Originally Posted By: ponder
IMHO - There have been two statements that I would disagree with.

1. "His main point is that guns in inexperienced hands are worse than no guns at all."

2. "Given this scenario and how it played out, a firearm is unlikely to have made a difference."

Neither statement above has any basis in reality. They only apply to those that prefer to turn the other cheek.

Since this second statement is mine, I guess I should reply.

I am not coming from the perspective of one who would "prefer to turn the other cheek", but as one who prefers the best chance at survival. In the event of a bear attack my goal is to end the attack, period. This is what I base my opinion on.

If I ever come face to face with a bear I want to be able to walk away from the situation. In my conversations here I've assumed others hold a similar goal and have made my arguments for the most effective way to do so accordingly.

Since we've already had a lengthy discussion about how best to defend against a bear attack in the first thread about this incident, I will again suggest that this topic is better discussed over there rather than rehashing the same thing in this thread.

This thread would be best served as a place to discuss the signalling / communication aspects of the incident and what we can learn in that regard.
_________________________
Victory awaits him who has everything in order — luck, people call it. Defeat is certain for him who has neglected to take the necessary precautions in time; this is called bad luck. Roald Amundsen