If you are overlanding, what weapon do you use? You can't carry a gun because of all of the different state laws on conceal-carry? What about bear spray? Seems that would be better than nothing.
Lots of good opinions here, and it's all personal preference. Many good reasons for both, but whatever makes you comfortable is most important.
I carry a gun during hunting season, when I am hunting. If I am not hunting, it's just too much to carry around.
I carry bear spray and a bear-banger/flare-launcher-pen at all times when in the back-woods, and it is within hands-reach in my truck or my tent.
Any tool you carry, make sure you are proficient in its use, and it's kept safely from others as needed.
Not sure I would say during non hunting season that a gun is too much to carry around. A full sized rifle sure, but something like a ar-7, m6 scout, or a pistol (I cc so its with me anyway) takes up little extra room and I dont see it as much of a hassle. Nice to have if needed.
I only shoot something when I plan to eat it. So if I am not hunting I'd rather deter an animal than kill it.
When I worked in the Mackenzie River Delta for the GSC when I was in University, there were a lot of bears and we worked solo. A couple of spoons tied to your pack and a bear banger was all we carried. But then, this is Canada,
If I am way up north where Polar bears will ignore the deterrent, then I want a full sized rifle with me. I wouldn't want anything smaller that a 30.06.
And to reiterate, my approach is not the only approach. If you feel more comfortable with a firearm in the woods, that's cool. Whatever works for you. I just want everyone who is in the woods to be trained on their gear, and on their environment, whatever they bring.
To quote the Big Lebowski, "sometimes you eat the bar, and sometimes the bar eats you."
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Having this thread in this particular category will elicit a certain percentage of answers of a given predilection. To offer an opinion from outside this sub category, I will put my answer in the mix. This is the logic I subscribe to and by no means offer this to suggest anyone else do so as well.
While I don't care to infringe on anyone's right to carry a firearm, I have never found a need to do so, and never will. Even living in thick bear country in Alaska where encounters with huge browns was a weekly occurrence, I never felt a gun of any kind would have improved my safety beyond what was afforded by common sense and bear spray.
Statistically, roughly 750 people die of accidental shootings PER YEAR in the US. There are roughly 3 bear-related deaths per year, in NA. That dwarfs the 26 killed by dogs, or those whacked by lighting. According to a study initiated by bear expert Tom Smith over the course of two decades, there were more fatalities whereby a gun was used for bear defense than that associated with bear spray. In fact, of 133 spray-thwarted attacks, there were only three reported injuries. Of 269 gun-related defenses, there were 17 dead people as an end result. Just having a gun statistically is less safe than not having one.
Regarding the two-legged threat, again, statistics provide a powerful, and frankly pleasant report. For every one report of violence in the back county, there are millions of safe visitations to the woods.
I understand the argument that having a gun simply increases your statistical odds, but the odds of needing to augment those odds is.....you get the idea.
So, no. Count me amongst those who feel no need to carry.
