|
[ Return to Contents
| Post a Reply
| Post a new message
]
Calibers, short and sweet
Posted by Michael Strahan on Mar 05 2006
Hi guys,
I've said before that I'm not a ballistics guy, so to support that I'll show my ignorance yet once more.
I don't have a lot of guns. The one I use most actively is a .375. I'm one of those guys who post a lot and recommend big guns for bear protection. I don't know the psycological implications of this (or if there's a connection at all), but my personal preference is to carry a larger caliber that I can shoot well. For the record, I don't think I have ever heard anyone imply here that the large caliber alone will do the job even if you can't hit anything with it. Wouldn't that be just a little ridiculous? Can you see a bear approaching you with intent to do bodily harm, then stopping short as soon as he realizes that you're packing a .300? OF COURSE you have to be able to shoot well! I hope we don't have to say this every time we discuss the topic.
I take exception to the argument that uses the unliklihood of a bear encounter as a justification for carrying a lighter caliber. To me that's like saying you shouldn't wear a seat belt because there's such a slim chance of having an accident, or saying you don't really need fire insurance on your house because the chances of the place burning down are so remote. Or like saying that you really don't need all those redundant instruments in the cockpit of a jet liner because the main ones hardly ever go out. How many of us have had car crashes where a seat belt saved our life? How many of us have had our house burn down? How many of us have been in a jet liner that had total instrument failure? Not many, I'd wager. I carry a larger weapon not because I live in constant fear of a bear attack, but because I want to be prepared for that possibility. I routinely find myself in grizzly country and it seems like good sense to me to be ready with what I consider to be the right tools to deal with it if things don't go well. I don't ever expect to have to use my rifle for that purpose. But two years ago, a friend of mine did. He had to take his shot at about thirty feet in the tall grass. Put yourself in his shoes and ask yourself what weapon you would want in your hands at that moment. Now, here's the part where I show my ignorance. Could it be that the same weapon you would prefer to use in a bear situation is the same one you should use for hunting in bear country? For me, since I only carry one weapon at a time, it's a no-brainer. But that's just me, and I don't fault you for making a different choice.
As to the weight factor, my .375 weighs 8.2 lbs. It has a light-weight synthetic stock and I had the barrel cut back to 20 inches so it would be easier to carry and use. I know this sort of thing is important to some, so there it is. I believe you CAN carry a heavier caliber, but I also believe not everyone can shoot one well. There are a lot of reasons for that, and I'm convinced that many folks just have a psychological barrier there. Some of them have never even tried it. As to other calibers, I have mostly changed my mind on the '06, and I think it could be loaded sufficiently to be useful against grizzlies. But I won't say the same thing for the .270. That doesn't mean that the strident defenders of this caliber have something wrong with them, it just means we have a difference of opinion.
In short, I'll say this: If you're comfortable dealing with a bear with a lighter caliber, go for it! But if you're going to ask for opinions, expect to hear them! I hope we can accept the fact that we won't agree on this topic, and try to refrain from making it a character issue.
-Mike
Previous: Big & little cal. Brian Richardson Mar 06 2006
Next: Character Issue Jake_65_65 Mar 05 2006
 Message Thread:
|
