight of any kind on the gun for one very great and simple reason: It don't hurt near as bad when the bear stuffs it up your ass.

Jim

Jim .

"If you're gonna carry a big handgun for defense against a Griz, ya better file down that front sight 'cause it won't hurt so much when that Griz takes it away from you and shoves it up your ass......" Geeez Marie, if I've read that ancient joke once, I've read it 500 times on the Internet!! 20,000 comedians starving to death on Sunset Blvd., and here we have "comedians" trying to be funny.

I find it interesting on the Internet that PERHAPS 50% of Alaska residents belive in carrying a heavy handgun out in the boonies, and 50% don't.

The argument that it is virtually impossible to protect yourself from a Griz out in the backcountry with a handgun, reminds me of the same argument screamed by the anti-gun crowd who state with all authority that you should never be allowed to own a handgun for self defense against vicious criminals 'cause "You're 998 of 1,000 times more likely the criminal will take it away from you and either kill you with your own handgun, or shove it up your ass (better file down that front sight!)". Uh huh.

I will say I know two Alaska residents who killed charging Griz with handguns. One, a National Park Service Ranger, with a S&W .44 Mag. The other, an employee crusing timber for a large lumber company, killed one with his Colt Govt. Mdl. .45 ACP, with eight rounds of hardball. Lucky? Perhaps, but they did with at the time, what they had with them.

Frankly, there are many times out in the mountains in my neck of the woods, Idaho and Wyoming, where there are a few Griz, and a LOT of Black bears and mountain lions, when I'm doing camp chores such as chopping and hauling firewood, toting buckets of water from creek to camp, cooking, etc., etc., and can't keep a .416 Rigby straped to my back, I have a handgun on my hip. Gives me comfort.

Seems to me if you wanna carry a large caliber handgun, carry it. If you don't, don't. Who cares?? My only caveat is if you're gonna carry a handgun, make sure you practice with it. A lot. 'Course, same goes for a rifle, too, doesn't it??

L.W.

Jim you really need to do some research on bear attacks what you'll find is that a lot of people have saved their butts using a pistol.

I figure that Quote is from some body who tried at one time to shoot one and could not hit anything with and therefor decide he would rather have it stuck up his ass then learn how.

I figure that Quote is from some body who tried at one time to shoot one and could not hit anything with and therefor decide he would rather have it stuck up his ass then learn how.

I agree with that thought.

Bears are not bulletproof.

The most important item in regards to carrying a pistol for protection is practicing enough to be competent in its use. As I told a co-worker who was thinking about getting a 44 mag for protection.

Are you an accomplished pistol shot? Nope, do you plan to shoot the gun enough to become a good shot with it? Nope, then get yourself a can of pepper spray and be careful.

It is much better to be unarmed and careful, then armed and careless.

I would venture to say that the majority of people carrying handgus for protection cannot shoot them accurately enough to be of any good to them, no matter what the caliber.

The biggest pistol I have is a Ruger Super Blackhawk 44 mag with a 7 1.2 inch barrel. It is a little bulky, but with a wide belt, and cordura holster, it isnt bad. I am very accurate with it to 100 yds. While there are other pistols I would rather have I suppose for bear protection, I feel comfortable with it, rather than without it. Sometimes I wish it had a 5 1/2 inch barrel, but then, it is very accurate with the long barrel.

Here is the ultimate Bear Stopping Pistol, if you can carry it.

A 600 NE Revolver.

http://forums.nitroexpress.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=bigbores&Number=13695&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1

I have a relative in Alaska that owes his life to his handgun. He was walking his trap lines when he startled a sleeping bear. Bear growls at him, he grabs his handgun (forget the caliber) and shoots at the growling bear (bullet went into it's mouth and hit the brain). Pretty lucky shot. Skinned the bear and uses the skin for a blanket when he goes camping. You may carry a handgun and never need it, but it sure is nice to have when you do need it.

Sevens

I'd say Paul is right on. Very few people can shoot a pistol accurately and fast enough for them to be much protection but fortunately even fewer ever need one. they do make you feel beter though.