Fuddlore into the mainstream

ITT: We Identify fuddlore that has made it's way into mainstream "common sense", and we kill it. I'll go first:

>"Yer going into bear country with something less than 454 Casull? Have fun pissing it off heh"

Nearly all of you dumb faggots in Jow Forums and everywhere else think a 9mm/40SW/10mm is just going to bounce off a grizzly hide. While I wouldn't recommend going in with hollowpoint rounds (go for hot hard cast), there is no way any thing faster than 1000fps will leave a griz or black bear "just pissed off"

Evidence:

ammoland.com/2018/02/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/
>Out of 37 recent defensive pistol uses against bears, all but one were successful
>In the unsuccessful case, victim's .357 only grazed the animal

Will give citations in next post

Attached: Mostofyou.jpg (1000x800, 78K)

Other urls found in this thread:

vaildaily.com/news/bear-shooting-rattles-bachelor-gulch/
wideopenspaces.com/alaska-man-kills-charging-brown-bear-with-a-9mm-pistol/
familyfriendsfirearms.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-48148.html
laconiadailysun.com/news/local/bristol-officer-felt-threatened-kills-bear/article_d3bf9e49-46e4-5481-adbe-a339d8eb9879.html
nationalparkstraveler.org/2010/05/grizzly-bear-shot-and-killed-hikers-denali-national-park-and-preserve5943
gunwatch.blogspot.com/2015/10/id-bear-attack-stopped-with-45-pistol.html
above.nasa.gov/safety/documents/Bear/bearspray_vs_bullets.pdf
newwest.net/main/article/saving_grizzly_bears_vs_hunter_safety/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>Nearly all of you dumb faggots in Jow Forums and everywhere else think a 9mm/40SW/10mm is just going to bounce off a grizzly hide.
No, we just know that unless it manages to penetrate far enough to cause a CNS hit (unlikely in many situations) handguns bullets will be ineffective against large bears.
Small bears can be south of 200 pounds and can be pretty easily killed by handguns.
Larger bears can be upwards of 1,500 pounds and will rape you with your (((s o y))) 9mm

Also your blog post doesn't seem very credible.

"Bear defense" is an excuse for people who want to own handguns in "most powerful handgun in the world, would blow your head clean off" calibers like .454 Casull and .500 S&W Magnum. Having a handgun in any caliber on you isn't a bad idea, but if you actually want to protect yourself from bears, bear spray is better.

Successful 9mm cases:
>Kills blackbear
vaildaily.com/news/bear-shooting-rattles-bachelor-gulch/
>Kills Momma Grizz
wideopenspaces.com/alaska-man-kills-charging-brown-bear-with-a-9mm-pistol/

Successful 40SW cases:
>Kills blackbear: familyfriendsfirearms.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-48148.html
laconiadailysun.com/news/local/bristol-officer-felt-threatened-kills-bear/article_d3bf9e49-46e4-5481-adbe-a339d8eb9879.html

Successful 45ACP cases:
Kills Grizzly Bear
nationalparkstraveler.org/2010/05/grizzly-bear-shot-and-killed-hikers-denali-national-park-and-preserve5943
gunwatch.blogspot.com/2015/10/id-bear-attack-stopped-with-45-pistol.html

Alright fudders, when you tell me how wrong I am, please give me cases where someone defensively used a sub 454 Cas and merely "pissed the bear off", or put shots on target but was still mauled/killed.

Unless it happens to be a windy day. I've read of at least two stories where bear spray was successfully deployed, but failed.

Alright, I grew up in grizzly country, my dad guided in wilderness areas, my granddad guided in wilderness areas... and my great-granddad guided in wilderness areas. I got my fair share of stories from them, especially Great-Grandpa before he died.

Great-Grandpa remembered a father and son in the early 60s who he took up fishing and hunting. The son had his 243 Win with him and apparently had an encounter with a grizzly away from the two others; he shot the bear with a 75 gr bullet and apparently it penetrated the bears nostril(?) cavity and killed on the spot. Another time, a hunter was found mauled with an emptied .30-30 levergat and a dead bear nearby; the man had emptied the gun into the griz before it managed to kill him. I'd honestly imagine from that it's more a matter of penetration and shot placement than the actual caliber.

shit, I didn't mean to use my trip from the innawoods thread.

Please see . And as I said, give me some counter-evidence. Or explain why hot 9mm buffalo bore hard cast lead rounds won't penetrate deep enough.

>please give me cases where someone defensively used a sub 454 Cas and merely "pissed the bear off",
Literally your second link.

>or put shots on target but was still mauled/killed.
The majority of the time a gun is used for bear defense the person will at least be injured.

So if it's a matter of shot placement, wouldn't that be a matter of shooting something you're comfortable/competent with? I mean, it honestly takes a brass balled dude not to flinch when you're shooting a 454Cas or some shit.

above.nasa.gov/safety/documents/Bear/bearspray_vs_bullets.pdf
Half of the time someone with a gun at least gets hurt.

A weapon that works decently against 200 lbs creatures isn't as effective against a 1,600 lbs bear.

Might work against a 400 lbs bear though, which is why some stories like the ones you posted exist.

>Literally your second link
I guess the grizzly must have died from being so pissed off

>The majority of the time a gun is used for bear defense the person will at least be injured
Please back this claim up. Shit, I'll even take some anecdotes you just made up.

That's an astounding statistic. I'm open to being wrong, but I'd really like to see the particular cases they bases this off of. Without being able to see the data points myself, I'm a bit skeptical of some government memo.

I would completely agree. An IWI Jericho in 45 is my personal preference, but dad swears by a Remington 1100 .410 w/ 1/4 oz slugs and granddad with his .45-70 levergat.

This is the same thing as stopping rifles used in Africa. Yes absolutely 308 will kill a cape buffeelo, but that's no good if it still charges and rams.

The problem with bear defense is that it's situational. If a burr charges, you want a stopping power. If the bears just is approaching and not retreating a 9mm mag dump is just fine.

Personally for burr defense I prefer a weapon unknown to Jow Forums, a friend. Each of us is armed, I carry a Shotgun with slugs and my friend carries a bolt gun. Bears are much less likely to attack 2 people, plus at any given time we have twice the awareness, twice the firepower and atleast one person incase of injury.

Don't get deady. Get a buddy.

>9mm
>any large predators
Ok it CAN be done with a small caliber but that’s like showing up an F1 race with a ricerocket. Yeah you can be in the race but nigger what the fuck are you doing?

Dogmushers carry .357 magnums, .44 magnums and .30-30 rifles for defending doggies from moose. I wouldn’t have less than my .44 because holy shit why would I fuck around with my 1911 when I can use something better.

Attached: C04AE4B6-2274-4462-9A2D-AE23730FBE50.jpg (1024x576, 49K)

>why would I fuck around with my 1911 when I can use something better.
BC of packability. When I'm backpacking in bear country i prefer to add as little weight as possible. I've already got my 40lb pack, my complaining gf, and sore feet. I don'y want an extra 2lbs and 3 inches of gun.

And since I carry my pistol on the front of my hip straps, a longer barrel really gets in the way when you have to scramble, bend over, climb, etc.

Forgot fuddlol
>.50 bmg will gut your moose that’s why you need this $5000 meme
>girls should have snuby .38 revolvers
>can’t learn to shoot with a semi automatic .22 it must be manual action
>something something Obama ammo prices Obama
>Volkswagens are good cars and well made
>AR15s cant kill a deer
>AR15s will vaporize a deer
>communists guns ether are space magic or poop extractors
>Colt,Remington,S&W,Winchester are not complete shit

Hey if that’s what works for you man than great. I have no problem packing a ruger blackhawk on my chest all day. I had a custom holster made so that helps. My 1911 is a Kimber so I can’t trust it to work innoatrail

>AR15s cant kill a deer
>AR15s will vaporize a deer

The frequency of these two is amazing.

>no actual sources or data presented, just a singular sourceless claim is made and an off the cuff and unsubstantiated claim from the one biologist who actually publishes regarding this field is cited
>zero info on methodology either
reproducibility is the holy grail of scientific proof for a good reason. Googling around on him provides some interesting info.

newwest.net/main/article/saving_grizzly_bears_vs_hunter_safety/

>fuck your government paper, read this blog!

>reproducibility is the holy grail of scientific proof for a good reason
Except nobody's talking about scientific proof. We're talking statistics.

>government paper
I think you mean "unsubstantiated govt blog". the term "paper" connotes claims backed up by argument and evidence, not just claims stacked on claims

>I think you mean "unsubstantiated govt blog".
It's original research.

>the term "paper" connotes claims backed up by argument and evidence, not just claims stacked on claims
Didn't know I wasn't allowed to use the word "paper" without it meeting the subjective definition you would invent afterwards.

>you need minimum 1000 ft lbs energy to bring down a deer

I want to hunt large game with a handgun, and even though .357 will take anything around where I live, I still want that sweet OP .500 S&W Magnum because I busted ass to unlock it in RE4 so I've gotta' have it IRL.

Don't have source, but there was that guy a few weeks ago who was eaten by a bear after putting in a few rounds of 357

Unironically the new production Winchester Model 70s are awesome with a great finish, sub MOA accuracy, very crisp trigger, controlled feed, and a silky smooth action. It’s a fudd gun, but it’s a really nice fudd gun that comes chambered for pretty much whatever you want. Winchester’s shotguns are essentially Brownings which are also good.

S&W isn’t bad and I’d be inclined to buy a revolver from them as long as it didn’t have that stupid lock. Their factory triggers are pretty good.

Remington has had QC issues recently I’ll gove you that.

Colt arguably makes the best 1911 around the $1000 price point and their AR15 aren’t bad from what I hear, but aren’t anything special either.

Attached: B228E636-90E7-4EC1-BB8F-7116AA81F7E4.jpg (1024x685, 139K)

Nvm, ignore this. I just looked it up to find a source for y'alls, but it turns out it's just some bullshit my dad read and didn't bother to fact check before telling me

>Colt arguably makes the best 1911 around the $1000 price point

Had a Colt Series 70 that I literally sent back for repairs 5 times and they couldn't fix.
Ended up getting a refund.

That sucks man, that’s the thing about brand loyalty, a bad experience with a lemon can make a dissatisfied customer for life. They should’ve just given you a replacement.

I bought a series 80 Combat Elite about 3 years ago and after hundreds of rounds only had maybe one or two stoppages and they were probably due to the factory mags. Didn’t have the same problem using a WC mag. The thing is a tack driver too, capable of 2” or less at 25yds if I do my part.

Because a research paper requires you to actually RESEARCH and lay out your methodology. That thing doesn't.

It's okay, your dad just contributed to the same exact fuddlore we're talking about ITT

>It's original research
Bruh, did you get past 7th grade? Have you ever written a research paper in your life? And if it did, did it look like that gov't blog post we're talking about?

Attached: 12351re.jpg (894x894, 368K)

>I CAN tell the difference between real life and vidya
>but I don't want to

According to two studies, by the same authors, a couple of years apart, with a sample size of 72.
One of the authors owns the largest manufacturer of bear spray in the us.
It's a product of academic bloat and outright bad science.
Don't get me wrong, it works. It's the best option if you have no idea what you're doing with a weapon. But it's actual effectiveness is worse than a gun, according to those same studies.