Hunter killed by bear, WRITE a letter to change Wilderness ATC 'rules'..

[Gunoholic]

Exactly, the 338 win mag is much more powerful, then why have a handgun...........get real!

No I wouldn't be carrying a handgun IN ADDITION to a high powered rifle or a shotgun because of the unnecessary additional weight rather than any disdain for or fear of handguns.
Handguns like rifles and shotguns are tools.
It is the person holding it that makes any tool dangerous or not dangerous as the case might be.

 

[norskie]

Don't get me wrong, I love firearms, however; I personally draw the line when it comes to handguns. Grizzly bear expert, Jan Allan and former CO from Pincher Creek, Alberta stated to me, "best bear defense is a shotgun loaded with SSG or buckshot". For decades I always stated, "if your afraid of the woods...........stay home!" I really don't want to encounter some guy carrying a sidearm who is pissed because I screwed-up his hunt.
To answer your question, no I don't know about Bill C-68 or the carrying of handguns............would it make a difference?

Wow.

Jan Allen was a conservation officer - not a Grizzly bear expert. He did have a fair amount of experience with bears, but likely only in the context of dispatching problem bears with the tools at hand. Did he have any experience with dispatching bears with a handgun? What tools did they have?
A handgun is a last choice defensive tool in my opinion, and yes I would take a shotgun in a ideal situation. Life threatening situations often aren't ideal.

Why would you fear a hunter with a handgun? Does your behavior as a hunter (or guide) often put you in a position where you fear for your safety because you screw up other folks hunts?

I hope you live by your adage "if you are scared stay home". I don't ever expect to see you in Montana when I am down - we wouldn't want to encounter one of those folks carrying a sidearm.

 

[track]

No I wouldn't be carrying a handgun IN ADDITION to a high powered rifle or a shotgun because of the unnecessary additional weight rather than any disdain for or fear of handguns.
Handguns like rifles and shotguns are tools.
It is the person holding it that makes any tool dangerous or not dangerous as the case might be.

I totally agree with your statement.

 

[fraserdw]

Given that the deceased had a firearm and was unsuccessful in using it, what makes anyone think that he would have been able to un-holster and fire a pistol? I think woods carry is great, I done it with an antique but this may not be the perfect example. It seems that no firearm would have helped in this case as the bear was way too close and quick.

 

[fenceline]

I totally agree with your statement.

So if you agree, and it is the person that is responsible for the conduct of the weapon, why do you label those that would like to ATC as "Dirty Harry"?

If you don't want the hassle of carrying a handgun in addition to carrying a rifle then so be it. That is your choice. But I don't understand why you would argue against someone having the choice to obtain an atc to carry a handgun.

 

[geologist]

Given that the deceased had a firearm and was unsuccessful in using it, what makes anyone think that he would have been able to un-holster and fire a pistol? I think woods carry is great, I done it with an antique but this may not be the perfect example. It seems that no firearm would have helped in this case as the bear was way too close and quick.

A small, light powerful handgun like a .357 magnum revolver, worn crossdraw in a belt holster weak side is a last measure protection tool, accesible to both hands if you are down on the ground and one hand is chewed up.

This is what I do when I ATC for work.

 

[fenceline]

It seems that no firearm would have helped in this case as the bear was way too close and quick.

How do we know? Too close and too quick for a long gun, but as he wasn't carrying an ATC we don't know if it would have helped him if it did.

This is about increasing the odds, having back up plans. An ATC is a back up plan.

The video of the film crew in the water is a prime example. Both men had rifles. It was the sidearm that saved the day. No sidearm, and the bear follows through, and that video ends very differently rifle or not.

 

[norskie]

Given that the deceased had a firearm and was unsuccessful in using it, what makes anyone think that he would have been able to un-holster and fire a pistol? I think woods carry is great, I done it with an antique but this may not be the perfect example. It seems that no firearm would have helped in this case as the bear was way too close and quick.

I am guessing that he had his rifle in his backpack carrier. Most sheep hunters do - the terrain often requires you to have both hands available to cover scree/rock, and the load in your pack with a complete fall/winter kit is heavy.


And the photo that I had seen on the news clip suggested he did as well.

 

[fenceline]

I am guessing that he had his rifle in his backpack carrier. Most sheep hunters do - the terrain often requires you to have both hands available to cover scree/rock, and the load in your pack with a complete fall/winter kit is heavy.

And the photo that I had seen on the news clip suggested he did as well.

Which is why a sidearm, quickly available on your hip, is a good safety option.

 

[steamy teabag]

Don't get me wrong, I love firearms, however; I personally draw the line when it comes to handguns. Grizzly bear expert, Jan Allan and former CO from Pincher Creek, Alberta stated to me, "best bear defense is a shotgun loaded with SSG or buckshot". For decades I always stated, "if your afraid of the woods...........stay home!" I really don't want to encounter some guy carrying a sidearm who is pissed because I screwed-up his hunt.
To answer your question, no I don't know about Bill C-68 or the carrying of handguns............would it make a difference?

Respectfully the fear you're displaying doesn't make any sense. If you screwed up some guys hunt they already have a firearm. Think through the fear you have of HG's.

 

[fenceline]

Respectfully the fear you're displaying doesn't make any sense. If you screwed up some guys hunt they already have a firearm. Think through the fear you have of HG's.

Amazing how "a guy pissed off I screwed up his hunt" with a long gun isn't dangerous at close range, but the same guy with a handgun is.

I wonder if this would translate into a bear at close range. Maybe a handgun is more effective at close range than a long gun vs a pissed off bear.

 

[track]

Respectfully the fear you're displaying doesn't make any sense. If you screwed up some guys hunt they already have a firearm. Think through the fear you have of HG's.

LOL!!!!!! I'm laughing at a few slandering comments where people are stating that "I'm packing a firearm" and that I'm "screwing up some ones hunt". Where do you guys think-up these things? LOL!!!! Oh yes, that I'm "afraid." It seems that this thread is full of guys who are afraid and need to pack a sidearm. When God made you a fool, did he give you a fools face?

 

[track]

Amazing how "a guy pissed off I screwed up his hunt" with a long gun isn't dangerous at close range, but the same guy with a handgun is.

I wonder if this would translate into a bear at close range. Maybe a handgun is more effective at close range than a long gun vs a pissed off bear.

Nor a handgun or rifle would suit me, a 12 gauge shotgun with SSG/Buckshot would be my preference.

 

[fenceline]

LOL!!!!!! I'm laughing at a few slandering comments where people are stating that "I'm packing a firearm" and that I'm "screwing up some ones hunt". Where do you guys think-up these things? LOL!!!! Oh yes, that I'm "afraid." It seems that this thread is full of guys who are afraid and need to pack a sidearm. When God made you a fool, did he give you a fools face?

That guy making the comments was you. You were the one who said you didn't want to come across some guy packing a handgun and upset because you screwed up his hunt. Those were your words.

The irony in arguing that the same guy packing a rifle and upset is now more dangerous with a handgun is rich.

Its about having the best tool for the job. One is for hunting, one is for close in defence. I doubt you would argue about someones ability to carry bear spray on a hunt. You may not agree with carrying bear spray, maybe because of the weight, or maybe you do think it would be effective enough. Either way, why would you argue against someone else having the choice?

 

[CV32]

Don't get me wrong, I love firearms, however; I personally draw the line when it comes to handguns.

I suspect that with this statement, you've now found yourself in unfamiliar country.

I really don't want to encounter some guy carrying a sidearm who is pissed because I screwed-up his hunt.

But his scoped .375H&H doesn't bother you?

 

[fenceline]

Nor a handgun or rifle would suit me, a 12 gauge shotgun with SSG/Buckshot would be my preference.

And as your preference, I would fight for you to have the choice to carry that if that is what you felt you needed to carry.

And I'd fight to allow people to chose to carry a sidearm if that is what they chose as the best option for them.

You would not fight for that choice, and that is where we differ.

 

[elker]

This is a very remote occurance and don't believe in carrying a handgun for protection. There have been millions of days hunting in grizzly country by hunters, not including other recreationalists, where grizzly incidents is most uncommon. I've hunted and guided in grizzly country for decades, encountered them and never had a problem. If some are asking to carry, then you probably want a permit for the city that you reside or visit..............cities are more dangerous than grizzly country.

You have mentioned that you are a super experienced guide in every post you spilled on this forum. Are you feeling insecure or unsafe?
Do you wear a badger while walking on the street?

 

[norskie]

You have mentioned that you are a super experienced guide in every post you spilled on this forum. Are you feeling insecure or unsafe?
Do you wear a badger while walking on the street?

My guess is the experience may well reside in his own mind. And his choice for a "bear expert" is about as bona fide.

Seems he believes in using SSG or buckshot as his bear defence of choice - someone should really tell him, ah never mind....

 

[blargon]

Given that the deceased had a firearm and was unsuccessful in using it, what makes anyone think that he would have been able to un-holster and fire a pistol? I think woods carry is great, I done it with an antique but this may not be the perfect example. It seems that no firearm would have helped in this case as the bear was way too close and quick.

It would be easier to use a handgun while the bear is dragging you away. There seems to be an assumption that his rifle was in his hands and loaded.

 

[track]

That guy making the comments was you. You were the one who said you didn't want to come across some guy packing a handgun and upset because you screwed up his hunt. Those were your words.

The irony in arguing that the same guy packing a rifle and upset is now more dangerous with a handgun is rich.

Its about having the best tool for the job. One is for hunting, one is for close in defence. I doubt you would argue about someones ability to carry bear spray on a hunt. You may not agree with carrying bear spray, maybe because of the weight, or maybe you do think it would be effective enough. Either way, why would you argue against someone else having the choice?

I mentioned a hypothetical situation, of not wanting to encounter a pissed off hunter with a handgun because he thought I screwed his hunt...........some think that I have, or going to. Where did I mention that I pack a handgun..........two other slanderous/fictitious remarks. AND now I'm the SUPER experienced guide. Many of and, if, buts, etc.LOL!!! Geez, just stay out of the woods if your paranoid of teeth and claws.