^Chuck Hawks is so full of sh@t on this subject. He could be mistaken for comments about hunting big bears, but his own title is bear defence. His slagging of short shotguns could be the result that Americans do not have the Canadian non-restricted, legal option of very handy shorter barrels on our 870s or M37s. (I'm talking about our 12.5s, 14s and 8.5 inch barrels with full stocks) This qualifies as Class III in most US states (about the same category as full autos) and are usually not approved for hunting or wilderness carry via state regulations. Which is mindboggling as handguns are usually easier to legally carry in most US states and even federal parks. Laws don't have to make sense unfortuneately! Rifles of adequate calibre make more sense with increasing distances. But, shooting a bear at distance
may land a person in legal hot water, if trying to argue self defence only and not hunting.
Also shotguns for this use are generally cheaper to run as optics are usually not chosen for this role and in fact may do more harm than good for close & fast use.
Arguement of Section Density is again a moot point as we are talking about up close and personal. Bigger holes arguably do more damage than smaller holes, and especially needed as a more sure stopper at claw and tooth range. He places too much emphasis on this subject of SD, and the comparing of a 45 grain .224 bullet as 'superior' to a 12 gauge slug is just riduculous IMO. A small calibre, with such a light bullet, such as this, should never be even mentioned for this subject. Brenneke shotgun slugs sell out every year in the Juneau gunstore ammo shelves of Fred Meyer supermarket and Rayco Gunsales, when the spring salmon run is full on and the bears are out of hibernation.
(As does the Corbon 45-70 Penetrators and Garrett hard cast cartridges in 44 Magnum and 45-70)
I'm guessing this foolish article gets alot of well deserved ridicule, in places such as Juneau or Anchorage. As it should.
