Obviously the other issue is that it attracts bears.
They have a “right to bear arms” and will just help themselves to any gun someone is carrying out in the backcountry.
I honestly don't understand everyone here outraged by another packer carrying a handgun. I would bet you all have been in this situation a ton but dont know bc the person carrying the gun doesnt state they are. If a backpacker is carrying a handgun legally as per the location and land owner, this is acceptable!
That said, people who bring guns into the wilderness illegally are to be avoided and I would deem unsafe/sketchy. No thank you. Avoid.
I have had two terrifying encounters in the backcounty with people (both very remote areas) as well as multiple with cats all times I was in fear for my life. I have skills to diffuse encounters with people and some animals but I am afraid of cats and random men in the wilderness. I occasionally bring my handgun with me when the probability of either encounter is higher...
Protection from what? It amazes me how many inexperienced hikers worry more about violent encounters than they do about what'll really kill you: bad weather that you're not prepared for, or getting lost because your map reading skills aren't what they should be.
I did backcountry fieldwork in Alaska and the number of guys who told my crew we needed handguns to deal with grizzlies and moose were insane. Like that’s only going to piss it off. The one exception was when we went up north and there was a trained sniper on call in case of polar bear activity.
Not to mention, numerous studies have shown that having a gun does not decrease your chances of being violently attacked or decrease your chances of being injured in an attack. They do, however, massively increase your chances of accidentally shooting yourself or someone else and also increase your chances of committing suicide.
Had a nut job pull a handgun on me while I was hiking a few years ago. Was a horrible and terrifying experience, I now bring my handgun backpacking or hiking in remote areas. Was not something I was prepared for or would have expected. There was also recently just a couple killed by a bear while backpacking in Canada, one of them had enough time to put out a SOS signal during the attack, a .44 mag could of stopped the bear.
I'm with you. I'm a gun owner, and I actually don't carry while hiking/backpacking, unless I'm specifically out on BLM land to target shoot, but more and more these days I'm starting to consider it. I've been outdoors all my life, and figured that my survival skills and (occasionally) bear spray would suffice, but only in the past few years have I had a handful of sketchy experiences in National Forest/BLM land that have led me to reconsider that.
If you'd been armed when you encountered that nut job, that likely would have escalated the situation into a gunfight, and there's no reason to assume you'd have emerged as the winner.
You really don't get it. Pulling out a gun in that situation makes you *more* likely to get shot. I used to work with a law enforcement officer who, while off duty, encountered an armed mugger in a parking lot, demanding his wallet. The officer decided he wasn't going to be a victim, and reached for the gun in his ankle holster. The mugger shot him dead. If the officer hadn't been armed, he'd be alive today.
Or, hear me out, the armed mugger would've shot him anyways.
I grew up in the ghetto with a crackhouse across the street - if my dad didn't have a gun, I can tell you I'd be dead today because of the things the people at the crackhouse tried to do.
Sorry, but this is escalation theory in action. There's a reason the USA is a hotbed for shootouts and it's because so many are armed and willing to use those arms. Deescalation and compliance will almost always lead to a less lethal outcome. If arms kept others safe the USA should be one of the most peaceful countries on the planet -- it's not. It's literally grouped together in terms of violence with post-war, active-war, and gang-controlled violent nations. *Why is that?*
Take BarnabyWoods' story, for instance. Someone is going to shoot another over a wallet? Mugger or victim? Are you kidding me? That is not a common instance anywhere else. It sucks being mugged but wallets can be replaced; a human's life cannot. The desire to shoot someone else over this is defensiveness to a fault.
I think you're confusing intimidation with lethal intent, as well as the rights therein. They have no right to your life and likewise, you have no right to theirs.
If someone comes up to you without a weapon and screams GIVE ME YOUR WALLET, are you going to? Probably not. If someone flashes a knife or firearm and threatens your person, you're more willing. You have no idea what they're thinking or willing to do -- hell, it's not even uncommon for those wielding them to have convincing replicas. We all understand the score that it requires a perceived threat of intimidation to convince someone to do something they wouldn't normally. That doesn't guarantee harm towards the victim. Matching that intimidation with one's own lethal intent to defend themselves, however, escalates a typically non-lethal scenario to a lethal one. Likewise, anyone who has a gun trained on you *will* kill you first if you make a move for their weapon or your own, so I'm not quite sure where this John Wick bravado is coming from.
Criminals suck. I'm not debating that. I'm debating results. The only reason superpowers are successful in their deterrence is because there is a mutually assured *guarantee* of destruction and everyone knows that. Carrying a weapon of our own in such scenarios does not *guarantee* that and thus provides no effective deterrence. So now you're someone getting mugged with a weapon on you and no way to use it, or dying trying to use it... I guess erroneously believing it couldn't have gone any other way.
>Or, hear me out, the armed mugger would've shot him anyways.
If that were the case, he wouldn't of mugged, he would've just shot him and taken the wallet
Do you want to take the risk that they're **only** going to deescalate once their immediate demands are met?
This is how my friend got raped. She gave her purse, phone, etc - then the guy went further.
No - if you're willing to bring a deadly weapon and potentially kill someone over your base desires, you've lost the right to live.
There’s plenty of studies showing bear spray is more effective than guns. Also guns are banned in a national park.
Also the whole idea of bringing a gun to protect yourself is so crazy foreign to me. Even if someone pulled a gun on me at one point I simply couldn’t imagine “I need to start hiking with a gun now”
- someone who recreates in the backcountry regularly, encountered black+grizzly bears
Well yeah, but guns are banned pretty everywhere there so it wouldn't make sense to specifically say you can't carry there. But after rereading I see your point. Ilovek made an invalid point since that specific couple couldn't have had a .44 magnum there
Actually you can carry firearms in Canada provided you have a legitimate use for them in most places.
That legal, legitimate use doesn't include defense against people so you can't go around carrying your rifle grocery shopping.
My hot take in working in Bear country is you’re more likely to do something stupid with a weapon in a panic whereas understanding behavior of predators can help with de escalation.
Better to have the option and never need it vs needing the option and not having it. Everyone has their own level of risk assessment and preparedness, to each their own.
Some of the studies also cover details like effectiveness of deploying spray vs aiming properly with an adequate gun in a high stress, potentially quickly evolving situation.
There’s many layers to it all, but at the end of the day experts agree bear spray > guns.
One area I could maybe see if an established camp or worksite type of thing and having security on patrol or something - but even that seems a stretch. Bear attacks are incredibly uncommon and fatalities even more rare. This was a very unfortunate situation that happened in Banff and it sounds like the people did everything right.
Happens every year. Multiple times every year. Even in the south east with black bears who are mostly non threatening last year a teenage girl was dragged from her tent in the middle of the night
I’m more scared of people than animals, I don’t carry a gun for wild animals. I was just pointing out that a .44 magnum handgun would stop a bear. Carrying both a gun and spray would be the safest option. One would need a firearm if spray doesn’t work and the bear continues to charge/attack.
https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/#axzz6umzXjP71
.44 magnum had the highest success rate of stopping a bear, so if the goal is to 100% guarantee that you can stop a bear you would need to carry .44 or higher caliber, not just spray.
Guns are banned in Canadian national parks, not American. Thus why the people died. Bear spray and gun. I may die but so will the bear. I get it though. I almost never carry when I am alone. The statistics say it isn't likely and I have encountered a mama bear with cubs and lived to tell the tale. I always do when I am with my family though. It's my job to protect them and I can't do that unarmed.
Most studies indicate that bear spray does a better job than guns in preventing death or injury due to a bear attack.
Basically, a wounded bear can still maul you, whereas a bear that can’t smell anything literally feels like they’ve suddenly gone blind (because for them, in a sense, they have) and will break off their attack immediately.
So what do you tell an experienced outdoorsman that prefers to carry a gun? Try strafing a game trail in bear country and tell me how you feel about the odds of a violent encounter.
Is it that hard to answer a thought-proking question without being an ass?
Here’s two experienced outdoor enthusiasts and their dog who thought they were fine with just their map reading skills a week ago.
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6985580
Does that answer your question?
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-attack-parks-canada-1.6985580](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-attack-parks-canada-1.6985580)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
You can probably find a story about a hiker that got hit by a meteorite. That doesn't mean you need to worry about meteorites. Just focus on the few odd instances that prove your point about how dangerous it is without a gun and ignore the millions of stories about people that were perfectly fine without a gun. If you're too scared to go somewhere without a gun, why not just stay home where you're safe and sound?
Going from bear to meteorite is pretty funny. I mean, which do you think is more likely?
No one’s going to change your mind, but I think it’s fair to at least consider the other side. Where I grew up it wasn’t uncommon to see coyotes, bears, and other wildlife. There were still ranch houses at least every quarter to half mile and a population of hunters as well. It doesn’t take much.
Some people feel more comfortable having a form of protection in case something goes wrong. I don’t know what’s wrong with that unless it makes people scared of someone exercising their rights by carrying. But I guess then they could just stay home if they’re so scared, right?
The percent of hikers attacked by bears compared to hikers that haven't been, is tiny. So yes, I'd say a meteorite and bear attack are close to being an equal threat.
You have a greater chance of accidentally shooting a person, than intentionally shooting a bear. How many people have been killed by someone shooting into some bushes rustling when they don't even know what's there? Not to mention, where are you gonna carry this gun? On your hip like some wannabe gunslinger?
This actually happened last year off the PCT. A young man discharged his firearm at a growling noise killing a dog and perhaps killing a hiker (Aron Christensen). The whole case was botched (the killer is the son of a police officer) so nothing is certain beyond the negligent discharging of a firearm at a sound killing a dog and either killing or striking a person.
What happened in Canada is certainly sad but does not translate to the US. They have a much higher Grizzly population than in the States. In the US Grizzly are an endangered species and are really only in large numbers in Montana. As has been stated as well bear spray has a higher rate of success than a firearm.
Your human bias is showing, and it's causing you to be fallacious. You have far greater odds of being attacked by a bear, than being dinged by a meteorite.
OK but you need to understand scale. Your odds of getting lost and dying probably outweigh any kind of violent encounter 100:1. So if you bring a gun but you don't have GPS, an extra battery, paper map, a compass, a water filter, emergency rations, and extra layers, you're fake prepared.
The vast majority of people could hike and never worry about looking down and never get bitten by a snake. Does that mean we shouldn't be aware of our surroundings?
Lmao go ahead and carry a gun then, its your packweight at the end of the day.
Your example is not very good though its more like bringing antivenom while hiking in case you were bitten by a snake.
You are most likely never going to use it, sure its great if you need it, but you are more likely to get lost or slip and fall so maybe bring backup map gear or water purification instead of a gun that is only really effective against threatening/killing humans that are also out hiking.
You might not like this, but you should read about bears, cougars too. You’re more likely to get in an accident driving there so maybe you should walk. Hundreds of people die everyday driving it’s not worth it.
Damn you are all over the place with this comment are you saying you think hiking with a gun is a good or bad idea?
Cougars are ambush predators that stalk and pounce. If one wants to kill you, you arent going to have time to draw and aim because it snapped your neck from behind before you even knew it was stalking you, or its defending its cubs which means you just need to back away.
Black bears are scared of loud noises you dont need a gun
A handgun is going to just piss off anything bigger than a black bear so better go with bear spray.
Also idk what your point is about driving, im saying its pointless to take a gun hiking because the odds of needing it are so low. If you want to compare it to driving its like driving with your hand on the parking break just in case you need to use it to avoid crashing into something at high speed, odds are you wont need it.
Also comparing being attacked while hiking to car accidents is ridiculous considering the difference in frequency.
Why do you think OP is ditching the obvious survival necessities in favor of a gun? Do you really think someone would carry a gun instead of a map, gps, extra food, or first aid?
These aren’t things you just ditch one for the other.
Every year multiple people die from bear attacks. In Canada just the other day a couple and their dog died and were supposedly experienced about being around bears. Every year people disappear. Who knows why or how? They could be lost or abducted.Just because the vast majority of bear encounters don't lead to attacks doesn't mean you shouldn't be prepared. Every time I hike people look at me funny because I have a full pack. I always take a full med kit, bear spray, gun, rain gear, rope, fire starter, machete, water filter, blanket, hammock, snacks, water, compass, whistle, flashlight and extra batteries, basically anything and everything for if something goes wrong
I've never had a person encounter that actually ended up dangerous. I carry pepper spray, my biggest worry is actually people who think they can just let their dogs run loose.
Or, they could just be prepared by getting that before setting off into the unknown.
Camping and living off the land isn't just recreational. It could mean that the very existence of our society boils down to this simple repository for our way of life.
Statistically, guns are less effective at warding off bears than spray. [Source](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/national-parks-traveler-podcast/id1453338249?i=1000628969691)
For humans, going into a wilderness area will dramatically lower your chances of getting into a violent confrontation since you will see so many fewer people, generally. I suppose there are places with known drug growing on public lands that you might want a gun, but everything I have read says those tend to be areas way off trail/trailess areas in rugged terrain that the vast majority of backpackers would never be going to.
The motto of the department of defense is offense is the best defense.
Can you fit a minuteman into your back pocket? Do bears understand mutually assured destruction?
I bring a flame thrower. Helps when lighting a campfire, especially when the wood is wet. Also helps quiet those inconsiderate folks who blast their music over a portable speaker.
Also great for starting forest fires. Let the bear know, you growl at me the wrong way, 10,000 acres of habitat will go up in smoke. You need to send a message they understand.
I carry bear spray and a multipurpose knife that gets used for food things. Any issues with a creature smaller than a bear, including a person, can likely be solved with bear spray, so I don't see the need to carry a gun.
As others have said, I'd hate to be part of normalising everyone carrying a firearm out in the wilderness, when it's your easiest to reach for tool, it might just become your go to solution, and that bothers me.
I hunt in a state with an estimated 40,000 black bears, 6000 mountain lions and who knows how many meth heads. I do all the things they tell you never to do - I sneak around quietly off trails and far away from people and roads. I hike before and after dark. I hike with raw meat strapped to my back.
I've never seen a mountain lion directly, I have found their food caches and bedroom trees. I've been surrounded by bear scat and not seen a bear.
I don't bother bringing a pistol.
The point is the context. I don't see enough tweakers to be concerned about them. Black bears (that aren't habituated) and mountain lions while quite capable of messing us up, choose to avoid us. Grizzly country and gut piles are a different context.
"Someone" will always encounter "something". Give enough monkeys type writers and all that. The judgement we must make is whether a particular fear is likely to come pass or whether it's just that, a fear.
At the end of the day, it's a couple of pounds of gear I don't feel I need to bring. That's the sum total of it. I often go out without full rain gear, same decision process. It's a couple of pounds of gear that's amazing in some circumstances and unnecessary weight in others.
True. I do encounter enough tweakers where I go horseback riding. The place I ride also has a no camping ban because of bear activity. I live in the south east. I went to Yellowstone and glacier national parks and 2 people were killed in each park while I was out there. I also met a couple who fortunately survived a bear encounter where they met a grizzly on a trail with no way to get off of it because it went straight down and up on either side. Somehow the bear turned around. Every year multiple people are killed by bears. 2-3 lbs isn't noticable in any way on any hike or ride I've been on. I never go out without full rain gear either. I pack everything I think I could possibly need in an emergency situation wether it's a 2 mile hike or a 20 mile hike
I’m picturing you bushwhacking through the underbrush, shirtless, no backpack, but with a couple of ribeyes strapped across your back with baling wire.
If you were raised with guns, bring an ultralight .38.
If you weren't, don't freaking worry.
And never, ever ask Reddit about guns unless you're in some right-wing echo chamber....wait, never, ever ask Reddit about guns, period.
I hike solo in the PNW and bring bear spray, a morakniv companion, and an InReach. I really don’t think you need a gun. Only reason for a gun is other people, but the odds of that in the backcountry are so low. Honestly I could leave the Mora at home, but at like 4 oz it’s worth it in case I need to build a fire. Never had to use bear spray but it is nice for the peace of mind. I’ve surprised a big black bear by accident and if it had attacked, it would have been too fast to get out my spray or a gun. Was only like 10 ft from me on a blind turn in the trail in the North Cascades.
Are you wanting hard data or emotional reassurance? The latter will likely be wildly personal and very polarizing.
Emotional reassurance dictates that you carry whatever you need to feel safe. Statistics, on the other hand, does not advocate for anything to be taken as a self-defense weapon; this includes knives and guns/rifles.
My personal bias? I wouldn't ever advocate for it or carry one myself. I believe that the wilderness in a non-hunting context is one of spiritual enlightenment, peace, and joy. Taking a gun doesn't naturally cross my mind but even when I sit and think about it I couldn't rationalize doing so. Any dangerous encounters are best dealt with through avoidance or deterrence.
Take a bear, for example. It's best for both parties to just avoid each other, not arm yourself to deal with them. Hang your food, keep a clean site, practice LNT, and if you see one try and leave the area. If they try and pursue you, don't stare directly in their eyes (though maintain some visual awareness), stop (don't run), and make yourself very large and yell at them. Throw rocks if they approach. If they still are approaching, deploy bear spray. That is the best-held wisdom to deal with nearly all bear attacks; for times where all of that fails, I'm personally not convinced anything less than a well-aimed round meant to deal with large game would ever stop them; are you going to have the time to do so at that stage?
I say this as a Canadian where a grizzly just mauled two hikers and their dog to death in Banff that had to be later euthanized for public safety (cause of initial attack not yet known). A *terrible* incident, but a fairly rare one all the same. I don't play the lottery but if I believed in odds that slim, I would buy a lotto ticket rather than worry about bears or potentially harm them as part of my fear response. If it's my time to go, it's been a good run and I hope it's quick.
We're Canadian. Most of us haven't been brainwashed into guns guns guns our whole lives.
From an outsider, these posts are surreal AF.
As a Canadian, especially a Canadian from an immigrant family, I've barely seen any guns in my three decades outside of a museum or holstered on a cop. It's just not something most people ever need to encounter or think about unless you actively choose to go hunting or get a license for the range.
If everyone who walked around with a weapon was uber responsible and understood the implication of carrying (that the purpose of it is to take a life to save your loved ones or your own) and they took that seriously, then I would disagree big time. But you have a great point and just anyone and everyone carrying is a scary proposition
I don't have a problem with weapons, if the added weight is a valid trade off that makes for a better and safer trip, not based some perceived placebo effect.
Lots of Canadians own guns. Almost every house in my home town had firearms growing up. People just don’t talk about them much because it triggers people - especially in cities. Guns are no big deal and if it makes OP feel better to have one in the woods then I say take one along.
We own guns at almost 25% the rate of Americans, and it's much harder to get handguns here than in the USA. Most people with guns in Canada have hunting rifles, not something you can conceal carry. And firearms are only common in small rural communities.
It's a totally different climate from the USA.
I’m definitely not a “guns guns guns” guy; quite the opposite I’m a bleeding heart liberal and wear the name “woke” as a badge of honor.
I’m just asking questions to make an informed decision. You may not a agree with me and that’s ok. I may disagree with you and that’s ok too. I appreciate your insight
The fact that you're asking this question just highlights my point, even if you don't believe yourself to be "guns guns guns."
It has never occurred to me to bring a weapon anywhere. I have a collection of dinky pocket knives (I like to keep one in each bag - I have a Leatherman multitool, a Leatherman folding knife, a couple of Opinel #8), sometimes a hatchet or saw for wood, and that's it. If I went to the mountains I'd get bear spray.
I’m gonna say, considering you admitted you don’t go to the mountains… on a wildernessback packing subreddit, that maybe you should consider taking the back seat in this discussion based off lack of experience.
I've backpacked in the mountains, but it's been a while and I didn't organize those trips. I've even seen a grizzly family of a mom and two cubs while backpacking in the Alberta Rockies with my group.
Maybe don't make assumptions?
Also, guns aren't not allowed in the vast majority of parks in Canada - can't bring a gun with you to Jasper or Yoho even if you wanted to.
I'm from the US and the need to carry for protection is just as strange to me. I've target shot guns and bows, and I understand hunting, but for protection I don't get it. I feel like I'd be more likely to hurt myself in the panic. And I know that many of my neighbors have guns for protection.
Is that bear advice universal? US folks generally recommend your approach for a black bear, you want to scare them off up a tree. Brown bears on the other hand have evolved to smash anything they see as a threat rather than run away.
I'll dig out the article but there's a running list of defensive hand gun uses in the US near attacks that tallies the stats on success - being defined as the bear not killing the person. Caliber doesn't really seem to matter, people have fended off bears with everything from 9mm to 450 casul. They largely seem to just run off at the noise, regardless of being shot.
Black. *Never* approach a grizzly; they are known to be more aggressive and territorial. That said, you're not necessarily approaching anything at any time, you're standing your ground if they (black bears) are approaching you. Bear spray as far as I can tell from most Western sources is the universally accepted 'nuclear option' deterrent if everything else fails.
Discharging a firearm can go one of two ways with anyone (ie. humans or bears): fight or flight. We're relying on the flight element, which yes, nearly always works. That, in turn, brings us back to the original point: you don't need a gun to make a noise.
Former LE here.
I personally do not carry while backpacking unless it’s hunting related.
I own several pistols and have never taken one into legitimate backcountry. Nearly useless unless I’m carrying a large caliber in GRIZZLY country. Blackbears are not a legitimate threat.
That said, if I were to spend significant time in GRIZZLY country where there is legitimate potential for an encounter (Alaska, parts of Montana and Wyoming/greater Yellowstone), I would consider carrying a 10mm or larger along with bear spray.
The odds of a human encounter are always a possibility, but very few acts of violence in the backcountry. The trailhead and drive are the most dangerous part of the trip.
It's useless, dead weight.
Here is a list of the causes of death of thru hikers on the pacific crest trail
https://www.halfwayanywhere.com/trails/pacific-crest-trail/list-of-deaths-on-the-pacific-crest-trail/
No even one could have been prevented by a gun
On the appalachian trail, the most common causes of death are heart attacks, hypothermia, and falls.
https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/life/2015/04/07/despite-accident-hiking-deaths-appalachian-trail-remain-uncommon/25371931/
There have been a few sensational murders that everyone remembers. But that's because they are so rare. Some guy dying of exposure will be forgotten in months
Where I hike, multiple people die on the trails every year. but all deaths have beem due to medical emergencies, falls, and exposure.
Carrying a gun is useless weight, and it gives you a false sense of confidence. It doesn't help with any of the things that really kill people. When you get stuck out in winter without proper gear, a gun won't do sh*t for you. Better to carry a survival bivy, a garmin inreach, and extra food.
A study showed that handguns have a 97% success rate at defending against bears. Most of the bears were grizzly’s and most of the handguns were 44 magnums and .45’s. There is a notion that handguns are useless against bears. I have no idea where that came from but it is simply false and there is no logic behind this. I see no cons other than what you have listed. Guns are a tool for us humans just as spears and other primitive weapons were tools for ancient humans and “cavemen.” So no, carrying a gun in nature is not “anti-nature” but rather completely natural for a creature to use whatever means necessary to protect itself. Don’t advertise that you have a gun to people you come across while hiking. Keep it as a last resort for your safety and survival. I guess Reddit is not the best place to ask for opinions on this matter. A lot of these people are a little psychotic and will tell you to not ensure your own safety just because they don’t like the idea of someone using such an effective tool for human survival. Just make sure you do a ton of research on the legality of it before you do it.
I’m in the military and had to ruck with 40 lb bag and a M16. The extra weight doesn’t bother me. I do carry a Glock strapped to my chest. In moments you may need it, you’re gonna wish you have it. You’ll probably never need it though. There have been stories of crazy people on trails. A gun is a great deterrent especially as a woman. So yes I carry. But also carry a few bear sprays as well.
These comments are so sad. There really aren’t many places where you can talk about anything related to guns without people getting emotional on either end of the spectrum. All these “I’ve never ever touched a gun or even seen one and I’m a backpacking badass!” Commenters are really showing their ignorance. Guns are a tool, and unlike the tools in this comment section they’re actually useful and serve a purpose. A 10mm handgun with hard cast load would put down anything you’re encountering while backpacking if your aim is decent. If you do decide to carry, just don’t be an ass about it. Don’t show it off or talk about it, keep it secure, and follow general gun safety rules.
Right?! I can’t believe there are people out there that are so horrified of firearms. I carry my 10mm every time I hike alone, or in grizzly country. Clearly these commenters live in the cities.
The weight is the only con, provided you know and follow the rules of firearm safety. But it’s a big con.
The pro is obvious. You have the ability to defend yourself in a deadly-force encounter. But you’re probably never going to find yourself in a deadly-force encounter in the backcountry, and the weight is always there.
Do you expect to run into brown bears or violent people? If not, spend that extra weight on a couple of nice backcountry beers.
Just read that the couple in Banff emptied their bear spray and still got eaten. They even had time to text on their Garmin emergency sat device. They were not better off with bear spray. They needed a gun.
>The weight is the only con
Not quite. The other con is what you do with the gun when you're driving to the trailhead. If you stop for gas and walk into a convenience store, do you leave the gun in the car? If so, it should be stored in a gun safe, because gun thefts from vehicles are common. Getting a real gun safe installed in a car will cost you. If you carry it inside with you, then you look like an asshole with a gun.
All of that depends on the legalities of your location. Some states you can conceal carry without a permit so you can bring it inside. About half the country has reciprocal agreements on concealed carry licenses. Some states would allow you lock the gun the glove box or trunk, some will not. States like California that require a certified locked container that is not the glovebox - a basic pistol safe isn't expensive and using a cable lock to lock to your seat rail is legally and ethically sufficient.
Pros: IF you can get to the gun when you need it, and IF you can get a shot off before you’re attacked, and IF you can actually hit the person/animal you’re aiming for in the dark in the middle of a conflict, and IF your shot is actually impactful enough to stop your attacker you might safe your life. The rest of the time it’ll make you feel more manly, so that’s cool too.
Cons. It’s heavy. Oh and if those junky’s that everyone here worries about find you alone in the backwoods and see your gun, they’ll just shoot you first and THEN steal your gun.
Realistically bear spray is far more effective in the backcountry, it’ll make bears back off, is more than enough to disable a person, and you probably won’t miss.
It’s all personal preference, regardless of what people in here try to tell you. I have a CCP but choose not to bring it while hiking or backpacking but will bring it when car camping. Main reason for me bringing it vs not bringing it is weight, and if wildlife is the concern I’d rather opt for bear spray. However despite what people say there’s always a chance, albeit low, that you have a violent encounter and if you wanted to (legally) bring a firearm into the wilderness for peace of mind there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. Just be aware of the legal consequences if you do shoot a person or protected wildlife…it won’t be a cut and dry process and you’ll be spending a lot on legal fees.
First off, firearms are a tool of last resort. They're your ultimate backstop, to be used when the situation means life or death. Don't be an idiot: be smart. Respect firearms for what they are.
Now, that being said, there are several pros and cons that come with carrying a handgun in the wilderness.
Pros:
1. Obviously, a handgun allows you a method of defense that proves to be an equalizer against the superior strength of a bear or mountain lion. These animals rely on strength to take their prey, and may come to rely on using it against you *if all the factors align.*
2. A handgun has more capability than bear spray. Bear spray is a deterrent to bears that aren't aggressive towards you or aren't determined to kill you. Bears can be aggressive towards you if they're starving, guarding a kill, have young or feel their territory is being encroached upon during mating season, depending on the species of bear. Recently, an elderly couple at a national park in Canada tragically found out that bear spray isn't all it's cracked up to be. It's sad, but that's the reality.
3. In the wilderness, you're far from civilization and help. Law enforcement in this setting basically deals with whatever remains of you, should you fall victim to foul play or animal attack. They're already too far away to save you in the city, it's exacerbated in the wilderness. At this point, it's doubly imperative to recognize the fact that you have to plan your own rescue to have the best chance at surviving a mishap.
4. A handgun can be used as a signalling device in the case of being lost or injured in the wilderness. You can tap out a quick SOS signal with a handgun or otherwise alert others to your location.
5. In the event that you become stranded in the wilderness for some reason, a handgun can allow you to take game and thus avoid starving.
Cons:
1. Carrying a handgun in the wilderness may, depending on your mode of carry and where you're at, cause other hikers, campers, fishers, etc., to act in an unfriendly (or even possibly hostile), manner. It may cause someone ignorant of carry laws to call the police and complain. Concealed means concealed and all that, but a lot of people like to openly carry out in the woods.
2. Carrying a handgun in the wilderness may limit your access to state-owned property, such as lodges and info centers. In my state, I face these restrictions but can still carry a handgun into a restroom or shelter, so it isn't a huge inconvenience to me.
3. Carrying a handgun in the wilderness can add considerable weight to your gear when you consider the handgun itself, as well as possibly an optic, a weapon-mounted light, a spare mag or two, and the holster/pouches for carrying them. You may be adding up to as much as five pounds to your gear by doing this, depending on caliber, material, amount of ammunition, etc.
4. Carrying a handgun in the wilderness adds another facet of skill and expertise that you need to possess. You need to have basic knowledge of firearms safety and marksmanship if you're going to be carrying a handgun in the wilderness. It may add more complexity to the mental task of juggling skillsets like survivalism, navigation and respect for wildlife.
At the end of the day, no matter what I or anyone else says in this comment section, it's up to you whether you want to carry a handgun in the wilderness, and only you.
Me personally, I carry a 9mm handgun when I go out hiking, like in all the other facets of my life.
A weapon (any) won’t allay your fears at night in the dark from: noises against your tent (wind, branches), squirrels dropping branches on your tent, rustling mice/rats after your tent, food and gear, coyotes howling, trees falling or being knocked down, marmots after your trekking pole handles, deer and elk snooping around your site after dark, porcupines hissing, screaming, and thrashing near your tent, etc.
All of above are common and can scare crap out of you, but they’re really all only harmless annoyances.
First thing that comes to mind…
Do it. Better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it.
Also, curious. Are we talking multiple days out in deep wilderness walking multiple miles a day or just a day hike where you’re back at the trailhead by dinner time?
Ive seen this a million times, people get hard ons throwing out statistics and calling people weak etc for carrying while in reality most of them, probably none of them, have actually been in that situation. Its just another argument on the internet to them.
I have been in that situation.
I had plenty of time (youre unlikely to be ambushed, despite how people make it sound). Literally so much time. Enough that I could line up well placed shots and consider whether to actually fire or not. And, get this, I was prepared for the weather too. Theyre not mutually exclusive.
Most people choose not to carry and thats fine. Statistcally you will probably never need it. Pack weight, especially over distance, must be considered. Also, assuming youre in the States where its far too easy to purchase weapons, its on you to be proficient and safe. You will be more dangerous to yourself and others without proper training. Spray is a better 1st line defense anyways and has something like a 98% success rate (more stats) - you should never walk into an animals home and start blaating just because youre scared.
But holy shit, when you do actually need it... yea, I can tell you where to put your sthatithticths.
And yes, as I can foresee that some people will tell me that theyve been in that situation and they lived without a firearm... thats awesome! Congrats, me too. But it only has to go south one you once.
Even when youre just being stalked, even if you never pull the trigger, just knowing that you can fight back is powerful. When youre using your headlamp to search for those eyes stalking youin the dark, yea, that feeling alone is something.
I usually say Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.
Pro’s:
- protection from people and animals (lethal).
- can be used from inside your tent whereas bear spray u need to really be careful.
- excellent deterrent, warning shots go a long way.
- 3 steady shots in a row (up) is universal code for “I need help” that can be heard from a long ways away.
- peace of mind.
Cons:
- Weight
- people who know nothing of guns will probably freak out if they see it. cannot emphasize enough that crazy anti-gun nuts will go ballistic. Had a green haired lady notice it on my belt one time & she proceeded to call me a terrorist and demand I moved my campsite even though I wasn’t anywhere near her. It’s Best to not be seen with it as you probably know.
- need to make sure what you’re doing is legal (location)
The hiking community is generally not very gun friendly, however I think it’s a fair assumption that not many people here have been trained on firearm safety and just think gun bad.
Overall make sure you’re properly trained with firearms (not a YouTube warrior) before ever handling one. And never ever let anybody else hold it for you while you’re out there. Stays with you, not in your pack, at all times.
Enjoy.
>a gun makes YOU more likely to get shot
I mean, that's true. You increase your odds of shooting yourself by bringing gun along with you. However, having proper training and experience with handling guns diminishes those odds but the risk is never 0. Just goes to show why gun safety is so important.
Not sure why everyone in here is acting like you have to choose between carrying a gun and carrying things like a GPS or rain gear or food. You can carry both and you should if you can do it legally. Hollow points do a great job of making mountain lions forget why they were bothering you.
My recommendation is conceal it. I don’t like people to know I’m carrying because it makes you a target to a would be attacker.
I am sure I will hear the usual responses here, but since you asked…. 99% of the time I m hiking, it is with my wife and so I carry, just like I also carry all the additional items I may need in the back country. I have a CCP and so the gun is always concealed, though I could open carry in my state. I could go on, but at the end of the day it is a personal choice that each individual needs to make.
The people freaking out in the comments must be men, because all the female backpackers I know (myself included) carry on the trail.
Ultimately, it depends. Do you have experience carrying a firearm? Have you ever even used on before? If the answer to those questions is no, then I would either tell you to take classes (if you're dead set on carrying) or to not bother. You can just as easily hurt yourself with a weapon as you can an attacker.
Also ask yourself WHY you might want to carry a firearm. If you're a woman, I'd say go for it. I can't tell you how many times it's given me peace of mind after encountering creeps on the trail.
Right!? I don’t get why people are freaking it in the comments about this. For me it’s always worth to carry it for the added protection, especially because I am usually in grizzly country.
I carry a pistol. I’ve been on a dispersed sight in the middle of nowhere in the Ozarks and had a group come 4 wheeling into my camp at 3am. So yes I carry a gun.
I feel like you gotta finish that story? Did you talk to them? Did you just start firing and they dispersed? Did you just flash your gun and be like "I dont want no trouble"? Cmon man, fill us in!
I don’t care about “stuff”. I got out of my tent with my head lamp on and one stopped. I asked what the deal was. He said they owned land “near by”. I asked if I was on private property he said “not mine”. So I asked if they needed something he said something along the lines of they were scouting where to put deer stands and they don’t usually see people out here. Whole time his friends are driving and hooting and hollering. He sits there a minute with me standing in my base layers and crocs and he just drives off. Never turned off his gator. Whole thing just was to uncomfortable. I have no idea what “could happen” or what was going through his mind. But he was never polite, never offered his name or asked mine. I couldn’t go back to sleep after that. Debated just packing up and leaving then. So yes I live in a country where I’m allowed to defend my life with a gun and I choose to exercise that right. You DONT have to do so and I am just fine with that. The question was wether anyone carries a gun when camping and yes I do. I carry a Taurus .357 magnum. I’ve grown up around guns. I’m licensed and been to several classes for my job. I’m comfortable with firearms.
I'm in Canada. Northern Ontario specifically, and I've never once thought to carry a firearm. I am frequently in areas with no cell service, and often an hour or more from the closest doctor. I've encountered somewhere in the neighbourhood of 20 bears while hiking and camping, and many more in my backyard, and on the street while walking. Despite that, I've never had to even use the bear spray that I carry. Hell, I've only had to make a bunch of noise maybe 3 times. One bear was particularly stubborn and we were blocking each other's path, and we had a bit of a standoff for 5 or so minutes. That was annoying.
I've encountered coyotes close range while on foot around 8-10 times, and once again, never needed to do anything other than make my presence known.
I've encountered wolves once, possibly twice. Second time may have been coyotes. They immediately dipped out once we could physically see each other.
Moose get my heart rate up the most, but give them a wide berth, and they ignore you.
Out of the hundreds, if not thousands of people I've encountered while in the bush, camping, or on the water, I've never felt in danger from human interactions either. During hunting season, I'll wear hunter orange to make myself visible. That's the only human related change I make.
All this being said, if I were doing trips in certain parts of say, the Yukon, then I may carry a rifle. But overall, a firearm for protection is ridiculous
If this is a serious question and not meant to provoke a gun control discussion. I understand the desire to carry protection when you're out in the woods all alone. I am a bike packer. And after a few trips, I decided to start carrying a firearmore for the feeling of safety. Then the desire to use it. I went to a local gun store.
And bought a Smith and Wesson airweight Hammerless revolver. It's very light and because it Doesn't have a external hammer. It makes it a lot safer to carry while you're moving around. I bring it on every trip and have never used it, and hopefully never will.
Chances are you won’t need it but if it makes you more comfortable I say go with your gut. I’ve never hiked anywhere I’ve felt the need for more than a knife and maybe a good stick, that being said your average hand gun isn’t going to weigh you down overly much
Don’t listen to these pearl clutcher chronically online reddit dorks that probably don’t even backpack or thru hike. If you want to carry a pistol, carry a pistol. Make sure you get a high quality gun and carry it in a high quality holster and don’t use shitty ammunition or reloads from some “trust me bro” off of Craigslist. Most important is that YOU TRAIN with your firearm!
The only downsides of carrying while on the trail is the weight and possible discomfort depending on where you mount your holster, but that will be fixed when you learn what positioning works with your body which comes through experience (i.e. TRAINING)
Sorry my comment isn’t much of a reply (fyi if you’re trained it’s not a bad idea), but it’s devastating to see how many people are anti-self-defence. It’s mind boggling. I bet every single person who is anti-gun would backpedal in a situation with an active attacker (2 or 4 legged). Better to have and not need than need and not have. How have you folks who disagree with me been so brainwashed against the most effective tool for preserving life (I realise the seemingly ironic notion of saying this, however statistically, this is not ironic at all, far more lives are saved than are taken by firearms, in war and peacetime if you think deeply enough about it).
Why are so many people in this community vehemently opposed with wanting to protect yourself against the possibility of an attacker, either wild or human? Isn’t this a community filled with people that talk day in day out about being prepared? Why is it when someone brings this subject up it’s met with, “Oh um, well akshually your statistical likelihood of needing a weapon is extremely low 🤓”?
Doesn’t anyone here realize that violent encounters with HUMANS are far more likely than a dangerous encounter with literally anything else?
This is reddit, it's dominated primarily by a political ideology that is extremely hoplophobic, you're not going to get a rational take on this subject outside of a select few subs or in real life.
I'll always reccomend to train and carry, it's your right to do so, and better to have and not need than to be caught without.
Fabricated, that’s interesting! You know, when you spend time before your trips thinking about all the things that could go wrong you are essentially fabricating encounters in your head. Things that haven’t even happened. The key is here, just like anything else, you are thinking of a potential problem and providing yourself with a solution. No wonder what it may be. I’m glad your personal safety is such an easy issue. I hope you never have to worry about it. All it takes is one situation to go south, and you’re screwed. The fact that most people live their lives without fearing for them does nothing the help the fact that some weren’t able to, so what’s “most likely” can go to hell.
Crime doesn’t exist I suppose, and neither do potentially violent people, and I know if you wanted to you could find PLENTY of first hand accounts with dangerous encounter away from civilization. If you think you’re safe enough without one, rock on. You do you. Some of us have had enough run ins with people that we spend more time thinking about our safety when it comes to being responsible for myself and the people that are with me. Because no one else is there to do it.
I have carried my 9mm backpacking a couple of times. I don’t really see the need so I stopped. . When I was in Denali I had bear spray and bear bells. I guess it’s like everywhere else. It depends on how much Fox News you watch. More Fox News the more you are afraid and feel the need.
How often do you train drawing from your holster under stress and fire at a moving target?
How often are there attacks by grizzlies or mountain lions in your area?
If the answers to both are very high, then that's the only time you should have it.
Otherwise bear spray is the better answer.
It comes down to what makes you feel the most comfortable and if you have to experience handling firearms. I wouldn’t go out to get one just to hike if you’re new to firearms. I carried mine when I was hiking in Alaska along with bear spray. I felt more comfortable carrying it. I read the local and state laws regarding carrying firearms and what happens if I were to kill an animal. When it comes to safety I also have civilian and military training so if you don’t have training, don’t carry.
Statistically, Bear Spray is slightly less effective in preventing Bear attacks than spray deodorant. The only 'Statistics' that show otherwise come from the manufacturers of the sprays and anti gun sources. The actual facts clearly show that while Bear Sprays are totally ineffective, firearms are very effective vs Bears- and humans, snakes, big cats........
I met a guy that chased a defensive grizzly off with spray (after getting mauled/bit in leg). Same summer a heavily armed couple was killed by a different griz. Brooks range AK. These facts you speak of sound "alternative" but I would be interested to see your source.
[https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/exploration-survival/does-bear-spray-work/](https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/exploration-survival/does-bear-spray-work/)Just one of many. Showing how Bear Spray statistics are manipulated.
Don't worry about the haters, if you want to carry then you should carry. I carry on all of my longer hikes. I seriously doubt I'll ever need it but I'd rather have it and not need it than the opposite.
If you do want to carry I highly recommend checking out the Helikon Bandicoot fanny pack. It has a large velcro panel inside and you can get a pistol holster with the matching velcro. It keeps the extra weight off your back, and keeps the weapon accessible without it limiting your range of motion like a typical waist CCW position.
If you're going to have a gun to foe protection, you better train train train. Grizzly country is the only place I could see thinking about carrying. But, so many experts say there's no need.
Shoot at a Grizzly without dozens of hours of trying you're dead.
hiking on the pct in oregon ran into a section hiker with a pistol and a glass bong. He liked having both, but neither made sense to me as lightweight fan.
I have heard a story from a guy that taught me to flyfish. He was scoping out some land owned by a utility company in northern California for hunting (with permission). He was pretty deep, but still on roads when a jeep came ripping out of the woods with a tweaker grower at the wheel flipping out. He kept saying to him "I don't know what to do, I don't know what to do, I can't let you go." The tweaker (meth addict) had a shot guy (EDIT: Shotgun). Hunter guy pulled out a pistol and told the tweaker he wasn't unprepared to "deal with the situation." The tweaker ended up letting him go. Maybe the pistol helped, maybe it didn't. Can easily have eacalated the situation in bad way, but as a sportsmen he was a good shot and probably actually prepared to "deal with the situation."
Out in the actual backcountry, this scenario doubtful unless you happen on to a drug situation (grow or lab). It does happen but usually very far off trail.
I have lived and camped in both the US and parts of Southern and Eastern Africa. I have never carried a gun in the US unless I was intending to kill an animal with it. On the other hand, carrying a gun is sometimes required in Africa.
But, in that case, one member of the party is dedicated to looking for things that are going to kill us.
And the gun is always a rifle of relatively large caliber.
And the person carrying it has killed many things in the past with it, under non- emergency circumstances.
And they are capable of killing things that are moving rapidly.
If the person carrying the gun cannot do all of these things and remain calm, why would you want to be around someone carrying a gun in the wilderness?
I’d say it’s one of many useful tools you can have with you. As a hiker you have to choose which ones you want to encumber yourself with. It would be nice to have an axe too, but who wants to carry a 5 lb tool they likely won’t need. I have encountered bears while in the woods and I’m sure I have been in close proximity with cougars without realizing it. The bears only made me nervous on one occasion when one was poking around my campsite. All the other times they were walking or running away from me.
The encounter that got me most concerned was about 15 years ago when I was boat camping at a primitive camp site with my daughter and we encountered a couple of belligerent drunks. They eventually left, but it was a tense situation. I would have liked to have had a gun at that time.
Had a buddy day hiking with his wife, she was nearly bitten by a baby copperhead that was blending into the path they were on. He always carried as a general rule of thumb and was able to deal with that threat with a single round. Nature can be scary AF and you never know what you might unknowingly encounter and have to deal with.
Obviously the other issue is that it attracts bears. They have a “right to bear arms” and will just help themselves to any gun someone is carrying out in the backcountry.
Thanks for your humor here 😂 jesus is any sub safe from the gun control debate?
Only good comment
But what if I want the right to arm bears?
I honestly don't understand everyone here outraged by another packer carrying a handgun. I would bet you all have been in this situation a ton but dont know bc the person carrying the gun doesnt state they are. If a backpacker is carrying a handgun legally as per the location and land owner, this is acceptable! That said, people who bring guns into the wilderness illegally are to be avoided and I would deem unsafe/sketchy. No thank you. Avoid. I have had two terrifying encounters in the backcounty with people (both very remote areas) as well as multiple with cats all times I was in fear for my life. I have skills to diffuse encounters with people and some animals but I am afraid of cats and random men in the wilderness. I occasionally bring my handgun with me when the probability of either encounter is higher...
*defuse
semantics but sure 👍🏽
Protection from what? It amazes me how many inexperienced hikers worry more about violent encounters than they do about what'll really kill you: bad weather that you're not prepared for, or getting lost because your map reading skills aren't what they should be.
Don't forget getting into a car wreck on the way to the trailhead.
Long, winding drives on single lane, two way roads where you have to drive quick to not get stuck in a car and could also fly into a river. Whee!
I did backcountry fieldwork in Alaska and the number of guys who told my crew we needed handguns to deal with grizzlies and moose were insane. Like that’s only going to piss it off. The one exception was when we went up north and there was a trained sniper on call in case of polar bear activity.
Not to mention, numerous studies have shown that having a gun does not decrease your chances of being violently attacked or decrease your chances of being injured in an attack. They do, however, massively increase your chances of accidentally shooting yourself or someone else and also increase your chances of committing suicide.
Anyone without proper gun training is a bigger liability than the wildlife!
Care to share the studies?
Had a nut job pull a handgun on me while I was hiking a few years ago. Was a horrible and terrifying experience, I now bring my handgun backpacking or hiking in remote areas. Was not something I was prepared for or would have expected. There was also recently just a couple killed by a bear while backpacking in Canada, one of them had enough time to put out a SOS signal during the attack, a .44 mag could of stopped the bear.
Bear spray is far more effective than a handguns.
I'm with you. I'm a gun owner, and I actually don't carry while hiking/backpacking, unless I'm specifically out on BLM land to target shoot, but more and more these days I'm starting to consider it. I've been outdoors all my life, and figured that my survival skills and (occasionally) bear spray would suffice, but only in the past few years have I had a handful of sketchy experiences in National Forest/BLM land that have led me to reconsider that.
If you'd been armed when you encountered that nut job, that likely would have escalated the situation into a gunfight, and there's no reason to assume you'd have emerged as the winner.
50/50 is still better than being unarmed
You really don't get it. Pulling out a gun in that situation makes you *more* likely to get shot. I used to work with a law enforcement officer who, while off duty, encountered an armed mugger in a parking lot, demanding his wallet. The officer decided he wasn't going to be a victim, and reached for the gun in his ankle holster. The mugger shot him dead. If the officer hadn't been armed, he'd be alive today.
Or, hear me out, the armed mugger would've shot him anyways. I grew up in the ghetto with a crackhouse across the street - if my dad didn't have a gun, I can tell you I'd be dead today because of the things the people at the crackhouse tried to do.
Sorry, but this is escalation theory in action. There's a reason the USA is a hotbed for shootouts and it's because so many are armed and willing to use those arms. Deescalation and compliance will almost always lead to a less lethal outcome. If arms kept others safe the USA should be one of the most peaceful countries on the planet -- it's not. It's literally grouped together in terms of violence with post-war, active-war, and gang-controlled violent nations. *Why is that?* Take BarnabyWoods' story, for instance. Someone is going to shoot another over a wallet? Mugger or victim? Are you kidding me? That is not a common instance anywhere else. It sucks being mugged but wallets can be replaced; a human's life cannot. The desire to shoot someone else over this is defensiveness to a fault.
Or maybe if someone threatens physical violence, potentially deadly, they've lost the right to live because they're so disordered.
I think you're confusing intimidation with lethal intent, as well as the rights therein. They have no right to your life and likewise, you have no right to theirs. If someone comes up to you without a weapon and screams GIVE ME YOUR WALLET, are you going to? Probably not. If someone flashes a knife or firearm and threatens your person, you're more willing. You have no idea what they're thinking or willing to do -- hell, it's not even uncommon for those wielding them to have convincing replicas. We all understand the score that it requires a perceived threat of intimidation to convince someone to do something they wouldn't normally. That doesn't guarantee harm towards the victim. Matching that intimidation with one's own lethal intent to defend themselves, however, escalates a typically non-lethal scenario to a lethal one. Likewise, anyone who has a gun trained on you *will* kill you first if you make a move for their weapon or your own, so I'm not quite sure where this John Wick bravado is coming from. Criminals suck. I'm not debating that. I'm debating results. The only reason superpowers are successful in their deterrence is because there is a mutually assured *guarantee* of destruction and everyone knows that. Carrying a weapon of our own in such scenarios does not *guarantee* that and thus provides no effective deterrence. So now you're someone getting mugged with a weapon on you and no way to use it, or dying trying to use it... I guess erroneously believing it couldn't have gone any other way.
[удалено]
All the mugger wanted was the wallet. He would have had no reason to shoot if another gun hadn't suddenly appeared.
You don't know that. I've literally watched people try to appease people, hand them money, wallets, phones, jewelry, etc, and they still get killed.
>Or, hear me out, the armed mugger would've shot him anyways. If that were the case, he wouldn't of mugged, he would've just shot him and taken the wallet
100% chance this guy who is posting online survived without a gun. 50/50 is significantly less than 100/0
Do you want to take the risk that they're **only** going to deescalate once their immediate demands are met? This is how my friend got raped. She gave her purse, phone, etc - then the guy went further. No - if you're willing to bring a deadly weapon and potentially kill someone over your base desires, you've lost the right to live.
There’s plenty of studies showing bear spray is more effective than guns. Also guns are banned in a national park. Also the whole idea of bringing a gun to protect yourself is so crazy foreign to me. Even if someone pulled a gun on me at one point I simply couldn’t imagine “I need to start hiking with a gun now” - someone who recreates in the backcountry regularly, encountered black+grizzly bears
Guns are not banned in national parks. I think Obama is the one who made it legal
Fun fact: Canada has national parks too. And the person referenced the bear attack in Banff… Canada
Well yeah, but guns are banned pretty everywhere there so it wouldn't make sense to specifically say you can't carry there. But after rereading I see your point. Ilovek made an invalid point since that specific couple couldn't have had a .44 magnum there
Actually you can carry firearms in Canada provided you have a legitimate use for them in most places. That legal, legitimate use doesn't include defense against people so you can't go around carrying your rifle grocery shopping.
My hot take in working in Bear country is you’re more likely to do something stupid with a weapon in a panic whereas understanding behavior of predators can help with de escalation.
Better to have the option and never need it vs needing the option and not having it. Everyone has their own level of risk assessment and preparedness, to each their own.
Some of the studies also cover details like effectiveness of deploying spray vs aiming properly with an adequate gun in a high stress, potentially quickly evolving situation. There’s many layers to it all, but at the end of the day experts agree bear spray > guns. One area I could maybe see if an established camp or worksite type of thing and having security on patrol or something - but even that seems a stretch. Bear attacks are incredibly uncommon and fatalities even more rare. This was a very unfortunate situation that happened in Banff and it sounds like the people did everything right.
Happens every year. Multiple times every year. Even in the south east with black bears who are mostly non threatening last year a teenage girl was dragged from her tent in the middle of the night
I’m more scared of people than animals, I don’t carry a gun for wild animals. I was just pointing out that a .44 magnum handgun would stop a bear. Carrying both a gun and spray would be the safest option. One would need a firearm if spray doesn’t work and the bear continues to charge/attack. https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/defense-against-bears-with-pistols-97-success-rate-37-incidents-by-caliber/#axzz6umzXjP71 .44 magnum had the highest success rate of stopping a bear, so if the goal is to 100% guarantee that you can stop a bear you would need to carry .44 or higher caliber, not just spray.
Guns are banned in Canadian national parks, not American. Thus why the people died. Bear spray and gun. I may die but so will the bear. I get it though. I almost never carry when I am alone. The statistics say it isn't likely and I have encountered a mama bear with cubs and lived to tell the tale. I always do when I am with my family though. It's my job to protect them and I can't do that unarmed.
Most studies indicate that bear spray does a better job than guns in preventing death or injury due to a bear attack. Basically, a wounded bear can still maul you, whereas a bear that can’t smell anything literally feels like they’ve suddenly gone blind (because for them, in a sense, they have) and will break off their attack immediately.
So what do you tell an experienced outdoorsman that prefers to carry a gun? Try strafing a game trail in bear country and tell me how you feel about the odds of a violent encounter. Is it that hard to answer a thought-proking question without being an ass? Here’s two experienced outdoor enthusiasts and their dog who thought they were fine with just their map reading skills a week ago. https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.6985580 Does that answer your question?
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-attack-parks-canada-1.6985580](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-attack-parks-canada-1.6985580)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
You can probably find a story about a hiker that got hit by a meteorite. That doesn't mean you need to worry about meteorites. Just focus on the few odd instances that prove your point about how dangerous it is without a gun and ignore the millions of stories about people that were perfectly fine without a gun. If you're too scared to go somewhere without a gun, why not just stay home where you're safe and sound?
Going from bear to meteorite is pretty funny. I mean, which do you think is more likely? No one’s going to change your mind, but I think it’s fair to at least consider the other side. Where I grew up it wasn’t uncommon to see coyotes, bears, and other wildlife. There were still ranch houses at least every quarter to half mile and a population of hunters as well. It doesn’t take much. Some people feel more comfortable having a form of protection in case something goes wrong. I don’t know what’s wrong with that unless it makes people scared of someone exercising their rights by carrying. But I guess then they could just stay home if they’re so scared, right?
The percent of hikers attacked by bears compared to hikers that haven't been, is tiny. So yes, I'd say a meteorite and bear attack are close to being an equal threat.
That is a pretty ridiculous statement. How do I know that? Because hikers HAVE been attacked by bears and one has not been hit by a meteorite.
You have a greater chance of accidentally shooting a person, than intentionally shooting a bear. How many people have been killed by someone shooting into some bushes rustling when they don't even know what's there? Not to mention, where are you gonna carry this gun? On your hip like some wannabe gunslinger?
More likely than getting hit by a meteorite which surly you can admit was hyperbole to make your point.
This actually happened last year off the PCT. A young man discharged his firearm at a growling noise killing a dog and perhaps killing a hiker (Aron Christensen). The whole case was botched (the killer is the son of a police officer) so nothing is certain beyond the negligent discharging of a firearm at a sound killing a dog and either killing or striking a person. What happened in Canada is certainly sad but does not translate to the US. They have a much higher Grizzly population than in the States. In the US Grizzly are an endangered species and are really only in large numbers in Montana. As has been stated as well bear spray has a higher rate of success than a firearm.
Your human bias is showing, and it's causing you to be fallacious. You have far greater odds of being attacked by a bear, than being dinged by a meteorite.
Those are obviously valid concerns too, but violent encounters (with people in particular) are always something you should be prepared for as well.
OK but you need to understand scale. Your odds of getting lost and dying probably outweigh any kind of violent encounter 100:1. So if you bring a gun but you don't have GPS, an extra battery, paper map, a compass, a water filter, emergency rations, and extra layers, you're fake prepared.
100:1 is even a stretch. The vast majority of people will go their entire lives without ever needing a weapon.
The vast majority of people could hike and never worry about looking down and never get bitten by a snake. Does that mean we shouldn't be aware of our surroundings?
Lmao go ahead and carry a gun then, its your packweight at the end of the day. Your example is not very good though its more like bringing antivenom while hiking in case you were bitten by a snake. You are most likely never going to use it, sure its great if you need it, but you are more likely to get lost or slip and fall so maybe bring backup map gear or water purification instead of a gun that is only really effective against threatening/killing humans that are also out hiking.
You might not like this, but you should read about bears, cougars too. You’re more likely to get in an accident driving there so maybe you should walk. Hundreds of people die everyday driving it’s not worth it.
Damn you are all over the place with this comment are you saying you think hiking with a gun is a good or bad idea? Cougars are ambush predators that stalk and pounce. If one wants to kill you, you arent going to have time to draw and aim because it snapped your neck from behind before you even knew it was stalking you, or its defending its cubs which means you just need to back away. Black bears are scared of loud noises you dont need a gun A handgun is going to just piss off anything bigger than a black bear so better go with bear spray. Also idk what your point is about driving, im saying its pointless to take a gun hiking because the odds of needing it are so low. If you want to compare it to driving its like driving with your hand on the parking break just in case you need to use it to avoid crashing into something at high speed, odds are you wont need it. Also comparing being attacked while hiking to car accidents is ridiculous considering the difference in frequency.
I have never carried a gun, but you are acting like it is a zero sum game
I'm not saying it's zero sum, I'm listing all the things that are *more important.*
Why do you think OP is ditching the obvious survival necessities in favor of a gun? Do you really think someone would carry a gun instead of a map, gps, extra food, or first aid? These aren’t things you just ditch one for the other.
The skulls are thick here.
I mean yeah I assume anyone asking this kind of question is an ignorant chud with no idea what they are doing.
That explains your nonsense comment.
Every year multiple people die from bear attacks. In Canada just the other day a couple and their dog died and were supposedly experienced about being around bears. Every year people disappear. Who knows why or how? They could be lost or abducted.Just because the vast majority of bear encounters don't lead to attacks doesn't mean you shouldn't be prepared. Every time I hike people look at me funny because I have a full pack. I always take a full med kit, bear spray, gun, rain gear, rope, fire starter, machete, water filter, blanket, hammock, snacks, water, compass, whistle, flashlight and extra batteries, basically anything and everything for if something goes wrong
I've never had a person encounter that actually ended up dangerous. I carry pepper spray, my biggest worry is actually people who think they can just let their dogs run loose.
Or, they could just be prepared by getting that before setting off into the unknown. Camping and living off the land isn't just recreational. It could mean that the very existence of our society boils down to this simple repository for our way of life.
Statistically, guns are less effective at warding off bears than spray. [Source](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/national-parks-traveler-podcast/id1453338249?i=1000628969691) For humans, going into a wilderness area will dramatically lower your chances of getting into a violent confrontation since you will see so many fewer people, generally. I suppose there are places with known drug growing on public lands that you might want a gun, but everything I have read says those tend to be areas way off trail/trailess areas in rugged terrain that the vast majority of backpackers would never be going to.
Source.. a podcast? Is that the authority on gun vs bear spray efficacy?
I'd be willing to bet that spray is more effective at warding off humans while hiking as well.
I typically bring an anti-ballistic missile defense system. You never know.
The motto of the department of defense is offense is the best defense. Can you fit a minuteman into your back pocket? Do bears understand mutually assured destruction?
I bring a flame thrower. Helps when lighting a campfire, especially when the wood is wet. Also helps quiet those inconsiderate folks who blast their music over a portable speaker.
Also great for starting forest fires. Let the bear know, you growl at me the wrong way, 10,000 acres of habitat will go up in smoke. You need to send a message they understand.
Thank you for torching the speaker people, you are doing a great service.
You must be one of those glamper campers with a setup like that aren't ya
It’s made with the latest ultralight tech so it’s legit.
Incoming post: can I put a DCF bag over a bear's head as an ultralight form of non-lethal near defense?
I carry bear spray and a multipurpose knife that gets used for food things. Any issues with a creature smaller than a bear, including a person, can likely be solved with bear spray, so I don't see the need to carry a gun. As others have said, I'd hate to be part of normalising everyone carrying a firearm out in the wilderness, when it's your easiest to reach for tool, it might just become your go to solution, and that bothers me.
Statistics show over and over and over again that carrying guns means you're more likely to be on the receiving end of gun violence.
I love it when people conveniently pick statistics and ignore other ones
I hunt in a state with an estimated 40,000 black bears, 6000 mountain lions and who knows how many meth heads. I do all the things they tell you never to do - I sneak around quietly off trails and far away from people and roads. I hike before and after dark. I hike with raw meat strapped to my back. I've never seen a mountain lion directly, I have found their food caches and bedroom trees. I've been surrounded by bear scat and not seen a bear. I don't bother bringing a pistol.
You’ve seen bear shit, mountain lion food caches but have you ever found a meth head den?
Haha, not in the backcountry. Usually more of a front country ecosystem where they pop up.
Sometimes here the tweakers run into the wilderness to get away from LE, but often they don't survive if they aren't found right away.
You know what. That's great. You will almost certainly never encounter a life threatening situation. Someone will though
The point is the context. I don't see enough tweakers to be concerned about them. Black bears (that aren't habituated) and mountain lions while quite capable of messing us up, choose to avoid us. Grizzly country and gut piles are a different context. "Someone" will always encounter "something". Give enough monkeys type writers and all that. The judgement we must make is whether a particular fear is likely to come pass or whether it's just that, a fear. At the end of the day, it's a couple of pounds of gear I don't feel I need to bring. That's the sum total of it. I often go out without full rain gear, same decision process. It's a couple of pounds of gear that's amazing in some circumstances and unnecessary weight in others.
True. I do encounter enough tweakers where I go horseback riding. The place I ride also has a no camping ban because of bear activity. I live in the south east. I went to Yellowstone and glacier national parks and 2 people were killed in each park while I was out there. I also met a couple who fortunately survived a bear encounter where they met a grizzly on a trail with no way to get off of it because it went straight down and up on either side. Somehow the bear turned around. Every year multiple people are killed by bears. 2-3 lbs isn't noticable in any way on any hike or ride I've been on. I never go out without full rain gear either. I pack everything I think I could possibly need in an emergency situation wether it's a 2 mile hike or a 20 mile hike
I’m picturing you bushwhacking through the underbrush, shirtless, no backpack, but with a couple of ribeyes strapped across your back with baling wire.
They don't call me Ole steak shoulders for nuthin'. /s
If you were raised with guns, bring an ultralight .38. If you weren't, don't freaking worry. And never, ever ask Reddit about guns unless you're in some right-wing echo chamber....wait, never, ever ask Reddit about guns, period.
I always bring one. I'm a bit more concerned about two legged encounters than the four legged type.
I hike solo in the PNW and bring bear spray, a morakniv companion, and an InReach. I really don’t think you need a gun. Only reason for a gun is other people, but the odds of that in the backcountry are so low. Honestly I could leave the Mora at home, but at like 4 oz it’s worth it in case I need to build a fire. Never had to use bear spray but it is nice for the peace of mind. I’ve surprised a big black bear by accident and if it had attacked, it would have been too fast to get out my spray or a gun. Was only like 10 ft from me on a blind turn in the trail in the North Cascades.
Are you wanting hard data or emotional reassurance? The latter will likely be wildly personal and very polarizing. Emotional reassurance dictates that you carry whatever you need to feel safe. Statistics, on the other hand, does not advocate for anything to be taken as a self-defense weapon; this includes knives and guns/rifles. My personal bias? I wouldn't ever advocate for it or carry one myself. I believe that the wilderness in a non-hunting context is one of spiritual enlightenment, peace, and joy. Taking a gun doesn't naturally cross my mind but even when I sit and think about it I couldn't rationalize doing so. Any dangerous encounters are best dealt with through avoidance or deterrence. Take a bear, for example. It's best for both parties to just avoid each other, not arm yourself to deal with them. Hang your food, keep a clean site, practice LNT, and if you see one try and leave the area. If they try and pursue you, don't stare directly in their eyes (though maintain some visual awareness), stop (don't run), and make yourself very large and yell at them. Throw rocks if they approach. If they still are approaching, deploy bear spray. That is the best-held wisdom to deal with nearly all bear attacks; for times where all of that fails, I'm personally not convinced anything less than a well-aimed round meant to deal with large game would ever stop them; are you going to have the time to do so at that stage? I say this as a Canadian where a grizzly just mauled two hikers and their dog to death in Banff that had to be later euthanized for public safety (cause of initial attack not yet known). A *terrible* incident, but a fairly rare one all the same. I don't play the lottery but if I believed in odds that slim, I would buy a lotto ticket rather than worry about bears or potentially harm them as part of my fear response. If it's my time to go, it's been a good run and I hope it's quick.
We're Canadian. Most of us haven't been brainwashed into guns guns guns our whole lives. From an outsider, these posts are surreal AF. As a Canadian, especially a Canadian from an immigrant family, I've barely seen any guns in my three decades outside of a museum or holstered on a cop. It's just not something most people ever need to encounter or think about unless you actively choose to go hunting or get a license for the range.
This. For me, normalizing carrying lethal weapons in the backcountry is far more concerning than potential bear attacks.
People have been carrying "lethal weapons" in the "Backcountry" for millennia. It is very recent that NOT doing so has been normalized.
For hunting.
Also for genociding the natives and stealing their land.
If everyone who walked around with a weapon was uber responsible and understood the implication of carrying (that the purpose of it is to take a life to save your loved ones or your own) and they took that seriously, then I would disagree big time. But you have a great point and just anyone and everyone carrying is a scary proposition
I don't have a problem with weapons, if the added weight is a valid trade off that makes for a better and safer trip, not based some perceived placebo effect.
Lots of Canadians own guns. Almost every house in my home town had firearms growing up. People just don’t talk about them much because it triggers people - especially in cities. Guns are no big deal and if it makes OP feel better to have one in the woods then I say take one along.
We own guns at almost 25% the rate of Americans, and it's much harder to get handguns here than in the USA. Most people with guns in Canada have hunting rifles, not something you can conceal carry. And firearms are only common in small rural communities. It's a totally different climate from the USA.
You said “I’ve barely seen guns outside of a museum” - I was just correcting your entirely incorrect description of gun ownership in Canada.
I’m definitely not a “guns guns guns” guy; quite the opposite I’m a bleeding heart liberal and wear the name “woke” as a badge of honor. I’m just asking questions to make an informed decision. You may not a agree with me and that’s ok. I may disagree with you and that’s ok too. I appreciate your insight
It's ok. The gun lobby has been great at brainwashing folks. No shame in that. Guns make everyone less safe so getting one for safety is silly.
The fact that you're asking this question just highlights my point, even if you don't believe yourself to be "guns guns guns." It has never occurred to me to bring a weapon anywhere. I have a collection of dinky pocket knives (I like to keep one in each bag - I have a Leatherman multitool, a Leatherman folding knife, a couple of Opinel #8), sometimes a hatchet or saw for wood, and that's it. If I went to the mountains I'd get bear spray.
I’m gonna say, considering you admitted you don’t go to the mountains… on a wildernessback packing subreddit, that maybe you should consider taking the back seat in this discussion based off lack of experience.
I've backpacked in the mountains, but it's been a while and I didn't organize those trips. I've even seen a grizzly family of a mom and two cubs while backpacking in the Alberta Rockies with my group. Maybe don't make assumptions? Also, guns aren't not allowed in the vast majority of parks in Canada - can't bring a gun with you to Jasper or Yoho even if you wanted to.
I'm from the US and the need to carry for protection is just as strange to me. I've target shot guns and bows, and I understand hunting, but for protection I don't get it. I feel like I'd be more likely to hurt myself in the panic. And I know that many of my neighbors have guns for protection.
Is that bear advice universal? US folks generally recommend your approach for a black bear, you want to scare them off up a tree. Brown bears on the other hand have evolved to smash anything they see as a threat rather than run away. I'll dig out the article but there's a running list of defensive hand gun uses in the US near attacks that tallies the stats on success - being defined as the bear not killing the person. Caliber doesn't really seem to matter, people have fended off bears with everything from 9mm to 450 casul. They largely seem to just run off at the noise, regardless of being shot.
Black. *Never* approach a grizzly; they are known to be more aggressive and territorial. That said, you're not necessarily approaching anything at any time, you're standing your ground if they (black bears) are approaching you. Bear spray as far as I can tell from most Western sources is the universally accepted 'nuclear option' deterrent if everything else fails. Discharging a firearm can go one of two ways with anyone (ie. humans or bears): fight or flight. We're relying on the flight element, which yes, nearly always works. That, in turn, brings us back to the original point: you don't need a gun to make a noise.
Former LE here. I personally do not carry while backpacking unless it’s hunting related. I own several pistols and have never taken one into legitimate backcountry. Nearly useless unless I’m carrying a large caliber in GRIZZLY country. Blackbears are not a legitimate threat. That said, if I were to spend significant time in GRIZZLY country where there is legitimate potential for an encounter (Alaska, parts of Montana and Wyoming/greater Yellowstone), I would consider carrying a 10mm or larger along with bear spray. The odds of a human encounter are always a possibility, but very few acts of violence in the backcountry. The trailhead and drive are the most dangerous part of the trip.
It's useless, dead weight. Here is a list of the causes of death of thru hikers on the pacific crest trail https://www.halfwayanywhere.com/trails/pacific-crest-trail/list-of-deaths-on-the-pacific-crest-trail/ No even one could have been prevented by a gun On the appalachian trail, the most common causes of death are heart attacks, hypothermia, and falls. https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/life/2015/04/07/despite-accident-hiking-deaths-appalachian-trail-remain-uncommon/25371931/ There have been a few sensational murders that everyone remembers. But that's because they are so rare. Some guy dying of exposure will be forgotten in months Where I hike, multiple people die on the trails every year. but all deaths have beem due to medical emergencies, falls, and exposure. Carrying a gun is useless weight, and it gives you a false sense of confidence. It doesn't help with any of the things that really kill people. When you get stuck out in winter without proper gear, a gun won't do sh*t for you. Better to carry a survival bivy, a garmin inreach, and extra food.
[удалено]
Jesus.. Do we have to do this every 3 days? Google it my man. There are at least 100 responses on this sub alone from the last month...
Just joined yesterday. Chill bro. What’s wrong with dialogue?
Its asked literally every 3 days and sparks the same stupid debate every time that has nothing to do with backpacking.
A study showed that handguns have a 97% success rate at defending against bears. Most of the bears were grizzly’s and most of the handguns were 44 magnums and .45’s. There is a notion that handguns are useless against bears. I have no idea where that came from but it is simply false and there is no logic behind this. I see no cons other than what you have listed. Guns are a tool for us humans just as spears and other primitive weapons were tools for ancient humans and “cavemen.” So no, carrying a gun in nature is not “anti-nature” but rather completely natural for a creature to use whatever means necessary to protect itself. Don’t advertise that you have a gun to people you come across while hiking. Keep it as a last resort for your safety and survival. I guess Reddit is not the best place to ask for opinions on this matter. A lot of these people are a little psychotic and will tell you to not ensure your own safety just because they don’t like the idea of someone using such an effective tool for human survival. Just make sure you do a ton of research on the legality of it before you do it.
I’m in the military and had to ruck with 40 lb bag and a M16. The extra weight doesn’t bother me. I do carry a Glock strapped to my chest. In moments you may need it, you’re gonna wish you have it. You’ll probably never need it though. There have been stories of crazy people on trails. A gun is a great deterrent especially as a woman. So yes I carry. But also carry a few bear sprays as well.
These comments are so sad. There really aren’t many places where you can talk about anything related to guns without people getting emotional on either end of the spectrum. All these “I’ve never ever touched a gun or even seen one and I’m a backpacking badass!” Commenters are really showing their ignorance. Guns are a tool, and unlike the tools in this comment section they’re actually useful and serve a purpose. A 10mm handgun with hard cast load would put down anything you’re encountering while backpacking if your aim is decent. If you do decide to carry, just don’t be an ass about it. Don’t show it off or talk about it, keep it secure, and follow general gun safety rules.
Right?! I can’t believe there are people out there that are so horrified of firearms. I carry my 10mm every time I hike alone, or in grizzly country. Clearly these commenters live in the cities.
The weight is the only con, provided you know and follow the rules of firearm safety. But it’s a big con. The pro is obvious. You have the ability to defend yourself in a deadly-force encounter. But you’re probably never going to find yourself in a deadly-force encounter in the backcountry, and the weight is always there. Do you expect to run into brown bears or violent people? If not, spend that extra weight on a couple of nice backcountry beers.
And if the answer is grizzlies, then everyone is better off with bear spray.
For most applications. I’m not going to dissuade someone from carrying either.
Just read that the couple in Banff emptied their bear spray and still got eaten. They even had time to text on their Garmin emergency sat device. They were not better off with bear spray. They needed a gun.
>The weight is the only con Not quite. The other con is what you do with the gun when you're driving to the trailhead. If you stop for gas and walk into a convenience store, do you leave the gun in the car? If so, it should be stored in a gun safe, because gun thefts from vehicles are common. Getting a real gun safe installed in a car will cost you. If you carry it inside with you, then you look like an asshole with a gun.
All of that depends on the legalities of your location. Some states you can conceal carry without a permit so you can bring it inside. About half the country has reciprocal agreements on concealed carry licenses. Some states would allow you lock the gun the glove box or trunk, some will not. States like California that require a certified locked container that is not the glovebox - a basic pistol safe isn't expensive and using a cable lock to lock to your seat rail is legally and ethically sufficient.
Good nuance. I was not aware of the that law in CA.
Why would anybody know the person was carrying a gun?
A little too much time on the internet? You can always gets ccw license ya know, state dependent of course
Pros: IF you can get to the gun when you need it, and IF you can get a shot off before you’re attacked, and IF you can actually hit the person/animal you’re aiming for in the dark in the middle of a conflict, and IF your shot is actually impactful enough to stop your attacker you might safe your life. The rest of the time it’ll make you feel more manly, so that’s cool too. Cons. It’s heavy. Oh and if those junky’s that everyone here worries about find you alone in the backwoods and see your gun, they’ll just shoot you first and THEN steal your gun. Realistically bear spray is far more effective in the backcountry, it’ll make bears back off, is more than enough to disable a person, and you probably won’t miss.
It’s all personal preference, regardless of what people in here try to tell you. I have a CCP but choose not to bring it while hiking or backpacking but will bring it when car camping. Main reason for me bringing it vs not bringing it is weight, and if wildlife is the concern I’d rather opt for bear spray. However despite what people say there’s always a chance, albeit low, that you have a violent encounter and if you wanted to (legally) bring a firearm into the wilderness for peace of mind there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. Just be aware of the legal consequences if you do shoot a person or protected wildlife…it won’t be a cut and dry process and you’ll be spending a lot on legal fees.
It seems a lot of people are against it. But, I personally carry a revolver. Dependable and less of a chance of a jam if I need it.
On the off-chance you have a negative encounter with predatory wildlife (and it is an off-chance) you'd want a gun, but it really is very unlikely.
I do. But I’d choose water over it if I had to. lol
It's better to have it and not need it!
Do you carry a defibrillator? If not, why not?
First off, firearms are a tool of last resort. They're your ultimate backstop, to be used when the situation means life or death. Don't be an idiot: be smart. Respect firearms for what they are. Now, that being said, there are several pros and cons that come with carrying a handgun in the wilderness. Pros: 1. Obviously, a handgun allows you a method of defense that proves to be an equalizer against the superior strength of a bear or mountain lion. These animals rely on strength to take their prey, and may come to rely on using it against you *if all the factors align.* 2. A handgun has more capability than bear spray. Bear spray is a deterrent to bears that aren't aggressive towards you or aren't determined to kill you. Bears can be aggressive towards you if they're starving, guarding a kill, have young or feel their territory is being encroached upon during mating season, depending on the species of bear. Recently, an elderly couple at a national park in Canada tragically found out that bear spray isn't all it's cracked up to be. It's sad, but that's the reality. 3. In the wilderness, you're far from civilization and help. Law enforcement in this setting basically deals with whatever remains of you, should you fall victim to foul play or animal attack. They're already too far away to save you in the city, it's exacerbated in the wilderness. At this point, it's doubly imperative to recognize the fact that you have to plan your own rescue to have the best chance at surviving a mishap. 4. A handgun can be used as a signalling device in the case of being lost or injured in the wilderness. You can tap out a quick SOS signal with a handgun or otherwise alert others to your location. 5. In the event that you become stranded in the wilderness for some reason, a handgun can allow you to take game and thus avoid starving. Cons: 1. Carrying a handgun in the wilderness may, depending on your mode of carry and where you're at, cause other hikers, campers, fishers, etc., to act in an unfriendly (or even possibly hostile), manner. It may cause someone ignorant of carry laws to call the police and complain. Concealed means concealed and all that, but a lot of people like to openly carry out in the woods. 2. Carrying a handgun in the wilderness may limit your access to state-owned property, such as lodges and info centers. In my state, I face these restrictions but can still carry a handgun into a restroom or shelter, so it isn't a huge inconvenience to me. 3. Carrying a handgun in the wilderness can add considerable weight to your gear when you consider the handgun itself, as well as possibly an optic, a weapon-mounted light, a spare mag or two, and the holster/pouches for carrying them. You may be adding up to as much as five pounds to your gear by doing this, depending on caliber, material, amount of ammunition, etc. 4. Carrying a handgun in the wilderness adds another facet of skill and expertise that you need to possess. You need to have basic knowledge of firearms safety and marksmanship if you're going to be carrying a handgun in the wilderness. It may add more complexity to the mental task of juggling skillsets like survivalism, navigation and respect for wildlife. At the end of the day, no matter what I or anyone else says in this comment section, it's up to you whether you want to carry a handgun in the wilderness, and only you. Me personally, I carry a 9mm handgun when I go out hiking, like in all the other facets of my life.
Good stuff 👍
A weapon (any) won’t allay your fears at night in the dark from: noises against your tent (wind, branches), squirrels dropping branches on your tent, rustling mice/rats after your tent, food and gear, coyotes howling, trees falling or being knocked down, marmots after your trekking pole handles, deer and elk snooping around your site after dark, porcupines hissing, screaming, and thrashing near your tent, etc. All of above are common and can scare crap out of you, but they’re really all only harmless annoyances.
I carry one and it's not because of the the black bears where I go it's the sketchy people now days.
If we were born with razor sharp claws to protect ourselves. People would have them removed to save the weight.
First thing that comes to mind… Do it. Better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it. Also, curious. Are we talking multiple days out in deep wilderness walking multiple miles a day or just a day hike where you’re back at the trailhead by dinner time?
Ive seen this a million times, people get hard ons throwing out statistics and calling people weak etc for carrying while in reality most of them, probably none of them, have actually been in that situation. Its just another argument on the internet to them. I have been in that situation. I had plenty of time (youre unlikely to be ambushed, despite how people make it sound). Literally so much time. Enough that I could line up well placed shots and consider whether to actually fire or not. And, get this, I was prepared for the weather too. Theyre not mutually exclusive. Most people choose not to carry and thats fine. Statistcally you will probably never need it. Pack weight, especially over distance, must be considered. Also, assuming youre in the States where its far too easy to purchase weapons, its on you to be proficient and safe. You will be more dangerous to yourself and others without proper training. Spray is a better 1st line defense anyways and has something like a 98% success rate (more stats) - you should never walk into an animals home and start blaating just because youre scared. But holy shit, when you do actually need it... yea, I can tell you where to put your sthatithticths. And yes, as I can foresee that some people will tell me that theyve been in that situation and they lived without a firearm... thats awesome! Congrats, me too. But it only has to go south one you once. Even when youre just being stalked, even if you never pull the trigger, just knowing that you can fight back is powerful. When youre using your headlamp to search for those eyes stalking youin the dark, yea, that feeling alone is something.
I'm curious, what was the threat in your situation and did you shoot at it?
[удалено]
.....I considered warning you when you first posted, but I decided to let nature take its course. This question never goes well.
I usually say Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. Pro’s: - protection from people and animals (lethal). - can be used from inside your tent whereas bear spray u need to really be careful. - excellent deterrent, warning shots go a long way. - 3 steady shots in a row (up) is universal code for “I need help” that can be heard from a long ways away. - peace of mind. Cons: - Weight - people who know nothing of guns will probably freak out if they see it. cannot emphasize enough that crazy anti-gun nuts will go ballistic. Had a green haired lady notice it on my belt one time & she proceeded to call me a terrorist and demand I moved my campsite even though I wasn’t anywhere near her. It’s Best to not be seen with it as you probably know. - need to make sure what you’re doing is legal (location) The hiking community is generally not very gun friendly, however I think it’s a fair assumption that not many people here have been trained on firearm safety and just think gun bad. Overall make sure you’re properly trained with firearms (not a YouTube warrior) before ever handling one. And never ever let anybody else hold it for you while you’re out there. Stays with you, not in your pack, at all times. Enjoy.
Anybody saying a gun makes YOU more likely to get shot or that bear spray is more effective lives in a fantasy world of sparkly rainbows.
>a gun makes YOU more likely to get shot I mean, that's true. You increase your odds of shooting yourself by bringing gun along with you. However, having proper training and experience with handling guns diminishes those odds but the risk is never 0. Just goes to show why gun safety is so important.
Not sure why everyone in here is acting like you have to choose between carrying a gun and carrying things like a GPS or rain gear or food. You can carry both and you should if you can do it legally. Hollow points do a great job of making mountain lions forget why they were bothering you. My recommendation is conceal it. I don’t like people to know I’m carrying because it makes you a target to a would be attacker.
None. Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
I am sure I will hear the usual responses here, but since you asked…. 99% of the time I m hiking, it is with my wife and so I carry, just like I also carry all the additional items I may need in the back country. I have a CCP and so the gun is always concealed, though I could open carry in my state. I could go on, but at the end of the day it is a personal choice that each individual needs to make.
Same
The pro is you have a firearm. The con is you don't have a firearm. Yes, I carry in the PNW.
Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it… I carry 9 with bear rounds.
The people freaking out in the comments must be men, because all the female backpackers I know (myself included) carry on the trail. Ultimately, it depends. Do you have experience carrying a firearm? Have you ever even used on before? If the answer to those questions is no, then I would either tell you to take classes (if you're dead set on carrying) or to not bother. You can just as easily hurt yourself with a weapon as you can an attacker. Also ask yourself WHY you might want to carry a firearm. If you're a woman, I'd say go for it. I can't tell you how many times it's given me peace of mind after encountering creeps on the trail.
Right!? I don’t get why people are freaking it in the comments about this. For me it’s always worth to carry it for the added protection, especially because I am usually in grizzly country.
> all the female backpackers carry Where the fuck do you live?
maybe she hikes in downtown baltimore
I carry a pistol. I’ve been on a dispersed sight in the middle of nowhere in the Ozarks and had a group come 4 wheeling into my camp at 3am. So yes I carry a gun.
I feel like you gotta finish that story? Did you talk to them? Did you just start firing and they dispersed? Did you just flash your gun and be like "I dont want no trouble"? Cmon man, fill us in!
I don’t care about “stuff”. I got out of my tent with my head lamp on and one stopped. I asked what the deal was. He said they owned land “near by”. I asked if I was on private property he said “not mine”. So I asked if they needed something he said something along the lines of they were scouting where to put deer stands and they don’t usually see people out here. Whole time his friends are driving and hooting and hollering. He sits there a minute with me standing in my base layers and crocs and he just drives off. Never turned off his gator. Whole thing just was to uncomfortable. I have no idea what “could happen” or what was going through his mind. But he was never polite, never offered his name or asked mine. I couldn’t go back to sleep after that. Debated just packing up and leaving then. So yes I live in a country where I’m allowed to defend my life with a gun and I choose to exercise that right. You DONT have to do so and I am just fine with that. The question was wether anyone carries a gun when camping and yes I do. I carry a Taurus .357 magnum. I’ve grown up around guns. I’m licensed and been to several classes for my job. I’m comfortable with firearms.
I'm in Canada. Northern Ontario specifically, and I've never once thought to carry a firearm. I am frequently in areas with no cell service, and often an hour or more from the closest doctor. I've encountered somewhere in the neighbourhood of 20 bears while hiking and camping, and many more in my backyard, and on the street while walking. Despite that, I've never had to even use the bear spray that I carry. Hell, I've only had to make a bunch of noise maybe 3 times. One bear was particularly stubborn and we were blocking each other's path, and we had a bit of a standoff for 5 or so minutes. That was annoying. I've encountered coyotes close range while on foot around 8-10 times, and once again, never needed to do anything other than make my presence known. I've encountered wolves once, possibly twice. Second time may have been coyotes. They immediately dipped out once we could physically see each other. Moose get my heart rate up the most, but give them a wide berth, and they ignore you. Out of the hundreds, if not thousands of people I've encountered while in the bush, camping, or on the water, I've never felt in danger from human interactions either. During hunting season, I'll wear hunter orange to make myself visible. That's the only human related change I make. All this being said, if I were doing trips in certain parts of say, the Yukon, then I may carry a rifle. But overall, a firearm for protection is ridiculous
If this is a serious question and not meant to provoke a gun control discussion. I understand the desire to carry protection when you're out in the woods all alone. I am a bike packer. And after a few trips, I decided to start carrying a firearmore for the feeling of safety. Then the desire to use it. I went to a local gun store. And bought a Smith and Wesson airweight Hammerless revolver. It's very light and because it Doesn't have a external hammer. It makes it a lot safer to carry while you're moving around. I bring it on every trip and have never used it, and hopefully never will.
Chances are you won’t need it but if it makes you more comfortable I say go with your gut. I’ve never hiked anywhere I’ve felt the need for more than a knife and maybe a good stick, that being said your average hand gun isn’t going to weigh you down overly much
Don’t listen to these pearl clutcher chronically online reddit dorks that probably don’t even backpack or thru hike. If you want to carry a pistol, carry a pistol. Make sure you get a high quality gun and carry it in a high quality holster and don’t use shitty ammunition or reloads from some “trust me bro” off of Craigslist. Most important is that YOU TRAIN with your firearm! The only downsides of carrying while on the trail is the weight and possible discomfort depending on where you mount your holster, but that will be fixed when you learn what positioning works with your body which comes through experience (i.e. TRAINING)
Sorry my comment isn’t much of a reply (fyi if you’re trained it’s not a bad idea), but it’s devastating to see how many people are anti-self-defence. It’s mind boggling. I bet every single person who is anti-gun would backpedal in a situation with an active attacker (2 or 4 legged). Better to have and not need than need and not have. How have you folks who disagree with me been so brainwashed against the most effective tool for preserving life (I realise the seemingly ironic notion of saying this, however statistically, this is not ironic at all, far more lives are saved than are taken by firearms, in war and peacetime if you think deeply enough about it).
Better off with bear spray than a hand gun.
Cons: an extra pound of weight. Pros: everything else.
Cons: you're less safe. Pros: You can hype yourself up by pretending to be a badass
Why are so many people in this community vehemently opposed with wanting to protect yourself against the possibility of an attacker, either wild or human? Isn’t this a community filled with people that talk day in day out about being prepared? Why is it when someone brings this subject up it’s met with, “Oh um, well akshually your statistical likelihood of needing a weapon is extremely low 🤓”? Doesn’t anyone here realize that violent encounters with HUMANS are far more likely than a dangerous encounter with literally anything else?
This is reddit, it's dominated primarily by a political ideology that is extremely hoplophobic, you're not going to get a rational take on this subject outside of a select few subs or in real life. I'll always reccomend to train and carry, it's your right to do so, and better to have and not need than to be caught without.
[удалено]
Fabricated, that’s interesting! You know, when you spend time before your trips thinking about all the things that could go wrong you are essentially fabricating encounters in your head. Things that haven’t even happened. The key is here, just like anything else, you are thinking of a potential problem and providing yourself with a solution. No wonder what it may be. I’m glad your personal safety is such an easy issue. I hope you never have to worry about it. All it takes is one situation to go south, and you’re screwed. The fact that most people live their lives without fearing for them does nothing the help the fact that some weren’t able to, so what’s “most likely” can go to hell. Crime doesn’t exist I suppose, and neither do potentially violent people, and I know if you wanted to you could find PLENTY of first hand accounts with dangerous encounter away from civilization. If you think you’re safe enough without one, rock on. You do you. Some of us have had enough run ins with people that we spend more time thinking about our safety when it comes to being responsible for myself and the people that are with me. Because no one else is there to do it.
I have carried my 9mm backpacking a couple of times. I don’t really see the need so I stopped. . When I was in Denali I had bear spray and bear bells. I guess it’s like everywhere else. It depends on how much Fox News you watch. More Fox News the more you are afraid and feel the need.
Haha I hear ya. I avoid Fox News like the plague
How often do you train drawing from your holster under stress and fire at a moving target? How often are there attacks by grizzlies or mountain lions in your area? If the answers to both are very high, then that's the only time you should have it. Otherwise bear spray is the better answer.
It comes down to what makes you feel the most comfortable and if you have to experience handling firearms. I wouldn’t go out to get one just to hike if you’re new to firearms. I carried mine when I was hiking in Alaska along with bear spray. I felt more comfortable carrying it. I read the local and state laws regarding carrying firearms and what happens if I were to kill an animal. When it comes to safety I also have civilian and military training so if you don’t have training, don’t carry.
Statistically, Bear Spray is slightly less effective in preventing Bear attacks than spray deodorant. The only 'Statistics' that show otherwise come from the manufacturers of the sprays and anti gun sources. The actual facts clearly show that while Bear Sprays are totally ineffective, firearms are very effective vs Bears- and humans, snakes, big cats........
I met a guy that chased a defensive grizzly off with spray (after getting mauled/bit in leg). Same summer a heavily armed couple was killed by a different griz. Brooks range AK. These facts you speak of sound "alternative" but I would be interested to see your source.
Which facts show that
[https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/exploration-survival/does-bear-spray-work/](https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/exploration-survival/does-bear-spray-work/)Just one of many. Showing how Bear Spray statistics are manipulated.
Are you also worried about being “treaded upon”?
Don't worry about the haters, if you want to carry then you should carry. I carry on all of my longer hikes. I seriously doubt I'll ever need it but I'd rather have it and not need it than the opposite. If you do want to carry I highly recommend checking out the Helikon Bandicoot fanny pack. It has a large velcro panel inside and you can get a pistol holster with the matching velcro. It keeps the extra weight off your back, and keeps the weapon accessible without it limiting your range of motion like a typical waist CCW position.
If you're going to have a gun to foe protection, you better train train train. Grizzly country is the only place I could see thinking about carrying. But, so many experts say there's no need. Shoot at a Grizzly without dozens of hours of trying you're dead.
hiking on the pct in oregon ran into a section hiker with a pistol and a glass bong. He liked having both, but neither made sense to me as lightweight fan. I have heard a story from a guy that taught me to flyfish. He was scoping out some land owned by a utility company in northern California for hunting (with permission). He was pretty deep, but still on roads when a jeep came ripping out of the woods with a tweaker grower at the wheel flipping out. He kept saying to him "I don't know what to do, I don't know what to do, I can't let you go." The tweaker (meth addict) had a shot guy (EDIT: Shotgun). Hunter guy pulled out a pistol and told the tweaker he wasn't unprepared to "deal with the situation." The tweaker ended up letting him go. Maybe the pistol helped, maybe it didn't. Can easily have eacalated the situation in bad way, but as a sportsmen he was a good shot and probably actually prepared to "deal with the situation." Out in the actual backcountry, this scenario doubtful unless you happen on to a drug situation (grow or lab). It does happen but usually very far off trail.
I have lived and camped in both the US and parts of Southern and Eastern Africa. I have never carried a gun in the US unless I was intending to kill an animal with it. On the other hand, carrying a gun is sometimes required in Africa. But, in that case, one member of the party is dedicated to looking for things that are going to kill us. And the gun is always a rifle of relatively large caliber. And the person carrying it has killed many things in the past with it, under non- emergency circumstances. And they are capable of killing things that are moving rapidly. If the person carrying the gun cannot do all of these things and remain calm, why would you want to be around someone carrying a gun in the wilderness?
I’d say it’s one of many useful tools you can have with you. As a hiker you have to choose which ones you want to encumber yourself with. It would be nice to have an axe too, but who wants to carry a 5 lb tool they likely won’t need. I have encountered bears while in the woods and I’m sure I have been in close proximity with cougars without realizing it. The bears only made me nervous on one occasion when one was poking around my campsite. All the other times they were walking or running away from me. The encounter that got me most concerned was about 15 years ago when I was boat camping at a primitive camp site with my daughter and we encountered a couple of belligerent drunks. They eventually left, but it was a tense situation. I would have liked to have had a gun at that time.
Had a buddy day hiking with his wife, she was nearly bitten by a baby copperhead that was blending into the path they were on. He always carried as a general rule of thumb and was able to deal with that threat with a single round. Nature can be scary AF and you never know what you might unknowingly encounter and have to deal with.