Can you cite anything to support this, or is this your opinion? I haven't seen anything yet which would support this assertion that bear spray is not effective in some class of "committed" attack.
I'm sure you will discount this as hearsay, but it is considered common knowledge in the law enforcement and self defense communities that OC spray simply doesn't work on 100% of the subjects and high suspicion that "highly motivated to resist/assault" plays a factor.
Even if that isn't true, and we rather attribute the result to some are "simply immune", the result is the same. Not 100% effective means not 100% effective.
I suspect I could dredge up some studies, but I'm not really that interested.
http://forums.officer.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-6152.html
radar
03-25-2000, 09:43 PM
The new format got me and I think I sent a copy of what you already stated, sorry.
Anyhow, I lost faith in the spray when I dumped the whole can on a subject with a butcher knife who licked the spray and almost cut my head off so we had to shoot him. That night waiting for the SBI investigator with my spray on the table doing the report, it spit at me from about 3 feet and and I was out of commission for about 30 minutes.
Well the alternative is to suggest they are perfectly safe relying only on bear spray. Considering that bear spray does not incapacitate the bear that seems like a potential disservice as well.
Sorry, I'm still going to have to disagree here.
To use your phrase, that's how your response sounded to me.
-john
Previous Topic
Index
