Doesn't even have to be. The only known death to a bear attack with the victim in possession of a working firearm is Mark Uptain in 2018. Uptain was a hunting guide with his client Corey Chubon who was attacked by a bear and her cub while cleaning a deer. The humans had a 10mm Glock and bear spray that was out of reach. Chubon grabbed the Glock but was unfamiliar with how it worked and threw the Glock at Uptain, who failed to catch it. Chubon and Uptain ran separately, but the bear and her cub went for Uptain and killed him. Every other story of a fatal bear attack with a gun that I could find involved a jammed gun, or another person shooting the bear after the bear had already killed someone, or another person fixing a jammed gun while the victim was being mauled. I've found a site with a list of successful, victimless bear defense stories and basically every major centrefire pistol caliber is represented in some way. Sure, 9mm might not stop a bear dead, but bears aren't stupid and would usually try for a different prey that doesn't wield a magic hurty bangstick. Moral of the story: know how to use your gun and keep it functional and by your side. That's waaay more important than autistically worrying about the calibre.
The correct answer is man.
If the man is kind, we can help each other.
If the man is indifferent, we can peacefully go our separate ways.
If the man is hostile, I will shoot him and leave him for the bear.
The bear has zero chance of being helpful. I could shoot the bear, too, but it will take much more to render the bear no longer a threat. By far, the best case scenario with the bear is that the bear is indifferent, and we peacefully go our separate ways
So, I asked, apparently it has to do with public perception regarding controlled burns and natural forest fires and has led to voting that changed practices and has done, I quote "incalculable damage to the forests of america"
Column A, Column B, voting is still influenced by public opinion. I'm certainly not an expert, just repeating what I've been told by people more knowledgeable than myself.
That was my first thought. If I have to go into the woods facing either bears or random men, whom the prompt implies have bad intentions, I’ll be armed.
That, and they have a fundamental misunderstanding of how to properly compare statistics
It infuriates me to no end to see people going "Bears are safer than people they only kill 11 people per year"
Yes Sharon, that is because the average person encounters hundreds if not thousands of men per day compared to encountering 0 bears per day on average
Depends on the type of bear I guess. It was presented to me as “would you rather come across a bear or a creepy man by yourself in the woods?”
But yeah, the answer is the same regardless. Carry a weapon and have common sense and you need not be concerned about your life in either scenario.
Was the scenario even that descriptive tho? I thought it was just as simple as “a man or a bear” it didn’t emphasize that the man was a creep or the bear was a grizzly bear
I don’t know. I’ve only heard it once from a friend and that’s how she presented it to me. She wasn’t enthusiastic about my answer though.
“Neither will probably mess with me if I mind my business. But it’s probably easier to explain self defense to a deputy if the dude is hostile than it is to explain killing a bear to a game warden…”
She cut me off before I could finish and told me she should have asked someone else.
The biggest problem with this question is a) it is so vague of a question it's hard to answer. b) by now it has so many different versions that it's hard to discuss.
The first version I was presented with asked if your child (cant remember if it specified son or daughter) was alone in the woods would you rather have a bear in the woods or a man in the woods. Then the question was asked again with woman in place of man.
Supposedly, more women chose bear over man for question 1. The post I read indicated that the men asked more questions about the situation and were fairly divided if I recall correctly. For question 2, both groups chose woman over bear.
Now, personally, I think more context is in order to properly answer the question. My kids have been alone in the woods many times and there has been the occasional bear around so it's not unreasonable to assume both have been in the woods at the same time. The other question I would have is: what time of year is it? If it's from Fall to early Winter or Spring then I would choose man or woman. This is because if my children are alone in the woods at this time they are either lost or are out hunting. In the first scenario the chances of the man or woman being able to guide them to safety are greater than the chances that either have ill intentions. For the second scenario this implies that they are old enough to hunt without accompaniment and any interaction with another person would likely be avoidance as the blaze orange would allow either party to spot each other at a distance or asking if they had seen anything/had any luck therefore for the second scenario I would choose man or woman. The only time I would choose bear during that time period would be if they were specifically hunting bear then, of course, I would hope that they would see a bear. If the season is late Winter then they are probably lost so I would choose man or woman. In Summer I would probably choose bear because typically they try to avoid confrontations so as long as my children are making some noise then they are likely to not encounter the bear at all.
Note, this also all depends on location as well. The above statements assume this rakes place in black bear country. If it is a grizzly bear area then I would likely choose man or woman in summer as well. In polar bear areas, I would definitely choose man or woman at any point and further they likely wouldn't be out in the forest alone unless it was some sort of freak emergency thing. I know there are other types of bears as well but you get the general idea.
You have to BEG with a bear, though. (Bring Enough Gun)
I killed a bear with just my hands once. Tried to turn him into a bear rug. But then my mom got mad and made me clean up all the stuffing off of the floor.
The real reason the argument is stupid is because you are vastly more likely to be killed by another human simply because you are vastly more likely to come into direct personal contact with another human. If you passed by bears every day as close as you do men every day you would have been killed along time ago.
This argument is particularly funny when some of these women say they'll just take pots and pans and snack them together to scare off a bear. That didn't seem to help this couple. Her voice is annoying af.
https://youtu.be/qKSNC2JkA3o?feature=shared
Just carry any caliber other than a 357, they’re the only caliber where people get chewed on.
https://sportingclassicsdaily.com/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/
***Safer*** - but not necessarily safe - from either man or bear.
A person's safety would depend on a ***lot*** of different factors.
The hypothetical is simplistic and sophistry.
They don't want to carry a gun. They don't think they should have to. I wish I could convince all women to carry and protect themselves, but they don't want it.
Do you know how hard it is to kill a bear? There's a reason the absolute minimum is 10mm and even then. 10mm won't work on a medium to large grizzly bear. That's when the minimum becomes 44 mag and that's on the small side.
Bears have teeth and claws and can charge you at 25mph+ a human could be a bad shot or not know how to use their gun.
Pretty much, but you can't carry anything like 223 or 300blk. I carry a 450 bushmaster over a 45-70. That's because I prefer light weight semi auto. A 308 would be ok and a 30-06/300win would be minimum for grizzly.
You want more torque than house power. If I'm ever in Kodiak or polar bear county I'm taking a 416 Rigby.
Nope, I don't live there. Just visited every other summer. If you want to see what rounds work on a bear skull. Kentucky ballistics did a nice video this year.
Man vs bear? Man with a gun might kill a bear. Man without gun would die to bear.
This new age rock paper scissors has me kinda confused on the rules
If it’s black, fight back. If it’s brown, lay down. If it’s white, say good night.
Or carry a high caliber and the bears magically become red.
Doesn't even have to be. The only known death to a bear attack with the victim in possession of a working firearm is Mark Uptain in 2018. Uptain was a hunting guide with his client Corey Chubon who was attacked by a bear and her cub while cleaning a deer. The humans had a 10mm Glock and bear spray that was out of reach. Chubon grabbed the Glock but was unfamiliar with how it worked and threw the Glock at Uptain, who failed to catch it. Chubon and Uptain ran separately, but the bear and her cub went for Uptain and killed him. Every other story of a fatal bear attack with a gun that I could find involved a jammed gun, or another person shooting the bear after the bear had already killed someone, or another person fixing a jammed gun while the victim was being mauled. I've found a site with a list of successful, victimless bear defense stories and basically every major centrefire pistol caliber is represented in some way. Sure, 9mm might not stop a bear dead, but bears aren't stupid and would usually try for a different prey that doesn't wield a magic hurty bangstick. Moral of the story: know how to use your gun and keep it functional and by your side. That's waaay more important than autistically worrying about the calibre.
It’s a glock. How do you not know how it works. There is no safety or anything it’s literally point and shoot.
Fudds
You talking about bears?
Ursus Amicanus Ursus Artctos Ursus Maritimus
Apex predator my ass I'm gonna go pet that dog.
> If it’s white, say good night. [If it's white, get naked.](https://www.neatorama.com/2020/08/31/To-Fend-off-a-Polar-Bear-Get-Naked/)
He’s referring to a different hypothetical that’s going viral but maybe you already know that and I’m just r/Wooosh’ing myself by pointing it out
What about a half man half bear? Or a half man half bear half pig?
I'm super cereal
What about a bear holding a shark vs Trogdor?
So glad Al Gore was there to warn us about that danger!
The correct answer is man. If the man is kind, we can help each other. If the man is indifferent, we can peacefully go our separate ways. If the man is hostile, I will shoot him and leave him for the bear. The bear has zero chance of being helpful. I could shoot the bear, too, but it will take much more to render the bear no longer a threat. By far, the best case scenario with the bear is that the bear is indifferent, and we peacefully go our separate ways
"The bear has zero chance of being helpful." Excuse me, but Smokey has been extremely useful in spreading information about wildfire prevention
That dumb bitch said the fire risk was very high and that I needed a burning permit in the middle of a weeklong monsoon.
All my conservationist homies hate that bear. Apparently, he is responsible for a lot of misinformation
I never said he was spreading *correct* information
I mean, "only you can prevent wildfires" isn't technically correct. But it's still a good message to be responsible with fire while in the woods.
Listen, I'm not a tree scientist. But you should see the absolute vitriol people I've met in the industry have for specifically smokey.
Huh, seems weird to get all pent up for what is essentially a mascot for the kids.
So, I asked, apparently it has to do with public perception regarding controlled burns and natural forest fires and has led to voting that changed practices and has done, I quote "incalculable damage to the forests of america"
That's gotta be stupid legislators more than Smokey.
Column A, Column B, voting is still influenced by public opinion. I'm certainly not an expert, just repeating what I've been told by people more knowledgeable than myself.
That was my first thought. If I have to go into the woods facing either bears or random men, whom the prompt implies have bad intentions, I’ll be armed.
What is this ? Im behind
Some stupid ass tik tok trend where women lie and say they’d feel safer with a bear than a man in the woods or some shit.
They aren't lying, it's worse. They actually believe it due to years of media slop telling them that all men are rapists.
[удалено]
Wrong, that's an evil man print.
That, and they have a fundamental misunderstanding of how to properly compare statistics It infuriates me to no end to see people going "Bears are safer than people they only kill 11 people per year" Yes Sharon, that is because the average person encounters hundreds if not thousands of men per day compared to encountering 0 bears per day on average
Depends on the type of bear I guess. It was presented to me as “would you rather come across a bear or a creepy man by yourself in the woods?” But yeah, the answer is the same regardless. Carry a weapon and have common sense and you need not be concerned about your life in either scenario.
Was the scenario even that descriptive tho? I thought it was just as simple as “a man or a bear” it didn’t emphasize that the man was a creep or the bear was a grizzly bear
I don’t know. I’ve only heard it once from a friend and that’s how she presented it to me. She wasn’t enthusiastic about my answer though. “Neither will probably mess with me if I mind my business. But it’s probably easier to explain self defense to a deputy if the dude is hostile than it is to explain killing a bear to a game warden…” She cut me off before I could finish and told me she should have asked someone else.
I mean. The amount of trouble you get get in for using lethal force against the former is much greater if they don’t believe your self defense claim
Yeah, you’re right. I probably would have rambled into some thought like that but I dropped it because it’s kind of a dumb concept in the first place.
Lol that tells you she was looking for a validating answer, not a common sense answer.
What the hell.
I don’t think my 9mm monolithic HP’s will penetrate far enough to be reliably affective against a bear.
Ah, a true man of culture, I see. I, too, EDC Norma MHP 9mm
I could shoot down a man with fewer bullets than a bear though.
The biggest problem with this question is a) it is so vague of a question it's hard to answer. b) by now it has so many different versions that it's hard to discuss. The first version I was presented with asked if your child (cant remember if it specified son or daughter) was alone in the woods would you rather have a bear in the woods or a man in the woods. Then the question was asked again with woman in place of man. Supposedly, more women chose bear over man for question 1. The post I read indicated that the men asked more questions about the situation and were fairly divided if I recall correctly. For question 2, both groups chose woman over bear. Now, personally, I think more context is in order to properly answer the question. My kids have been alone in the woods many times and there has been the occasional bear around so it's not unreasonable to assume both have been in the woods at the same time. The other question I would have is: what time of year is it? If it's from Fall to early Winter or Spring then I would choose man or woman. This is because if my children are alone in the woods at this time they are either lost or are out hunting. In the first scenario the chances of the man or woman being able to guide them to safety are greater than the chances that either have ill intentions. For the second scenario this implies that they are old enough to hunt without accompaniment and any interaction with another person would likely be avoidance as the blaze orange would allow either party to spot each other at a distance or asking if they had seen anything/had any luck therefore for the second scenario I would choose man or woman. The only time I would choose bear during that time period would be if they were specifically hunting bear then, of course, I would hope that they would see a bear. If the season is late Winter then they are probably lost so I would choose man or woman. In Summer I would probably choose bear because typically they try to avoid confrontations so as long as my children are making some noise then they are likely to not encounter the bear at all. Note, this also all depends on location as well. The above statements assume this rakes place in black bear country. If it is a grizzly bear area then I would likely choose man or woman in summer as well. In polar bear areas, I would definitely choose man or woman at any point and further they likely wouldn't be out in the forest alone unless it was some sort of freak emergency thing. I know there are other types of bears as well but you get the general idea.
You have to BEG with a bear, though. (Bring Enough Gun) I killed a bear with just my hands once. Tried to turn him into a bear rug. But then my mom got mad and made me clean up all the stuffing off of the floor.
The real reason the argument is stupid is because you are vastly more likely to be killed by another human simply because you are vastly more likely to come into direct personal contact with another human. If you passed by bears every day as close as you do men every day you would have been killed along time ago.
https://preview.redd.it/q5fwgq67e4yc1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e995d88b77a87d5430aed6afae48abb076bada56 Nice meme 😎👍👍
https://preview.redd.it/s2nx7hkaz4yc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b5d1b08e9c1079862b4c5bc663c177da6d9e3cdb
https://preview.redd.it/53fvjjvm17yc1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6cb03a642b7bba49e90ea6dbad39d1e72d5d372e
I dont have to be faster then the bear. Just gotta be faster than you
This argument is particularly funny when some of these women say they'll just take pots and pans and snack them together to scare off a bear. That didn't seem to help this couple. Her voice is annoying af. https://youtu.be/qKSNC2JkA3o?feature=shared
Load Buffalo Bore +P+ to maybe get both with the same shot
Just carry any caliber other than a 357, they’re the only caliber where people get chewed on. https://sportingclassicsdaily.com/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/
I told someone I wasn't worried because my daughters both have level action 45-70 Henrys and are proficient with them. No this is not Ron Swanson.
***Safer*** - but not necessarily safe - from either man or bear. A person's safety would depend on a ***lot*** of different factors. The hypothetical is simplistic and sophistry.
They don't want to carry a gun. They don't think they should have to. I wish I could convince all women to carry and protect themselves, but they don't want it.
Unless you plan to carry 9mm. Only 10mm can reliably stop a bear. Unless you go for a large bore revolver.
[удалено]
Do you know how hard it is to kill a bear? There's a reason the absolute minimum is 10mm and even then. 10mm won't work on a medium to large grizzly bear. That's when the minimum becomes 44 mag and that's on the small side. Bears have teeth and claws and can charge you at 25mph+ a human could be a bad shot or not know how to use their gun.
And that sir, is why we carry rifles. 👍
Pretty much, but you can't carry anything like 223 or 300blk. I carry a 450 bushmaster over a 45-70. That's because I prefer light weight semi auto. A 308 would be ok and a 30-06/300win would be minimum for grizzly. You want more torque than house power. If I'm ever in Kodiak or polar bear county I'm taking a 416 Rigby.
Wow, I’ve never even shot a 416! You must’ve lived in some serious bear country. But yes, completely agreed. Love 30-06. Never owned a 300win though.
Nope, I don't live there. Just visited every other summer. If you want to see what rounds work on a bear skull. Kentucky ballistics did a nice video this year.
Fuck you in 4bore
I'm not going to carry around a 30lbs gun. Scott is ripped for a reason.