hotrod180 wrote:Mantoga wrote:A hard hitting, very reliable sidearm. They are butt ugly and have a god awful feeling trigger but a 10mm Glock with a few spare magazines. They aren’t expensive, practically maintenance free and could be the difference between getting food vs. being food.
Not so good for preventing "being food", but I'm thinking that for most of us,
a 22 rifle and/or shotgun (or preferably a combo gun like the savage 24) would be better at "getting food" than a 10mm Glock.
Plus more fun for lightweight plinking around camp.
I spent 30 years flying the friendly skys of Alaska, including some pretty remote areas, and ALL in bear country. While working, I was required to carry at least a handgun. Most days, I did. If we were working on big animals (bears, moose, sheep, etc) I carried a short barrel Remington 870 (issued to all LE personnel). That shotgun also lived in my assigned plane. All our field crews were also equipped with the shotguns and slug rounds. I also carried bean bag rounds as a deterrent. This equipment was dictated by policy for anyone operating in bear country.
I also conducted the mandatory field firearms training and certification for ALL assigned field employees. Our bear protection policy was absolutely clear: ALL field employees had to carry or be protected by someone trained to protect them, with the 12 guage shotgun OR a high powered rifle (30-06 or louder). The single exception in policy was for the Fisheries folks who (occasionally) conducted electrofishing. Their argument was they couldn't carry a shotgun along with all the electro fishing gear while wading.
So, those guys always showed up with their .44 mag handguns, in a chest holster for requalification. Now, EVERYone who was carrying was required to go through either initial training or requalification every season. Our requalification was really simple: They had to demonstrate to me that they were competent and safe in handling the firearm (loading, unloading, verifying condition, basic handling, etc). Secondly, everyone had to shoot a "Charging Bear Target". The slightly smaller than life size bear target was fixed to a "sled" which had a rope harness, and fifty or sixty feet of rope. Each participant lined up facing the target from fifty feet away, gun at port arms. Another held the rope and at my call of "Charge", they took off at max speed, dragging the "bear" toward the shootist. My requirement was they had to get off three rounds from a locked and loaded condition, and at least ONE slug had to hit something significant on the "bear". No toenail shots counted.
In almost twenty seasons conducting this, I NEVER had anyone qualify with a handgun, and yes, one participant did show up with a Glock 10.
A side note: The FBI at one point transitioned to 10 mm handguns for routine carry (ugh!!}. Within a year or so, they realized that their average scores in their recurrent qualifications dropped significantly. Which is when they started carrying .40 caliber ammunition in those 10s. I heard more recently that they are issued 9mm handguns. There is no question that the average scores are going to be better with a 9 than any of the heavy caliber handguns.
So, would you rather carry a Glock 10 or a S&W .44 and miss with most rounds, all the while abusing yourself regularly to practice wtih those things......or carry a Glock or Sig compact 9, and put four or five rounds in the beast? Me, I'm a .40 cal guy, what I was trained and shot most. Those little 9s are sweet shooters, though.