Any of you stop a charge with a handgun?

Ontario Hunter said:

Bear spray is much more efficient and reliable deterrent. I'm sure you won't believe it. As proof I suggest you let someone spray you with it. No need to be terribly accurate like a revolver. Yes, there are freak instances where bears didn't react ... but a lot more instances where they didn't react when shot. Often even with good shot placement the bear doesn't react instantly. Bear spray produces an INSTANT reaction. I expect it would work equally well on hogs.

Click to expand...

Foxi said:

But yesterday I was on a wild boar driven hunt and a boar that had quietly crept up on me in the rainy forest on the return leg stared at me from about 30-40 meters away from the woods and I had his skull in my crosshair, but I wasn't sure if it wasn't a large female with possibly small young ones (not allowed to shoot). He noticed me and my dog and suddenly darted past me at 30 m like a greased lightning bolt, no chance of a safe shot. He disappeared into the forest and the thick undergrowth so quickly. I let go of my dachshund and he followed the trail with loud “roars” and I hoped that he would come to the neighbor's hunting seat. But that wasn't the case; he remained hidden.
The thought of him charging at me and me pulling out the pepper spray made me laugh.
Even with a rifle, only a lucky shot would have been successful if he had attacked us,so quick he was.
But the reality is that a “Dagga boy” cape buff or boar don't grow old for nothing.

Foxi
(nearby ,Ive got absolute nothing yesterday ,but my Dackel had fun)
View attachment 719780

Click to expand...

Scott CWO said:

You’re getting a little too enamored with everything Phil says. I don’t know any guides that would allow a .243. I had a guy show up with a 7 STW after telling me he was bringing a .338 WM. I made him use my camp rifle, which is a 375 H&H. I also disagree with Phil about Nosler Partitions for DG. I don’t allow those bullets because they don’t hold together. Accubonds are fine but I prefer Swift A-Frame or Barnes TSX, TTSX or LRX. I’m not going to explain or expand on the NP here so please don’t ask. There are volumes of ink spilled about the NP on other threads.

Click to expand...

Scott CWO said:

You’re getting a little too enamored with everything Phil says. I don’t know any guides that would allow a .243. I had a guy show up with a 7 STW after telling me he was bringing a .338 WM. I made him use my camp rifle, which is a 375 H&H. I also disagree with Phil about Nosler Partitions for DG. I don’t allow those bullets because they don’t hold together. Accubonds are fine but I prefer Swift A-Frame or Barnes TSX, TTSX or LRX. I’m not going to explain or expand on the NP here so please don’t ask. There are volumes of ink spilled about the NP on other threads.

Click to expand...

Foxi said:

Yesterday I was on a wild boar driven hunt.......
The thought of him charging at me and me pulling out the pepper spray made me laugh.
Even with a rifle, only a lucky shot would have been successful if he had attacked us,so quick he was.

Foxi

Click to expand...

Carnivore hunter said:

Phil Shoemaker killed a coastal brown bear with a 9mm 147gr hard cast. Phil used Buffalobore ammo hard cast to do it. The photos and evidence is on Buffalobore's website. Phil also mentioned he talked to Tim Sundles about it...

9MM +P OUTDOORSMAN Pistol and Handgun Bullets Pistol & Handgun Ammunition

9MM +P OUTDOORSMAN Pistol and Handgun Bullets Field Proven pistol and handgun ammo. Maximum firepower bullets. Best ammunition for pistols and handguns for sale. Buffalo Bore. Strictly big bore. Strictly Business.

www.buffalobore.com

View attachment 719704

Click to expand...

Doug Hamilton said:

Yes. Pretty much everyone that hunts knows that story. The bear was not charging the shooter. He attacked the client. The guide was cable to kill the bear with the 9 mm, eventually, but you can bet he would have been much faster (and happier) with a proper rifle.

Click to expand...

Flbt said:

But that’s the point of a handgun.
To be there when you don’t have a rifle or when something happened to the rifle.

Click to expand...

Doug Hamilton said:

Which would be why I carry a .44 mag when I'm fishing in grizzly country. I also carry a .40 or .45 whenever I leave the house. But a handgun will never be as good as a rifle in a dangerous situation. There is no reason to carry both at the same time.

Click to expand...

Doug Hamilton said:

Which would be why I carry a .44 mag when I'm fishing in grizzly country. I also carry a .40 or .45 whenever I leave the house. But a handgun will never be as good as a rifle in a dangerous situation. There is no reason to carry both at the same time.

Click to expand...

Carnivore hunter said:

That's not a true fact, that is your personal opinion.

A backup handgun is a life saver and has proven to save the lives of hunters, law enforcement and military.

There's a reason why almost every military on this planet has their soldiers carry both a rifle, handgun and knife, the countries that have the budget to afford it, not some third world country. The U.S. is ditching their Sig M17/M18 handguns and switching to Glocks. Why not just send soldiers into combat with only a bolt-action rifle and nothing else? Because that would be crazy and technology advances and we're not all primitive Bantu/Zulu's.

There's a reason why almost all police departments have shotguns, AR15's and handguns, the ones who have the budget to afford it, not some third world country.

Any hunter who goes into the wild with dangerous animals and dangerous humans lurking out there with only a rifle and no backup sidearm is making a huge mistake and gambling with their lives.

Lots of documented evidence of police officers/SWAT who went into a building and their rifle or shotgun malfunctioned or ran out of ammo and they pulled out their sidearm to save their life and neutralized the suspect. Same thing with military. Same thing with hunters.

Above, Foxi posted a story about a hunter who was charged by a wild hog and their 357 mag revolver saved their life. Handguns are invaluable when you're on your back and a animal or human is on you.

Anyone who says you don't need both a rifle and a handgun I bet has never been on their back on the ground with either a wild animal or human trying to murder them.

And for all the veterans of the military here who claim all you need is a rifle and try to exploit your service to justify your stupid opinion, save it, I don't care about your stupid opinion, my father is a veteran of the U.S. military and carried a rifle, Colt 1911 and knife and, according to his experience as a veteran of the U.S. military and all the veterans at the local VFW he attends they would NEVER go into combat against humans or dangerous game with only one gun and no backup. All the hunters there who are veterans take a handgun into the woods with them with their rifle. Some like semi-autos like Glocks, some like revolvers.

Click to expand...

Carnivore hunter said:

That's not a true fact, that is your personal opinion.

A backup handgun is a life saver and has proven to save the lives of hunters, law enforcement and military.

There's a reason why almost every military on this planet has their soldiers carry both a rifle, handgun and knife, the countries that have the budget to afford it, not some third world country. The U.S. is ditching their Sig M17/M18 handguns and switching to Glocks. Why not just send soldiers into combat with only a bolt-action rifle and nothing else? Because that would be crazy and technology advances and we're not all primitive Bantu/Zulu's.

There's a reason why almost all police departments have shotguns, AR15's and handguns, the ones who have the budget to afford it, not some third world country.

Any hunter who goes into the wild with dangerous animals and dangerous humans lurking out there with only a rifle and no backup sidearm is making a huge mistake and gambling with their lives.

Lots of documented evidence of police officers/SWAT who went into a building and their rifle or shotgun malfunctioned or ran out of ammo and they pulled out their sidearm to save their life and neutralized the suspect. Same thing with military. Same thing with hunters.

Above, Foxi posted a story about a hunter who was charged by a wild hog and their 357 mag revolver saved their life. Handguns are invaluable when you're on your back and a animal or human is on you.

Anyone who says you don't need both a rifle and a handgun I bet has never been on their back on the ground with either a wild animal or human trying to murder them.

And for all the veterans of the military here who claim all you need is a rifle and try to exploit your service to justify your stupid opinion, save it, I don't care about your stupid opinion, my father is a veteran of the U.S. military and carried a rifle, Colt 1911 and knife and, according to his experience as a veteran of the U.S. military and all the veterans at the local VFW he attends they would NEVER go into combat against humans or dangerous game with only one gun and no backup. All the hunters there who are veterans take a handgun into the woods with them with their rifle. Some like semi-autos like Glocks, some like revolvers.

Click to expand...

• Officers:
  These are often issued pistols as a secondary weapon.
  
  
• Vehicle crews:
  Personnel in tanks and other vehicles are frequently issued pistols because their primary role requires them to operate in confined spaces and have their hands free for other tasks.
  
  
• Machine gunners:
  These soldiers have a heavier, crew-served weapon and are issued a pistol as a sidearm for close-quarters defense.
  
  
• Special operations forces:
  In many cases, members of special operations units are issued a pistol as a backup weapon, or some may even carry one as a primary weapon.

• Rifles are more effective:
  Rifles are more accurate, have a greater range, and offer more stopping power than pistols at combat distances.
• Weight and bulk:
  Carrying a pistol as a secondary weapon is extra weight and bulk, which takes up space that could be used for carrying more ammunition, food, or other essential gear.

Carnivore hunter said:

That's not a true fact, that is your personal opinion.

A backup handgun is a life saver and has proven to save the lives of hunters, law enforcement and military.

There's a reason why almost every military on this planet has their soldiers carry both a rifle, handgun and knife, the countries that have the budget to afford it, not some third world country. The U.S. is ditching their Sig M17/M18 handguns and switching to Glocks. Why not just send soldiers into combat with only a bolt-action rifle and nothing else? Because that would be crazy and technology advances and we're not all primitive Bantu/Zulu's.

There's a reason why almost all police departments have shotguns, AR15's and handguns, the ones who have the budget to afford it, not some third world country.

Any hunter who goes into the wild with dangerous animals and dangerous humans lurking out there with only a rifle and no backup sidearm is making a huge mistake and gambling with their lives.

Lots of documented evidence of police officers/SWAT who went into a building and their rifle or shotgun malfunctioned or ran out of ammo and they pulled out their sidearm to save their life and neutralized the suspect. Same thing with military. Same thing with hunters.

Above, Foxi posted a story about a hunter who was charged by a wild hog and their 357 mag revolver saved their life. Handguns are invaluable when you're on your back and a animal or human is on you.

Anyone who says you don't need both a rifle and a handgun I bet has never been on their back on the ground with either a wild animal or human trying to murder them.

And for all the veterans of the military here who claim all you need is a rifle and try to exploit your service to justify your stupid opinion, save it, I don't care about your stupid opinion, my father is a veteran of the U.S. military and carried a rifle, Colt 1911 and knife and, according to his experience as a veteran of the U.S. military and all the veterans at the local VFW he attends they would NEVER go into combat against humans or dangerous game with only one gun and no backup. All the hunters there who are veterans take a handgun into the woods with them with their rifle. Some like semi-autos like Glocks, some like revolvers.

Click to expand...

pilar said:

I don’t think all infantrymen are issued a sidearm, maybe something has changed?
Not everyone is a special forces or seal , ranger
“
No, not all soldiers are issued a pistol in combat;standard riflemen are typically not issued a handgun as it is seen as less effective than their rifle at most combat ranges. Pistols are generally issued to personnel who may need a secondary, close-quarters weapon, such as officers, machine gunners, and vehicle crews, or those not engaged in direct ground combat, like pilots.

Who typically gets a pistol

• Officers:
  These are often issued pistols as a secondary weapon.
  
  
• Vehicle crews:
  Personnel in tanks and other vehicles are frequently issued pistols because their primary role requires them to operate in confined spaces and have their hands free for other tasks.
  
  
• Machine gunners:
  These soldiers have a heavier, crew-served weapon and are issued a pistol as a sidearm for close-quarters defense.
  
  
• Special operations forces:
  In many cases, members of special operations units are issued a pistol as a backup weapon, or some may even carry one as a primary weapon.

Why standard infantry are not issued pistols

• Rifles are more effective:
  Rifles are more accurate, have a greater range, and offer more stopping power than pistols at combat distances.
• Weight and bulk:
  Carrying a pistol as a secondary weapon is extra weight and bulk, which takes up space that could be used for carrying more ammunition, food, or other essential gear.

You probably watch to many movies and play to many video games ?

Click to expand...

Here are the sidearms the US military has carried into battle since first taking on the British

The military has distributed more than 100,000 M17 and M18 handguns, the latest in a long line of sidearms that US troops have carried into battle.

www.businessinsider.com

Here's What Pistol Each Military Branch Uses In 2023

Find out what pistol is used by each branch of the military, including the US Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, & Coast Guard.

www.operationmilitarykids.org

Over 200 years of sidearms. Here’s what’s been in the US Army’s holsters.

The Army’s newest sidearm, the SIG Sauer M17, comes with one standard 17-round magazine and two extended 21-round mags. Fifty-nine shots per soldier is quite an arsenal. So, how did the bullet count go from one to nearly 60?

www.militarytimes.com

Army fields new handgun system to military police

The U.S. Army began fielding M17 and M18 Modular Handgun Systems to the Military Police School at Fort Leonard Wood in December to replace the force's aging Beretta M9, a weapon that has been in use since the mid-1980s and is quickly reaching its ser...

www.army.mil

Military Service Handguns Around The World - Inside Safariland

The choices of modern military forces tell us a story. Here's a look at the wide world of military service handguns.

inside.safariland.com

Doug Hamilton said:

So you don't care about the opinions of those with vastly more experiences ence than you? That's what I thought. Have it your own ignorant way.

Click to expand...

Ontario Hunter said:

Oh boy. And where is this VFW club full of military veterans who wear handguns while rifle hunting deer? Mars? Okay, I admit during Montana hunting season I do rarely see Mr Dress-up types wearing handguns ... but their trucks usually don't wear Montana plates. Or if they do, they haven't been wearing them very long. Just as well walk around with a neon sign on their backsides: "Look at me! I'm a greenhorn fool." Or a red nose and big floppy shoes.

Click to expand...