Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Kent Lufkin, Nov 12, 2007.
Correct as usual Richard :rofl:
Can you post a quote of someone playing rambo here?
So, am I to assume that you would shoot a bear rather than give up a couple of hatchery steelhead?
This is why I ALWAYS carry in the woods.
Dogs shot dead, camp burned...
Are you on a physhing trip with that question or are you serious?
"Hell, if I have a gun what do I have to be afraid of?"
"So, do you feel lucky? Do you?"
Oh wait, that wasn't here :rofl:
Is it true than in Washington, you don't need a CWP to transport to or carry while fishing?
Are you for real? Sheesh, I need to start using smiley faces more often...
sometimes giving up there fish is not going to get a bear to leave you alone. a warning shot will 99% of the time scare it off. if it doesnt and that bear is threatening your life, then it is much better to be packing a gun that can get the job done insteead of that little 45acp or 9mm.
and yes if i am fishing and a bear shows up and decides to charge at me IT WILL GET SHOT! and i will make sure i have a gun that will do the job when needed.
that goes for a tweeker aswell. if i have to pull my gun out on someone i am more then willing to use it. BUT that is always the last thing that will happen.
using your gun is always the last thing you should do, no matter what. weather it be a bear, dog, deer (unless hunting season lol) person, cougar, GIANT STEELHEAD!!! i had one smack me in the face with his tail last year lol
I was serious.
Shooting wildlife out of season or without a license is illegal (poaching is the term, I believe, and with all the anti-poaching threads on this board, it should be a subject we all are sensitive to).
Given the extremely low frequency of attacks on humans by wildlife in this state (or in the contiguous states, for that matter), there is a tremendous burden of proof on the shooter if he/she claims shooting a wild animal was for personal safety. It is likely that some evidence of physical attack will be needed to avoid criminal charges. "Officer, he was threatening to take my steelhead" probably won't cut it.
In the past 50+ years, during which time I've spent absolutely as much time in the out of doors pursuing a wide variety of recreational activities all over the North America (an other parts of the world), and have had numerous encounters (some quite close) with bear, moose, bison and other critters that could do me harm, I've never been in a situation where being armed would have been helpful, nor have I personally known anyone who has been in such a situation. By saying this, I'm not denying it can and does happen, but only that the probability of such an occurrence happening is so low as to approach zero. For that reason alone, I wouldn't consider carrying something so heavy and useless as a handgun. If I need ballast for wading a fast-moving stream, I can always pick up a couple streamside boulders.
That said, I'm not going to argue that any of you should not carry a handgun if you are legally entitled to and want to. I own guns and have hunted since I was a teenager. It's just not for me and I find most of the arguments here quite specious. Handguns are really pretty amazing technological instruments, as is an iPod (which I also don't carry, but know folks who wouldn't leave home without) and I can understand why people might want to own one for that reason alone.
So, my first entry in this thread was a joke (about carrying a handgun to subdue large fish), the second was to respond that no one else had said anything in this thread about their use as fishing 'tools,' and my third was to raise the serious issue that defending your food (whether it is a steelhead you have just caught or your backpacking supplies in your camp) by shooting a bear is totally unjustified, unless your own safety is at stake (which I contend is almost never going to be the case, and the statistics on attacks by wildlife, as a probability relative to the number of encounters, suggests is true).
If I wanted to be provocative, I'd use the teddybear analogy, but I typically don't try to be provocative on this board, because it is difficult to do so in a measured way on an anonymous board with people you don't know.
results may vary.
I was typing when you submitted your reply, so I'll just add that I support you in using your weapon to defend your life. I would only say that you probably can/will live a very long and active outdoor life (unless something more mundane, like cancer or a car wreck, gets you first) without ever having the opportunity to do so. If you calculate the amount of effort you will sustain over that period lugging that piece around with you, you might also reach the conclusion that it isn't worth it.
Sorry man that was posted after Phlyphisher made the rambo comment. :rofl: I do agree, that is not a very good outlook on carrying a firearm and I suspect it was made in jest.
Well Said iagree
I have been cornered by a charging bear, granted it was intentional and was during a bear hunt during bear season where bear "dog driving" was legal. I was mentally prepared for that situation and let me tell you, the pucker factor was still a 13.2 on a scale of 1 to 10. If any of you guys are carrying to protect yourself from a bear, ya'll better be shooting a significant amount at least once a week. If you are carrying to protect yourself from a cougar, forget it, you'll be as good as cat food by the time you even realize a cat is stalking you.
I cary an old no 7-20-80pf in my holster these days unless I'm hunting. That would be a 20 oz flask of jack daniels.
Kent: :rofl: :rofl:
For all practical purposes, no not really. Get a CWP and save yourself the hassle and legal bills.