The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: The Semi-automatic Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 13, 2008, 10:19 PM   #1
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Hunting Incident Proves .45 Inadequate for Protection

A man who was a member of a Bear hunting party here in Oregon was recently badly mauled by a wounded Black Bear. The bear had initially been shot in its shoulder with a .338 Winchester magnum rifle by a 15 year old boy in the hunting group. Men in the party then trailed the wounded bear in thick brush, armed only with handguns.

One man armed with a .45 Auto, Aaron Wyckoff, confronted the wounded animal at close range, and it savagely attacked him. He fired his pistol into the Bear 4 times, but then he accidentally released the magazine of his 1911 pistol, as he continued to struggle with the bear on top of him.

As he fought with the bear for his life, another member of the party approached, and shot the bear with a .44 Remington magnum revolver. However, the bear would still not get off the hunter that was being mauled. Finally, this second man put the barrel of his .44 mag up against the bear's ear, and fired directly into its skull. Finally, the Bear rolled off the wounded hunter.

What do you think that this incident proves? What lessons can be learned?

Certainly, it must bring into question the effectiveness of the .45 for self-defense, don't you think?

For it took a revolver to finally kill the bear.

Surgeons reported that they were astonished that Wyckoff survived the attack without worse injuries than those he got.

See:

http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms...80&sid=4&fid=2

.
LanceOregon is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:24 PM   #2
Axion
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 21, 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 619
WTH?

Everyone knows that a bear is a much tougher animal than a human is and it is not news at all that a .45 acp isn't ideal for defense against bears. The .45 acp always has been, and always will be more then adequate for use against people, this story changes nothing.
__________________
A couple of Sigs and a Walther

Last edited by JohnKSa; July 7, 2008 at 11:32 PM. Reason: Acronym adjustment...
Axion is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:25 PM   #3
cschwanz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 20, 2008
Location: IN
Posts: 321
that really doesn't show the effectiveness or lack of of the .45. It said the hunter shot 4 times, but where did they hit the animal? if the bullets struck a non lethal zone, the already wounded and scared animal would not have been subdued. ANY round to the ear of an animal will put it down, something about a bullet to the brain does wonders...

Ill stick to carrying my .45 for my self defense needs
__________________
SA XD .45 Compact -- 5" Colt XSE -- Glock 21SF
Savage Mark-II .22LR
Member:NRA, DU, PF
Ignorance can be fixed....its called education. Stupid will get you killed!
cschwanz is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:25 PM   #4
rantingredneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 12, 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,728
Are you honestly asking whether the fact that four rounds of .45ACP not stopping a bear at close range means .45ACP wont stop a person reliably??

Apples and watermelons dude.......

Now if you are asking whether this proves .45ACP isn't good protection against bears in the woods then that's different.
rantingredneck is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:27 PM   #5
rantingredneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 12, 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,728
Also, bears don't know they're supposed to fall down when they are shot.
rantingredneck is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:28 PM   #6
spamanon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 2008
Location: idaho
Posts: 373
You're joking, right? I just know you are.

If this incident proves that the .45 is not worthy of self defense than it also proves that a .338 WM isn't. Note also that you are making an erroneous conclusion. I DID NOT take *just* a revolver to stop the bear, it took a rifle shot, 4 .45s and 2 shots from the .44.

This incident only shows what everyone in the world already knows. For bears, you don't draw your handgun unless your rifle is empty, broken or at home. Even then, no matter what the handgun, you better be praying as you draw.
__________________
The second amendment articulates one of my rights, but like the other amendments, grants none.
spamanon is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:30 PM   #7
rantingredneck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 12, 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,728
It does probably prove that a 15yo shouldn't be hunting with a .338 Mag though.
rantingredneck is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:32 PM   #8
Dave85
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 3, 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,421
Nothing in regards to the .45's effectiveness against a human attacker can be inferred from the details of this account; especially as they are so limited. It would not be out of line to conclude that the .45 ACP may be insufficient for defense against bears.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!"
--commonly misattributed to, and most likely not, Benjamin Franklin
Dave85 is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:34 PM   #9
zoomie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: GA
Posts: 1,861
No way! .45ACP is plenty for bear. Just ask this guy!

http://bakercityherald.com/news/story.cfm?story_no=6690

Quote:
When the bear just up the hill roared, Joshua McKim's first thought was that he had never heard a bear make a sound like that.

His second thought, almost instantaneous with the first, was that he was awfully glad he had brought his pistol on this mushroom-picking trip.

When he first glimpsed the bear through the thick brush, McKim had cocked the hammer on the .45 caliber semi-automatic Taurus, a copy of the famous 1911-model Colt.

The bear didn't move.

McKim, 22, who has picked mushrooms and hunted deer and elk in the Wallowa Mountains above his hometown of Halfway since he was a boy, has seen maybe 20 bears.

And every one had fled, rumbling away from him in that awkward but oddly efficient gait peculiar to bears.

But this bear just stood there, no more than 35 yard away, staring down at McKim.

"I was saying, why isn't he running away — the wind's blowing right at him so he must be able to smell me," McKim said, recounting what happened a week ago today, on the evening of May 28.

"This is really weird. Bears always run away. Maybe I should holler at him."

The bear hollered first.

Then, finally, the bear started moving.

Right at McKim.

McKim yelled.

"He kind of hesitated for a second," McKim said.

"Then he came on. Faster."

McKim fired the first of the eight bullets in the .45's clip.

"The first shot hit him in the shoulder."

The bear tumbled, rolling for about 10 feet until it came to a flat place.

McKim had just enough time to recognize that the bear, which had cinnamon-colored fur, was not a grizzly but a black bear.

Black bears, despite their common name, sometimes have brown or cinnamon-shaded fur that makes them look quite like a grizzly.

McKim didn't think the bear was a grizzly — they are officially extinct in Oregon although people occasionally claim to see one in the Wallowas or in Hells Canyon.

But the bear sure acted more like an aggressive grizzly than a shy black bear.

And it was bigger than any bear McKim had seen.

As it rolled, though, McKim saw that the bear lacked the grizzly's distinctive shoulder hump.

This was scant comfort, though, because a black bear, though not a predator on par with the grizzly, is quite capable of killing a person.

The bear righted itself and kept moving, not directly at McKim but in his direction.

The bear was closer now, 15 yards or so.

McKim pulled the trigger until the clip was empty.

"I knew I was hitting him; I didn't know where," he said. "I wasn't about to let him get any closer."

The bear careened into a patch of brush and McKim couldn't see the animal.

"I wasn't about to go into the brush with a wounded bear in there," he said. "I couldn't see much."

Besides, he was out of bullets.

McKim walked half a mile or so to where half a dozen of his relatives and friends were looking for morels.

His dad, Ivan McKim, found the bear, dead, beneath a tree.

"I had walked right by him twice, but the tree had overhanging branches and it was pretty dark in there," Joshua McKim said.

He gutted the bear, figuring the State Police could salvage the meat and donate it to local food banks.

The bear's stomach was empty, and his teeth had been ground to nubs.

"I guess he was really hungry and he thought I looked like an easy meal," McKim said. "Or maybe I was right in the middle of his mushroom patch."

McKim drove back to Halfway and called Oregon State Police.

The next morning he met Sr. Trooper Chris Hawkins, and they drove in Hawkins' patrol pickup truck to the site along Beecher Creek, a tributary of East Pine Creek.

The pair dragged the bear to Hawkins' truck.

Hawkins, who works in OSP's Fish and Wildlife Division, drove to his office in Baker City, where he skinned the bear.

He found several bullet wounds, including holes in the bear's shoulder and in its chest.

The position of the wounds confirmed McKim's account that when he fired, the bear was moving toward him.

Also, one of .45 slugs, which travel much slower than, say, a rifle bullet, penetrated the bear's thick hide and lodged in a lung, Hawkins said.

All this proved to Hawkins' satisfaction that, as McKim said, the bear was quite close to him when he fired.

"Everything lined up with just what he said," Hawkins said. "He did the right thing by calling us. We appreciate that."

There was a bear-hunting season going on last week, but McKim didn't have a tag.

You don't need a tag, of course, to legally shoot a bear that charges you.

But because McKim didn't have a tag, he can't keep either the bear's meat or its hide, Hawkins said.

OSP gave the meat to food banks and disposed of the hide, he said.

McKim said he's a bit disappointed that memories will be his only mementoes of his bear encounter.

Based on the measurements of the bear's skull, the animal, which probably was about 10 years old, would have qualified for Oregon's record book for hunting trophies, McKim said.

Mainly, though, he's relieved that the bear was the incident's lone casualty.

McKim figures it was good fortune that he, the only person in his mushroom-picking group who had a gun, came across the bear.

Just 15 minutes or so earlier, McKim had decided to separate from the rest of the pickers to check a place where he had found morels before.

Evening was coming on and a light rain was falling, and McKim wanted a quick look before the rest of the bunch decided to go back to Halfway.

That contingent included his 20-month-old niece, Opal Burnette, who lives in Bend.

Opal's mom, Tonya Burnette, who's McKim's sister, said she was wheeling Opal in her stroller when Joshua had his confrontation with the bear.

"I'm just really happy that nobody got hurt out of the deal," Joshua said. "I'm alive; I guess that's what counts.

"And I'm really glad I had that gun."

He even found a few morels which, though you can't make a handsome rug out of them, are pretty tasty fried in a pan with a bit of butter.
/sarcasm off. I'm with everyone else... are you seriously comparing bears to humans?
zoomie is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:36 PM   #10
Don Lu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2006
Location: Georgia
Posts: 271
yeah..doesnt prove anything. Ive never heard anyone argue that the 1911 in .45 acp is a bear stopper or woods gun...Its still good against people though. .45 is GREAT for protection..just not against a bear.
__________________
GLOCK 23,Smith & Wesson New 520,Tuarus 651,Taurus 608,Taurus PT92,
Astra A-75,CZ-52,East German Makarov,Mossberg 835 Ulti Mag, Remington 870 Express Magnum
Don Lu is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:37 PM   #11
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
Does no one else sense a bit of tounge-in-cheek in the original post?
Webleymkv is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:39 PM   #12
zoomie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: GA
Posts: 1,861
Hopefully he was kidding. I didn't get the sarcasm if he was.
zoomie is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:40 PM   #13
Don Lu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 12, 2006
Location: Georgia
Posts: 271
Quote:
Does no one else sense a bit of tounge-in-cheek in the original post?
thats what I was hoping to see.. but tounge in cheek didnt quite come through for me if that was the OP intent.
__________________
GLOCK 23,Smith & Wesson New 520,Tuarus 651,Taurus 608,Taurus PT92,
Astra A-75,CZ-52,East German Makarov,Mossberg 835 Ulti Mag, Remington 870 Express Magnum
Don Lu is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:41 PM   #14
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Quote:
Are you honestly asking whether the fact that four rounds of .45ACP not stopping a bear at close range means .45ACP wont stop a person reliably??
The average weight of adult male black bears in Oregon is only 275 lbs. So with some luck, maybe this bear could have weighed 300 lbs.

But that is not all that more than what a human adult male can weigh. Many men weigh over 200 lbs.





What if you were attacked by a 300 lb NFL lineman??

.
LanceOregon is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:42 PM   #15
Auto426
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2007
Location: South Louisiana
Posts: 1,323
This story really proves nothing.

There is a thread in the revolver forum, which has a link to another thread with a post from a professional bear hunter. He took several LEO's out hunting for bear with their service weapons, which were .45's. He states that they killed their bears in around 2-3 shots to the vitals.

I would rather put my trust in the 100 year long reputation of the .45 as a man stopper then some vague article about an incident with a bear.
__________________
"Si vis pacem, para bellum" - If you want peace, prepare for war.
Auto426 is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:43 PM   #16
zoomie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: GA
Posts: 1,861
Not many men, even those weighing 250+, have a foot of fat and muscle covering their vitals.
zoomie is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:46 PM   #17
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Quote:
No way! .45ACP is plenty for bear. Just ask this guy!
Wow, your story is also here in Oregon.

We seem to be getting some aggressive black bears this year.

In your case, though, the shooter was able to empty his .45 into the bear. So this other story I mentioned is probably unfair to the .45 Auto, since he was only able to get half the number of shots off that the fellow in your story did.

.
LanceOregon is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:48 PM   #18
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
Quote:
The average weight of adult male black bears in Oregon is only 275 lbs. So with some luck, maybe this bear could have weighed 300 lbs.

But that is not all that more than what a human adult male can weigh. Many men weigh over 200 lbs.
Quote:
What if you were attacked by a 300 lb NFL lineman??
Ooooookaaaaayyy, apparently it wasn't tounge-in-cheek. One must bear in mind (no pun intended) that the anatomy of a bear or any animal for that matter is quite different than a human. This is why the .357 Magnum is considered to be excellent for defense against humans but only marginal for most big game hunting. Kind of an apples to oranges comparison.
Webleymkv is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:52 PM   #19
LanceOregon
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 10, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,774
Quote:
This is why the .357 Magnum is considered to be excellent for defense against humans but only marginal for most big game hunting.
But a .357 loaded with heavier bullets offers very good penetration, I do believe. Penetration has more to do with bullet design and sectional density.

I was actually thinking that I should maybe pack my .357 with me if I go hiking off into the forest this summer.

.
LanceOregon is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:55 PM   #20
HKCHEF
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 1, 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 130
I think it proves these hunters need to go back to the range and get some practice with there accuracy. You should not have to stick your barrel in a bears ear, shot the dam thing before it jumps on you.
__________________
HK45, HK45C, P30, P30L, P7M8 AH
S&W Model 41 .22 / Winchester Speed Pump 12 / Buckmark Rifle Bull Barrel .22 / LWRC M6A2 5.56 SBR 10.5''
HKCHEF- "Fostering fear is good for business."
HKCHEF is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 10:59 PM   #21
Nemsis
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 27, 2006
Location: Peoples Republic of Chicago
Posts: 408
your right .45 is terrible all you people who live in bear counrty should send your .45 pistols and ammo to me their are no bears hear I'll be safe to have them
__________________
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." --Norman Thomas
Nemsis is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 11:00 PM   #22
Auto426
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 24, 2007
Location: South Louisiana
Posts: 1,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by LanceOregon
I was actually thinking that I should maybe pack my .357 with me if I go hiking off into the forest this summer.
.45 ACP was never designed for use as a hunting round. It was designed by John Browning for use in a military sidearm, something almost exclusively used against humans. And it does a fine job against humans. But when it comes to animals with thicker skins and denser tissues, it's not a great performer.

Most people will consider a .357 to the minimum to pack with you if you are going out and about into bear country. A lot of people will recommend a good .44 magnum if you are in an area which you may encounter bears.
__________________
"Si vis pacem, para bellum" - If you want peace, prepare for war.
Auto426 is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 11:02 PM   #23
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,435
Quote:
But a .357 loaded with heavier bullets offers very good penetration, I do believe. Penetration has more to do with bullet design and sectional density.
There is more to penetration than bullet design and sectional density and there's more to what makes a good hunting round than penetration. Bullet weight and momentum come into play when were talking about penetration and bone-breaking ability on animals both of which the .41 Magnum, .44 Magnum, .454 Casull, etc. have more of than the .357 Magnum. Also, when loaded with softpoints or hollowpoints, the larger calibers often have enough energy and momentum to both penetrate deeply enough and expand acceptably which the .357 often does not. When hunting anything larger than small to midsized deer with a .357, the conventionaly wisdom is to place most of your emphasis on penetration and make a very, very accurate shot at relatively small areas on the animal. While accuracy is very important with any cartridge, the larger calibers shots at areas that wouldn't be advisable with the .357 are acceptable. Humans, however, are erect bipeds with a lighter bone structure than many large animals and as such less penetration than is often needed on four-legged animals is necessary to reach vitals and break bones.
Webleymkv is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 11:10 PM   #24
ElectricHellfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 22, 2008
Location: The Woodlands, Texas
Posts: 2,271
A pointless thread IMO.
__________________
Texas, the only State to Have Ever Kicked Another Country's Butt
ElectricHellfire is offline  
Old June 13, 2008, 11:24 PM   #25
b.thomas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 8, 2006
Posts: 461
Just proves the fifteen year old needs to practice more!
And why in heavens name would you use a damn pistol to finish off a bear when you have a rifle handy??
b.thomas is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.08273 seconds with 10 queries