This is what can be stated with absolute certainty:
Shooting any living creature with non CNS shots, is a “hope”. Maybe it decides to stop, and then again maybe it doesn’t. Even if the majority decide to stop- there is one, somewhere that won’t. This would be psychological stops.
Again, data indicates 100%, far more than "hope". "The one that doesn't stop" statistically may be out there, but after well over 100 cases, we're still waiting for it.
Shooting anything living in the CNS- makes it stop. Disrupt the CNS and it is done. This would be physiological stops.
Those are terminal facts.
Now, hitting the CNS is different matter. So too would be the difference between the probability of psychological stops from body shots, or shots to the face and head.
I've said this before, but
the data tells us "CNS stops" is a red herring. It may be what you
think is necessary, but that doesn't mean it is. The data clearly says it's not.
For a long time I heard stories about bullets "skipping" off a bear's head, I dismissed them as dumb BS because
I couldn't imagine it actually happening, rather than looking at the data. This year on Kodiak, I was able to see first hand that yes, this absolutely could happen, and did, with a 180 grain 30-06 at about 15 feet. Then paying closer attention to actual cases, it happens in actual accounts, more than once. Coincidentally, one was with a 454 Casull not far from where this 30-06 case took place. After a failed head shot, the guy's account was that body shots turned the bear. The data tells us there's a far greater chance of a bullet deflecting and not actually reaching a bear's CNS, than getting chewed on by shooting the bear in the body.
30-06 deflected off this brown bear's head. Killed with shots to the body.
I've heard the question "how much penetration does it take to reach a bear's brain?" Yes, the answer is very little, as long as you have the option of picking your shot. I've done it with a black bear with my grouse loads, no problem, but I had all the time in the world to do it. A 22LR works about as well in similar circumstances.
Black bear killed with a "grouse load". 110 plated 30 cal bullet over about 3 grains of pistol powder. Very easy if you get to pick your shot, but not what we're talking about here.
Make a fist, with fingers curled in and thumb laying over your index finger. The side of your fist where your thumb is, is the size and shape of a big bear's frontal brain profile. Now add sloped bone and nasal cavity over that. You may consider yourself to be a good enough shot to put any bullet through that any time, and under any circumstances, and hell, maybe you are. I'm not, never will be, nor will the vast majority of any other shooters be. Suggesting people even aspire to this is counter to what we know works, better.
Now I’m paraphrasing: you say-
“I don’t need to be all that good, shoot a bear anywhere and ‘data’ says I will live”.
I say- “the only way to know tThe outcome is to disrupt the CNS- I.E. the brain. The brain is a relatively small target. Bears move quickly, though generally straight at you. I need to train to hit 4-6” targets at high speed, on demand, under stress. Even if I do not hit the brain directly- though it is a much higher probability shooting at the head/face than the body; things shot in the face/head on average react much more than things shot in the chest”.
How many bears have you actually shot like this? Have you ever had the experience of doing exactly what you're imagining you're going to do? I'm not saying you wouldn't be successful, but you seem okay with speculating "on average" chances with something you suggest doing, that rarely happens, but ignore what happens over, and over and over, and needs no imagining to understand. That you call "hope". 100% isn't hoping, it's doing what has shown to actually work.
Which one of those can you genuinely reason will have a higher success rate across 1,000 shootings- the “I don’t need to be very good”? Or the “I need to be very good and shoot things in the head”?
Why try to "reason" what we "think" will work rather than look at data? Just look at what does work and how well it works. Previously I "reasoned" that a bullet wouldn't ever really deflect off a bear's skull. Look where "reasoning" got me. And you pointed out that my 147 FP FMJ has shown to be more prone to this very deflection than the same in a hardcast, excellent point and thank you, seriously.
As to what I "reason" would work best? Again, looking at the data, that would be a shooter with your level of skill putting multiple shots in a bear's chest, with a 9mm or larger. That to me is hard to dispute as the most likely and most successful combination 1,000 times over. If you ever had to save my ass, that's exactly what I'd ask you to do.
With your position you are hoping it works and working on probability (maybe). With my position- I am doing the things in my power to actualize the outcome I desire.
Umpteenth time, not hoping, looking at what works over and over and over. However, becoming a better shooter than I am is a 100% good suggestion. No downsides, at all, period, end of sentence.
If that’s the case- then how are you positive that my statements that lasers trainers aren’t the best training tool isn’t true?
I'm always trying to learn, and take what you say about shooting seriously, that's why I was second guessing what I was doing, because you told me to. With more thought and experimentation, here's what I think is happening in my particular "laser trainer" case:
About 10 years ago I started needing reading glasses, but can see fine at distance. I won't wear glasses for much the same reason you recommend against red dots (get wet, dirty, broken, too many things to go wrong - and too much hassle). That said, without glasses, I also, literally, cannot focus on front sights. Over the last several years, unconsciously, I've shifted to a target focus with "soft sight focus", because without glasses, that's the only way it works for me.
I tried the laser with glasses, to where I can focus on the sights. Focus shifting back and forth, exactly like you stated, started happening immediately. It did not work. Doesn't happen without glasses, because in my case, it can't. I have to use a target focus and sights in a "peripheral" way and not shift focus to them. I'm guessing that's why I was not seeing what you said I would.
We are back to- “I’m real strong”. Ok, how much did you lift? “I don’t know, but it was a a lot”.
I never stated that someone couldn’t shoot slow (and 1 shot per second is slow) and shoot a 4+ inch groups at 7 yards. I believe I stated- at speed under stress (or some version of that). I’ll say it again- laser trainers are not the best tool for training. Maybe not good at all for most. Everything about them tries to pull your attention away from everything that helps you hit at speed under stress, and put that attention into the past- that no longer matters.
Well, ya bring what ya got. I have no illusions I can shoot as well as you; that's laughable to me. But...I also have no illusions that I need to be as good a shooter as you are. Better is always better, and thanks for the advice, but I'm better than most of the hacks I know that are running around the woods and batting 1,000 on bear defense, so at least I'm in good company.
