Wyoming: Another Successful Handgun Defense Against a Grizzly Bear

Wyoming Grizzly Bear Shot Handgun

Courtesy Troy Nemitz

On May 31, 2018, at about two o’clock in the afternoon, 23-year-old Noah Kolis was guiding three friends from Chicago. They started at his boyhood home near Cora, Wyoming. His dog, a Chesapeake-Lab mix, was with them, heading to some rock formations nearby. Polis was carrying his 460V Smith & Wesson revolver. Two other men in the party were carrying bear spray.

The two men with bear spray had fallen 50 yards behind when the dog alerted to something. Kolis thought it was a large animal. Then he saw the bears, a grizzly sow and cubs, uphill from their location.

He yelled at the dog, but it was too late. The dog came running back. The grizzly mama charged, moving extremely fast. His friend from Chicago bolted back down the trail. Polis had his revolver out, as the bear came to a stop, just a dozen feet away.

From jhnewsandguide.com:

“I was just thinking, ‘Don’t make me do this, don’t make me do this,’” Kolis said.

As he scanned the ground where the grizzly stood on all fours about a dozen feet away, the sight of the claws spurred the thought “Those will kill you.” His gut told him a second charge could be imminent. Adrenaline pumping, “my mind was quiet,” he said, as he then calmly pulled the trigger on his Smith & Wesson Model 460V revolver. The bullet struck the stationary bear in the cheek, and she fell.

Potential harm to himself averted, Kolis started “cursing up a storm,” mad at the situation and himself, as the bloodied bruin rolled down a steep hillside in the Bridger-Teton National Forest’s Boulder Basin. He shot at least three more times to end the sow’s misery, knowing the gravity of what had just happened.

“With the pull of my finger,” he said, “I just killed three bears.”

Grizzly Bear Revolver Shot Wyoming

The Wyoming Game and Fish department investigated the shooting. They found it to be justified self defense.

From gillettenewsrecord.com:

“The dog saw the bear, the bear came after the dog, the dog ran back to the people,” he related.

The grizzly charged “head on” toward one man who was legally carrying a handgun and shot it several times as it ran to 10 feet in front of him.

“It happened really quickly,” Lund said.

One hiker carrying bear spray had it ready but couldn’t spray the bear because the other man was in front of him.

The sow had been involved in conflicts with people before. Cora, Wyoming is inside the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE). Grizzly bears in the GYE have a bad record of being threatening to humans. In 2017, over five percent of the grizzly bears in the GYE were either shot and killed in self defense, or killed by government officials after being shown to be an serious threat to people and their property.  In 2017, that was 35 bears out of a population of about 690.

The bear Kolis shot was wearing a collar. The collar showed the bear had been trapped and collared after conflicts in the Upper Green River area. The sow had two cubs with her. There is a good chance the cubs won’t survive through the winter. Bear cubs have a high mortality rate. They are often killed and eaten by adult boar grizzlies.

The 460 S&W magnum is one of the most powerful pistol cartridges chambered in a revolver. This case illustrates how effective it can be at stopping a grizzly bear. Handguns have stopped bear attacks 97% of the time in documented cases.

Bear spray might have worked in this instance. It can be effective. In the studies most cited to recommend bear spray, the researchers refuse to release their data. Numerous flaws have been found in their methodology. The primary flaw seems to be in the selection of what cases to include in the data base. Most of the cases involving bear spray were with non-aggressive bears. In a study of firearm effectiveness by the same authors, most of the cases involved aggressive bears.

In this case, the bear had stopped only a dozen feet away. The situation was extremely dangerous. Kolis isn’t exactly a big game hunter. He said the biggest thing he had killed previously was a rabbit he hit with his car. Still, he was calm in the face of an extremely deadly threat. Others have said a magnum revolver in the hand calmed them enormously.

From The Longest Minute-Terrifying Bear Attack:

  As I pulled the revolver out, a sudden calm came over me, and I knew everything would be fine.

Kolis kept his cool and did what he had to do.


©2018 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch


  1. avatar Bloving says:

    “The 460 S&W magnum is one of the most powerful pistol cartridges chambered in a revolver.”
    What? They don’t make them in 6.5. Creedmore?
    Ha! Beat ya to it, Gov!

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      The only serious calibers start with .5

      1. avatar WadeJ says:

        Everyone already forget about the .9mm?

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          I should have been more descriptive – .500

          My bad.

        2. avatar K42inPO says:

          .9mm would be like a needle or a nail! Ballistic coefficient would be good, and speed ought to be quite high, so the energy would be high and trajectory would be flat. But the energy transfer to target would have to stink.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          .9 mm has never failed to stop a bear with a single shot. *Never!*

    2. avatar The Chuck Norris of Rifle Calibers says:

      The Gov will be returning soon. Maybe tomorrow if I can’t think of another awesome Creedmoor themed screen name by tomorrow morning.

    3. avatar Creedmoor E Lee says:


      Waiting for Glock perfection 6.5 Creedmoor before I throw all my other guns away.

      1. avatar Toni says:

        was it magnum research that had a revolver that the smallest chambering for it was .45-70 and went with a few similar straight-wall cartridges up to .50-140 in the late 80’s early 90’s? have not been able to find it since. i remember at the time it was touted as an excellent backup gun for big game guides

    4. avatar tmm says:

      It appears the new caliber war is 6.5 Creedmore vs everything else.

      I hear the 6.5 Creedmore not only kills your soul, but accelerates the expansion of the universe.

      1. avatar Stereodude says:

        I thought it killed the souls of family members too?

  2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

    One of his friends ran for ; A. Help or B. Chicago. An experience like this could really ruin a pair of under ware.

    1. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

      You don’t have to be faster than the bear……..

    2. avatar Hannibal says:

      Friend had the right idea… you don’t have to be faster than the bear, just faster than the guy next to you…

  3. avatar Alex Waits says:

    And during my research for a trail gun, all I found were articles pointing to bear spray as the only effective means of animal defense. :/

    1. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

      I believe the bear spray mafia cares more about the bear than the person.

      1. avatar Kendahl says:

        Years ago, Backpacker Magazine published the results of tests on pepper sprays advertised for defense against bears. They were attacked for proposing that hikers bring (horrors!) a weapon into the wild. The risk of being killed and eaten is supposed to add spice to the backpacking experience. My personal position is that I will give up tools like spray and guns, which are the products of human intelligence, when bears give up teeth and claws.

        Bear spray has its place. It works faster than a bullet and isn’t as difficult to aim as a gun. However, bears have been known to return after the spray wears off. That’s when you need a permanent solution. Note that the sow in this incident was a known problem bear.

        1. avatar Jackass Jim says:

          Quote from a genuine maroon: “Bear spray has its place. It works faster than a bullet and isn’t as difficult to aim as a gun. However, bears have been known to return after the spray wears off. “

    2. avatar CC says:

      Bear spray has its uses, but there are a lot of conditions where it won’t work well and quite a few were it wont work at all. Bears stalking you are generally upwind, but bears you surprise could be downwind including in very very strong winds.
      It is also expensive to train on bear spray, and without training n wind you will miss the bear. Most bear spray is no good once you’ve used any amount for training since the gas leaks out after the first use.

      1. avatar Fred Ward says:

        Grizzlies love bear spray! It seasons the meat.

  4. avatar 2Asux says:

    The bear stopped before being shot; the threat stopped.

    According to the reading, the armed hiker had opportunity enough to retreat to safety, at least to safety behind those carrying bear spray. As the man stated, his shots killed three bears, animals in natural habitat acting as animals will. Invading the spaces of a wild animal, then killing the creature for acting normally is inexcusable.

    One cannot deny that not trekking into the wild removes the threat of attack from wild animals, almost entirely. It also removes the need or justification for carrying a handgun with the force of a canon in those places not ventured. Indeed, a handgun of such calibre as reported can only be used to kill, not to “stop the threat”. Our erstwhile gun owner couldn’t stop the threat of bear attack without killing the bear.

    “The Great Outdoors” should be left to nature to manage. Humans have enough on their plates to manage their households, let alone a wilderness.

    1. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

      So the human population should be placed under house arrest worldwide? See, it’s guys like you that make it possible for guys like Trump to be in office. Thanks.

      1. avatar daveinwyo says:

        I have walked the walk. Bear spray works. I recreate in the hills here and have had to use it. And yes I had a gun. Bear spray is very compressed in the can. It will reach 40′ but is most effective at about 30′. And don’t talk about wind till you have been in the Wind River Range. The guy with the gun should have also had spray. PS DO NOT SPRAY IN YOUR EYES! (I also think the actual number of successful use are like DGUs, underreported.)

    2. avatar Rick says:

      Stupid rant.

    3. avatar The Chuck Norris of Rifle Calibers says:

      Obviously he should have been carrying a 6.5 Creedmoor. Bears might just be dumb animals, but they’re smart enough to know not to mess with a man with a Creedmoor.

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        I admit to an unfamiliarity with the term, “6.5 Creedmoor”. If it is some sort of firearm, you may be correct. If that sort of weapon can intimidate by its mere presence, it may offer an effective alternative to actually unnecessarily shooting an animal.

        1. avatar Mark N. says:

          Animals are not intimidated by firearms, since they do not know what they are. Second, a wounded grizzly is an extremely dangerous animal. Third, is it unethical to simply wound an animal, whether in self defense or when hunting, and leave it to suffer until it bleeds to death or dies of a resulting infection and starvation. If y’all city folk are intimidated by nature, even though you too are animals, well then y’all can stay home. Just don’t tell the rest of us what to do.

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          ” Second, a wounded grizzly is an extremely dangerous animal. Third, is it unethical to simply wound an animal, whether in self defense or when hunting, and leave it to suffer until it bleeds to death or dies of a resulting infection and starvation.”

          On this we agree. Even the hiker in question understood that the cubs are likely to soon die due to the lack of the mother bear. Where we disconnect is that the mother bear should have been shot even once.

        3. avatar The Chuck Norris of Rifle Calibers says:

          This is how firearms normally work among humans. The vast majority of defensive g un uses do not involve a shot fired.

          The 6.5 Creedmoor is a newer round that is revolutionizing the firearms world due largely to it’s ability to be just as effective at a half mile as it is at a half yard and also it’s logic defying insane accuracy. By now even the bears know not to mess with a Creedmoor man.

        4. avatar 2Asux says:

          Ah…a new bullet. Thank you.

        5. avatar Huntmaster says:

          This is what happens when you don’t have enough help on 2nd shift to supervise the patients during free computer access.

        6. avatar New Continental Army says:

          2ASUX, then you should know 6.5 Creedmoor is such an amazing and magical round, that is revolutionizing shooting, that the round will know the instant it’s fired, wether what it’s fired at is a real threat or not, then take appropriate action. You really need to get up to speed on this amazing new round that will revolutionize every aspect of your daily life.

        7. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “You really need to get up to speed on this amazing new round that will revolutionize every aspect of your daily life.”

          Yes, I have been properly informed the item is a bullet, with but one purpose, and that is to kill at range. The mind of man finds inexhaustible ways to kill itself, while bereft of ways to do less harm to one another.

        8. avatar Ed says:

          2Asux = Faggot.

          End of line.

        9. avatar CC says:

          Yes, I have been properly informed the item is a bullet, with but one purpose, and that is to kill at range. The mind of man finds inexhaustible ways to kill itself, while bereft of ways to do less harm to one another.

          Yet mass violence and individual violence and criminal violence have all been steady falling as they do

        10. avatar ironicatbest says:

          @MarkN, I don’t know about that, while out hiking I gained the curiosity of three coyotes, they followed me for quite some time. I picked up a stick and aimed it at them, they took off running

        11. avatar Scoutino says:

          Pssst, Sam, you are forgetting to switch names again.

    4. avatar Alex Waits says:

      Your ignorance is showing.
      Troll somewhere else. Thanks.

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        Your ignorance is showing.
        Troll somewhere else. Thanks.”

        Advocating protecting nature from the most vicious, ruthless, violent predator on the planet is “ignorance”. What a strange world you must inhabit.

        1. avatar Mark N. says:

          You are welcome to go visit a grizzly and give it a nice hug. Please!

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          “You are welcome to go visit a grizzly and give it a nice hug. Please!”

          Actually, I’ve seen that done successfully on one of the nature channels. Associated, but only just, your Alaskan cousins do have a whacking great joke about that.

        3. avatar Hannibal says:

          There are a great man ill-advised things that have been done. Invading Russia has been done (more than once!). That doesn’t mean it would be a good idea for you to try and march on Moscow in December.

          Another ill-advised thing would probably be trusting an aggressive grizzly 12 feet away. If that was indeed the measurement he would have pretty much no chance to respond if she decided to attack. 12 feet is not far. Might he have been able to successfully scare her off with a shot or might she have left him alone after a minute? Maybe. Maybe not. If you want to play those odds it’s your neck.

        4. avatar 2Asux says:

          “If you want to play those odds it’s your neck.”

          Is not twelve feet within the effective range of bear spray? Others in the party had the spray. Why not everyone? Yes, twelve feet may seem to demand a shot fired, but if not there in the first place, neither the handgun, nor the spray would have been needed.

        5. avatar Kendahl says:

          “ ‘You are welcome to go visit a grizzly and give it a nice hug. Please!’
          Actually, I’ve seen that done successfully on one of the nature channels.”

          There were a couple of naturalists who tried that in eastern Siberia. They aren’t doing that any more. The bears killed them.

        6. avatar 2Asux says:

          “There were a couple of naturalists who tried that in eastern Siberia. They aren’t doing that any more. The bears killed them.”

          Isn’t that most likely because the researchers should not have been there atall?

        7. avatar CC says:

          Advocating protecting nature from the most vicious, ruthless, violent predator on the planet is “ignorance”. What a strange world you must inhabit.

          2Asux aka cisco kid, Megafuana is not endangered by human hunting or human self defense from violent predator attacks — but from habitat loss.

          The left advocates open borders which by definition means massive future habitat loss in the US.

          By the way bear spray is very often ineffective.

        8. avatar 2Asux says:

          “Megafuana is not endangered by human hunting or human self defense from violent predator attacks — but from habitat loss.”

          Is not invading the habitat of wild animals, animals who have expressed not desire for your presence, also leading, ultimately to loss of habitat? If the wild animals are forced to learn that humans are apex predators, do those wild animals not surrender habitat, and move to avoid discovery by humans? When those animals relocate from fear, or die off, do humans not find it acceptable to take over those habitations for their selfish benefit?

    5. avatar DrewR says:

      A bear can cover 12 feet in less than a second, so the threat was definitely not over.

      As to you second point, I live in the woods, you ninny, what am I supposed to do, not walk around my property? Griz don’t usually prowl around here, though fwp just had to relocate one they trapped about 10 miles away, so I live well within its 100 square mile range. I’ve had mountain lions and black bear on the property my whole life. If I had to stay out of wild places I couldn’t ever leave my house. Hell, I’m even typing this response while sitting on a log in the woods, taking a break from clearing fallen trees.

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        “A bear can cover 12 feet in less than a second, so the threat was definitely not over.”

        Presuming the animal would continue the attack? Isn’t that a bit of what you lot call “pre-crime punishment”?

        Why one would choose to “live in the woods” is beyond me. It is no longer necessary to endure the privations of such an isolated condition. Is it not also true that clearing fallen trees, and removing the underbrush causes forest fires to be more devastating? I seem to remember reports that human habitation in forests has made forest fires more fiercesome over the last fifty years.

        1. avatar DrewR says:

          First, we live in the woods mostly because we don’t want to be surrounded by obnoxious condescending pricks like you.

          Secondly I’m not clearing brush, I’m clearing fallen trees, which I use for heat in the winter and the removal of which does not increase either the propensity for or intensity of wild fires, your understanding of that subject is as incomplete as your understanding of firearms; or of nature, for that matter, since you seem to think a bear has the ability to recognize a gun.

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          “…you seem to think a bear has the ability to recognize a gun.”

          Actually, no. Before this moment, I did not know what “6.5 Creedmoor” described. I rather hoped it was some sort of item that could despatch bears and other animals without actually shooting them.

        3. avatar 16V says:

          2A, Temporarily bored, or just see the current crop of newbs and couldn’t resist the smell of fresh meat, as it were?

          Regardless, hope you’re well. “Privations” was a nice touch, I like anachronisms.

        4. avatar 2Asux says:

          ” “Privations” was a nice touch, I like anachronisms.”

          You would prefer a more America word, such as “dumb-assery”?

        5. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Does the floor nurse know you’re back on the computer again???

        6. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

          Try Googling “forest fire fuel ladder” to remedy your ignorance. My home is at 4500′ backing up to the Flathead National Forest…we frequently have deer, elk, black bear and the occasional grizzly wander through our property. When I cut firewood or clear brush for fire mitigation I have a Ruger .454 Casull in a cross chest holster…fortunately in 20 years I have not had to use it against aggressive wildlife….however, I will continue to carry it just in case an apex predator is feeling owly and decides to take it out on me.

          It is probably a good thing that you do not live in the Northern Rocky Mountains…we have enough visitors and tourons through ski season and the Summer to keep our emergency services occupied.

        7. avatar 2Asux says:

          Oh yes. I honor the hardships, and overcoming of those hardships, of my ancestors. Who provided a world where such primitive living conditions are relics of history. Cities and towns are not prisons, but remarkable circuses of sights, sounds, opportunities, entertainment, and mostly civilized living.

          You are correct. I would never attempt replicate the conditions of my ancestors in the Northern Rockies, nor the northern reaches of Denmark. I rather think that is also the conclusion tens of millions of other Americans who do not savor the pioneering life. For me, having to overnight in a Motel 6 is my idea of “roughing it”.

        8. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

          Oh Golly, a dilettante Troll…how droll.

          So happy in your ignorance of where your food, fabrics, building materials, etc comes from…please do not let any of us elucidate you in the Reality of Living.

          Hearken, I believe I hear your Nanny calling…best you toddle along.

          PS: thank you ever so much for not deigning to visit where we mere yokels eke out our existence.

        9. avatar DrewR says:

          Hey, Old Guy, you don’t live too far away. I’m in Marion, about 3500 ft elevation. Elk are right up on the mountain next to me but don’t come through the property much. Anyone who can’t understand why we would want to live out here is more than welcome to stay the heck out of Montana.

        10. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

          Amen, Brother…too many Californicators / Washetonians relocating here to get away from the $h!t$how in their States…and, then proceeding to try and mold us into a clone of exactly what they Left…WTF?

        11. avatar P Hall says:

          2A: You’re a city boy, aren’t you?

        12. avatar 2Asux says:

          “2A: You’re a city boy, aren’t you?”

          Oh my, what gave me away?

        13. avatar CC says:

          Megafuana is not endangered by human hunting or human self defense from violent predator attacks — but from habitat loss.

          The left advocates open borders which by definition means massive future habitat loss in the US.

      2. avatar oldandshaky says:

        To reply in a progressive snooty way, I would look through my lorgnette and ask, “Why you don’t live in a city big enough to be effectively a socialist utopia? People who don’t live in place crowded enough to be serviced by mass transportation are incomprehensible, simply incomprehensible. How food is produced in the countryside, how mines are located and supplied with manpower and the like are beneath my consideration, absolutely. Nobody needs so much fresh air.” That’s something like what I would say if I were totally ** a******.

        1. avatar 2Asu says:

          I rather thought that large towns and cities controlled by Republicans are void of all you noted.

        2. avatar CC says:

          ‘towns controlled by republicans”

          nearly the entire elevation of US murder over similar demographic developed democracies occurs in handful of Democrat cities.

    6. avatar rt66paul says:

      1. If you use a smaller round against the bear, it will just keep on coming.
      2. If you walk or run away, the bear will chase you and attack.
      3. If you stand your ground, the bear could charge and even if you shot her, she could kill you before you could get out of the way.
      4. If you stand your ground, the bear will attack as soon as the cubs make any noise.
      5. If you were along for the hike, you could take the place of your host with the hand cannon and use bear spray, if needed.

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        “5. If you were along for the hike, you could take the place of your host with the hand cannon and use bear spray, if needed.”

        You allow this is an option. Why not first on the list?

        1. avatar Huntmaster says:

          I don’t think the term hand cannon means the same thing to us as it does to you…

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          “I don’t think the term hand cannon means the same thing to us as it does to you…”

          No fear of learning, here. Please increase my knowledge, with an explanation of your comment.

        3. avatar CC says:

          if you go camping in the northern provinces of Canada it is more common than not to see people with mini-14 who are not even on hunting trips for protection

    7. avatar Kendahl says:

      No, the threat was still imminent. Bears can run 30 mph. That’s 44 feet per second. Had the bear decided to continue, Kolis would not have had time to fire before it reached him.

    8. avatar 8ASUX says:

      Incorrect re read the article once again. The authorities in a liberal state found him to be justified. That’s about as strict scrutiny as you can go up against in a DGU. But, if you feel hot sauce works better, by all means use it.

      Oh, and by the way, if we get rid of the 2A, as you do often mention, we might as get rid of the entire bill of rights, and bring back Draw and Quartering. Progress. The 8th amendment prevents the all mighty government from really striking the kind of fear you want to see imposed on the innocent, after all.

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        “The authorities in a liberal state found him to be justified.”

        Yes, they did. But simply because a body benefits from a “legal” ruling doesn’t make it “right”, does it?

        1. avatar 8ASUX says:

          Hmm. That’s sounds like a rather conservative statement, wouldn’t you agree?

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Hmm. That’s sounds like a rather conservative statement, wouldn’t you agree?”

          Difficult when such is returned, isn’t it?

        3. avatar 8ASUX says:

          Why are you using two names interchangeably?

      2. avatar Toni says:

        yes i agree though i would propose that any and all traitors in govt positions should face Hang, draw and quarter. if it was the case you might just see a large number of people in govt leaving office because of the danger of the peoples wrath. they are the only group i feel it should apply to. there are other just as effective ways of dealing with other criminals in society that are more humane. the reason why i feel it should be applied to traitors in govt is that their actions affect whole generations and even multiples of generations in a nation not just a few people.

    9. avatar 7.62x54r says:


      Where is the border that humans are forbidden to cross in your world? Are we to be confined to Manhattan? Central Park would be off limits, of course. We can’t be running over squirrels with our fat tired bikes.

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        Haven’t posed the idea of any restrictions, as in zoning, or fences, or guard rails. Only questioning the propriety of killing animals for acting as animals will. Questioning whether it is right in nature to trespass on nature and take life which is only acting within its nature. Animals cannot reason. Doesn’t that put on us the responsibility to not place them in circumstances where death is the only response to natural reactions?

        1. avatar Mark N. says:

          “Animals cannot reason.” Boy, are you behind on you science classes. First of all, humans are animals, and if we cannot reason, quitcherbitchen. Second, there are a substantial number of animals that have high intelligences and an ability to reason. Ask anyone who hunts wild pig–them suckers are smart! (Actually, pigs in general are pretty smart.)

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          “Animals cannot reason.” Boy, are you behind on you science classes. First of all, humans are animals,”

          I rather think we all understand that “animals” used in the current context excludes humans. The question on the table is the ethical and moral question of intentionally invading the realm of “wild” animals, then killing them for what arguably passes for self-defense, or warning of self-defense. Wild animals in urban centers are problematic enough for humans, why is it necessary to go out of the way to encroach on the natural habitat of wild animals? Is “live and let live” no longer a human virtue?

        3. avatar Pg2 says:

          “Trespass on nature”….so you are saying we should be confined to urban and suburban zones. No thanks. Humans have as much as right to this planet as any other animal.

        4. avatar 2Asux says:

          “Humans have as much as right to this planet as any other animal.”

          Are you comfortable declaring that humans are no different from non-human animals? That as the most developed form of animal, with intelligence, reason, understanding and the learned ability to control our urges, we simply operate on “survival of the fittest”?

    10. avatar Sal Chichon says:

      You are an idiot.

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        “You are an idiot.”

        I pray you have not exhausted your entire intellect with the above.

        1. avatar Sal Chichon says:

          Not even close, buttercup. You are just getting precisely the response your condesending attitude deserves. I hope you drop your soy latte on your pussy today. Oh(!), and have a shitty day, okay? Okay.


    11. avatar drunkEODguy says:

      fuvk me that’s the most dumbass thing I’ve hear this year. Impressive . How about another take for you green peace weenie; Apex predator challenges another apex predator and dies.

      Also, check out how fast bears can close 12 feet. It probably would have been on him already if he had tried to react to a second charge.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Also, check out how fast bears can close 12 feet. It probably would have been on him already if he had tried to react to a second charge.”

        To repeat myself (which I dearly love to do), had the hiker and his companions not been in “bear country”, the shooting would not have ensued.

        1. avatar CC says:

          100 million Americas are in bear country and bear country includes some of the most settled areas of the US.

          My sister lives 18 miles from Manhattan and in her town garbage storage now includes bear resistance, and 11 miles west of her a hiker was killed by a black bear a coupe of years ago.

    12. avatar Trotline says:

      Cannons fire shells that explode. Handguns, like the S&W 460 Magnum do not fire exploding bullets. If hit by a 460 Magnum you may explode, and a fine, pink, misty explosion it would be.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “If hit by a 460 Magnum you may explode, and a fine, pink, misty explosion it would be.”

        Delightful. So satisfying when one of the “POTG” shed the mask and declare themselves. Rather than use logic, facts and reason to defeat ideas, the favored solution is to kill the opposition. Brilliant !

        1. avatar Mark N. says:

          In other words, you believe it is somehow unethical to defend oneself from an animal attack. Well okay then. No one says that you must have a survival instinct. What a nice bubble to live in.
          By the way, I live in a town f around 100,000, surrounded by mountains on three sides, and farms stretching south. Despite out urban environment, we still get visited by coyotes, black bears, rattle snakes and even the occasional cougar. Should we roll up the streets and move to a “modern” mecca full of millions of people? I don’t think that would work either. Even LA has cougars and coyotes. Coyotes live in NYC’s Central Park. Towns in the northeast are being visited by aggressive wolf-coyote hybrids. Ohio and Pennsylvania suffer numerous deaths in vehicle-dear accidents. Get a clue: the animals, they walk among us!

        2. avatar 2Asux says:


          Wildlife that visits, or has not relocated beyond the boundaries of urban centers, can be dealt with in a variety of ways. Going into the natural environment of wild animals is completely unnecessary. The days of the pioneers are long gone. Family farms are an anachronism, inefficient, and a drain on taxpayers (subsidies, yes?); commercial farming results in cheaper goods (making it easier to meet the needs of the society). There is no necessity of living in or near untamed flora and fauna. No necessity, merely an affectation or a need to generate a feeling of being a robust human because of “living off the land”. When one visits a neighbor’s house, it is not considered circumspect to demand the neighbor accommodate you to your pleasure. When visiting nature, an intrusion is the same as becoming an unwelcome dinner guest. If you disturb your host, it is your responsibility to leave without further damage. Shouldn’t the same apply when visiting, no, intruding upon natures preserves?

        3. avatar Toni says:

          no commercial farms are not more efficient, not in the long term. they deplete the soil leaving it so that the crops that they grow are no longer viable. sure they are for a few years but i have seen so many that the only way they survive is put more and more chemicals on the soil (which deplete everything that make the soil alive and healthy) which makes the problem worse until it does not matter how much they put on the yields are going down. most family farms however tend to look after their soil more as it is the lifeblood of the farm. without good soil the family does not eat and most family farms want to be able to pass that farm on to their kids and grandkids.

          good to see you believe in good old slavery to the system 2ASUX

        4. avatar 2Asux says:

          Rather makes the case for hydroponics, no?

        5. avatar Toni says:

          nope not at all. it does make a case for small farmers who have a vested interest in maintaining and improving the quality of the soil. yes there are a few that dont but at best they last a generation before the land just wont grow enough to provide for them as well as an income. aquaponics can be a good way as it combines animals (fish) along with plants to maintain a balance.

        6. avatar CC says:

          Sam I am: firstly why are posting as both 2Asux and Sam I am ?

          Secondly; ‘”So satisfying when one of the “POTG” shed the mask and declare themselves.”
          There are up to about 200 million Americans living in gun owning households, and you generalize on one persons comment (which you misrepresented anyway).

        7. avatar The Return Of jwm. says:

          CC, I’ve pointed out before that sam i am and 2asux are the same troll. He answers questions and makes statements in the same stream as both people.

          Yet I have folks here that argue it ain’t so. 16v is convinced he’s a brilliant, pro gun person trying to sharpen our skills. I say a troll is a troll. And trolling is a sign of mental illness. Look it up.

        8. avatar 16V says:

          JWM. He is really on our side. Either that, or he’s an 8th-degree-blackbelt troll. Based on an extended convo with him years ago.

          Someday when I’m insanely bored I’ll try to find it in the archives.

      2. avatar Weapon Of War says:

        Ummm, yeah, 10mm is like artillery. It not only explodes, but will dismember you in mere seconds. Don’t know about this ‘460’ thingy.

    13. avatar JoshuaS says:

      I grew up in a town of 40k, a suburb of Los Angeles (though we didn’t think of it like that)

      Just on my street, while growing up, we had one bear shot in the park, another captured and tagged, another put in a zoo (it liked hot tubs) and at least three more never caught that got in trash, etc. In fact, the week before I moved out we came back to one on our front lawn. Visited last Christmas and my uncle had one in his tree outside his bedroom window, and he lived 2 miles further from the hills than we.

      Also had a few mountain lions. One got its head in a fence and officers had to shoot it as kids were on the street walking to school.

      So even if we should all move to urban sprawl, there will always be someone on the border with nature.

      Seriously. Had a 20 min commute to USC stopped by a mountain lion hit on the freeway.

      I seriously wonder if the comment here is written by someone from NYC or braindead

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        Every instance you describe defines an urban setting. We are talking about invading the private space of wild animals. In the wild, you are the intruder, and the rightful inhabitants have a duty (“right”?) to protect their young, and their habitat. In armed self-defense terms, an attacker confronted with armed self-defense bears the burden of retreat, or risk fatal consequences. If not retreating, the self-defender has a legitimate case for using deadly force. I don’t see the actual difference.

    14. avatar Weapon Of War says:

      We go where we please. Animals are our bitches. If that weren’t true, then cattle would keep us in pens, and horses would ride us. Bears are scum anyway.

    15. avatar HP says:

      lol! That’s a good troll, I give you 7/10.

    16. avatar auldzalt says:

      Do not turn your back on a predator! Turning away and running change you from something to investigate or leave alone into prey. As for your outmoded, hippy, tree-hugger blather; lock yourself away in a concrete jungle without the means to defend your self. Again, you are prey.

    17. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

      @2ASux I hope one day you get the chance to outrun a grizzly that’s 12 feet away from you.

  5. avatar Big Al says:

    2Asux – What happened to your spell check – “canon” is the name of a business machine company. CANNON is a weapon. DUH??? My guess is that your IQ is reflected in your entire post. Lower than your shoe size.

    1. avatar 2Asux says:

      You are correct. Misspelling “cannon” was preventable via “spell check”. However, I generally ignore “spell check”, not the least because it recognizes only American, versus English. Do not overlook that with misspellings, I join the American president. Not bad company, eh?

      1. avatar Huntmaster says:

        Carefull…. the’re going to make you wear pajamas…

  6. avatar Bcb says:

    ^^^ Haha at that guy. He’s funny. Mr 2A that is.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      That’s Mr. Sux to you.

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        “That’s Mr. Sux to you.”

        I’ll thank you to use my full title, “Sir Mr. 2ASux”

        1. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

          Back on your meds Sam, you were doing so well there for a time.

    2. avatar New Continental Army says:

      Right. He doesn’t even know about 6.5 Creedmoor.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Right. He doesn’t even know about 6.5 Creedmoor.”

        Neither do I have detailed knowledge of all the types of cancer, but I know none are good. Same with bullets.

        1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

          Maybe if you and your people learned a little about bullets the Germans couldn’t have walked into Copenhagen without having a shot fired at them.

          Danes crack me up.

  7. avatar former water walker says:

    A dozen feet away is damn close…is this the “real” sux?!?

    1. avatar 16V says:

      Seems to be. Haven’t seen him in a while, though, admittedly I’ve not been here as much as the old days.

      1. avatar DrewR says:

        It’s not just you, he hasn’t been around for awhile. We had some others who were actually more annoying, in the classic troll sense. That’s why I jumped at the chance to engage 2ASux, because he’s just so entertainingly bad at not just argumentation, but even at being a troll. Fun times.

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          “…because he’s just so entertainingly bad at not just argumentation, but even at being a troll. Fun times.”

          Happy to entertain, right up to the point we finally disarm the lot of you. The latest offence against Bernie is only energizing the more enlightened among us. Drip, drip, drip. Tie eye eye i’m is on our side, yes it is.

        2. avatar GS650G says:

          By saying We disarm does that mean you’re going to take part or just watch on TV and hope it goes the way you want it to?

      2. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “Seems to be.”

        It’s about 95 percent him, but something is distinctly ‘off’.

        He’s not in his usual ‘fighting trim’, so to speak.

        Perhaps he has been recently ill? Dog died?

        1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

          Maybe the hormone treatments are starting to kick in.

        2. avatar Geoff PR says:

          “Maybe the hormone treatments are starting to kick in.”

          Read between the lines in what he says.

          Notice how he is actually carrying on a discussion and not just spouting copy-paste crapola like ‘cisco’.

          2ASux is a true *gift* when he comments in TTAG. He is providing outstanding training for debating Leftists on guns.

          (*Zero* sarcasm. He really is an asset here…)

        3. avatar Gregory B. Hesting says:

          Exactly Geoff. I am always amused how quickly people blindly attack him, rather than simply arguing the points he presents.

          Anyone who is interested can delve back in the archives, must be 4(?) years ago. I have engaged him, as Geoff noted, he is acting as provocateur. He posts bog standard talking points of the Left/progs/snowflakes. Address the points, he quits posting. Go figure.

          I’ve long held a sneaking suspicion he is some staffer, but given the current state of the scribbling, I’ve been thoroughly disabused of that notion.

        4. avatar 2Asux says:

          “Address the points, he quits posting. Go figure.”

          Interesting how that unfolds. Having a “stand-up” (New York vernacular, I believe) interchange on a civil basis goes a long way toward completing the task. Perhaps there is a purpose at work here.

  8. avatar Grace12 says:

    I recommend you go sux start a glock.

  9. avatar Roger Elllison says:

    OMG people…have you just discovered the Internet


    1. avatar DrewR says:

      Not here. 2ASux has been at this for between 3 and 5 years. The only thing that has ever been demonstrated to shut him up is to present him with indisputable facts counter to his position, at which point he just jumps to the next claim.
      Most of us engaging with him now have been around here just as long and are just having some fun at his expense. He’s one of these guys who is so stuck up that he can’t imagine being wrong about something that he makes himself look ridiculous trying to justify himself, one of the best examples of which is the gun knowledgeable bear idea above. He’s a troll, but he’s our troll.

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        he won’t go away

        but I’m not sure he’s worth arguing with either

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          “but I’m not sure he’s worth arguing with either”

          If one is so lacking in confidence of his/her own thinking that an echo chamber is necessary to validate their conclusions, it is objectively a waste of time to engage in the interchange of opposing ideas.

        2. avatar CC says:

          “echo chamber”

          you mean like your use of two screen names here?

      2. avatar 16V says:

        DrewR, The argument is the point. As noted, argue the points successfully, he moves on. Which is his goal.

        I’ve had a couple of long interactions with him, many years ago. He’s on our side. But he does find some perverse amusement toying with those who don’t “get it”.

        1. avatar 2Asux says:

          “But he does find some perverse amusement toying with those who don’t “get it”. ”

          More like disappointment.

    2. avatar 2Asux says:

      “OMG people…have you just discovered the Internet”


      OMG people. Trolls disrupt our echo chamber; avoid them – avoid thinking.

      1. avatar 8ASUX says:

        Arguing with you helps us prove your ignorance. Also, your commenting helps out TTAGs bottom line. TTAG contributes to the NRA and many other pro gun groups. So, enjoy your proxy support of the NRA.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Arguing with you helps us prove your ignorance.”

          Ignorance is a lack of knowledge; stupidity is knowing better, and doing it anyway…such as killing other people.

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          “Ignorance is a lack of knowledge; stupidity is knowing better, and doing it anyway…such as killing other people.”

          Thank you, my brother !

        3. avatar 8ASUX says:

          So you admit you are stupid?

        4. avatar CC says:

          Ignorance is a lack of knowledge; stupidity is knowing better, and doing it anyway…such as killing other people

          We don’t know why over 75% of US murder occurs in 64 out of 3,000 US counties, all of them Democrat.
          Or why Democrats advocate only criminals be armed.
          That Democrats are more likely to be outright stupid is one theory.

        5. avatar 2Asux says:

          “We don’t know why over 75% of US murder occurs in 64 out of 3,000 US counties, all of them Democrat.”

          Could it be that obstinate and obstructive Republicans starve the funding adequate to implementing effective remedies? Perhaps it is too difficult to imagine any explanation for conditions other than your fossilized world view.

  10. avatar Bierce Ambrose says:

    So, annual DGUs run at 2.5 million + 1 / year?

  11. avatar Edward Gilbertson says:

    Trolls always go away when not fed.

    Trolls stay when fed….just like this Troll was just fed.

    THat’s why he’s stuck around

    So again


    1. avatar 2Asux says:

      “So again


      Agree. Better to live life with your head in a wastepaper basket, all the better to hear your echo.

      1. avatar CC says:

        2asux, you would not be hearing so much of an echo in your bubble if you were not posting under at least four screen names (sam i am, 2zsux, cisco kid, etc) on this site.

        1. avatar Pg2 says:

          Exactly. Trolls(professionally paid trolls as well as mentally ill recreational trolls)nearly aways use multiple profiles.

        2. avatar RidgeRunner says:

          He’s not Crisco. This wanker appears to be able to spell and form a sentence. Similar lack of reasoning powers, though.

        3. avatar 2Asux says:

          “posting under at least four screen names”

          You are incorrect, sir; wildly incorrect.

  12. avatar DrewR says:

    2ASux/ Sam I Am, you have revealed yourself, time to just embrace it. Don’t think the “thank you my brother” comment is fooling anyone, you posted as Sam saying that you continue to say people shouldn’t be in the woods when the Sam I Am name hadn’t posted anything of the sort.

    Admit the truth like an adult, you’ve gotten yourself caught.

    1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

      The inanity is verbose, no? Perhaps even a tad esoteric for this one’s taste.

      1. avatar CC says:

        Sam I am= 2asux=”cisco kid”

        Typical gun grabber technique.

  13. avatar DaveDetroit says:

    It’s kinda funny the mental gymnastics of the liberal mind. How is defending yourself against a bear morally different than killing a cockroach, raccoon or even a rat while in the city? Man isn’t encroaching on animal habitat just in the country. Cities have animals too, but city dwellers have no problem killing THOSE animals. Nature doesn’t end just bcz people build a city.

    Nearly all violent crime can be attributed to crowded cities and a liberal/progressive mindset. When city dwellers start making policy for natural areas, nature suffers. We’ve seen liberal policies promote out of control wildfires and mass animal starvation- all out of willfull ignorance.

    Man doesn’t have claws or teeth or hide sufficient to defend against nearly any animal attack. We have only our cleverness. Handguns of sufficient caliber have few drawbacks compared to pepper spray. This bear was, in city terms, a multiple offender on probation. I’m glad that it met with someone able to defend themself. It could have easily been an unprepared environmentalist, teacher, or young children. In the end, lives were saved. The bear, likely would have been put down after its next bad encounter.

  14. avatar ironicatbest says:

    I like my ending better. .. Being from Wyoming he was a fast runner, he and his dog outran the Chicago tourist, and the Three Bears had lunch

  15. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    A .460 is darned good bear medicine.
    Hope it didn’t ruin the back strap or tenderloin!

    1. avatar rocketscientist says:

      I can almost guarantee it ruined the shooter’s hearing. That thing is ungodly loud, like horn of Gabriel loud. I have one with the larger barrel and when I touch it off, literally everyone at the huge square range stops and turns over with that “WTF was that” look on their faces. I love my .460, but I would be very averse to carrying it for self defense with any sort of muzzle break on it and without quality noise cancelling inserts at a minimum.

  16. avatar AZgunner says:

    If that revolver was chambered in 6.5 Creedmor, not only would the bear have died, but the remaining bears would have chosen him as their new God-King.

  17. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

    To think that Esoteric Inanity was just up that way camping no more than 3 weeks ago. Probably within 10 miles of where this incident occurred. Stories like this give one a certain sense of affirmation in packing a model 629. Now granted, a 44 magnum is no 460 S&W magnum, but utilizing 300 grain hard cast bullets at a steady 1,300 FPS, should be plenty adequate for inland grizz.

    Cora, Wyoming is a truly majestic area. The Wind Rivers are plainly visible to the north and northeast, while the Wyoming Range is present to the west. Pinedale is only around five miles southeast, for those that favor a slightly bigger town with several bars and pubs.

    If memory serves, the town was settled by James Noble back in the 1870s. Many of his descendants still reside there. Sadly, there isn’t much of the old town left, a post office and small general store are, to this one’s knowledge, no longer there. The old homestead is still mostly intact. This entails the Noble’s old house, remnants of the blacksmith shop and several old barns and bunk houses.

    One might ask how Esoteric Inanity would know such obscure history. In many instances, obscure trivia is quite simply innate to this one, however, Cora’s history is especially so as it is family history. Esoteric Inanity’s ancestors were tireless pioneers that endeavored to carve out a meager existence for themselves as ranchers in a less than hospitable land.

    In the Upper Green River Valley winters can be quite harsh, and even in modern days, it is still fairly rugged and isolated. Back in the latter 1800s, this one’s ancestors had to not only contend with the brutal environment, but also the wildlife and occasional Indian and outlaw(had a few of them in the family too).

    Granted, the Indian Wars were mostly over by the mid 1870s, however, there was the occasional band that traveled through. One such group of Shoshone, led by the grandson of chief Washakie, actually were fond acquaintances of James Noble and his family.

    The wildlife on the other hand, was quite different. Wolves and bear are the quintessential nemesis of the rancher. Therefore, the pioneers extirpated them with a passion. This isn’t to say that the aim was to drive the predators to extinction, but merely quell their numbers. Back then as now, the residents of Cora knew damn well the dangers posed by the wilds. When one is part of the food chain, the role can either be accepted and embraced, or the reality denied and one then becomes the prey.

    When traversing Grizzly country, enjoy the journey for it is breathtaking. Also, pack as big a gun as you can comfortably carry. Doesn’t hurt to bring bear spray along either if one has the space.

  18. avatar Pg2 says:

    Sounds like a hell of a shot given the intensity of the situation.

  19. avatar Timothy says:

    2Asux, I don’t know if you read these the morning after or not. Hopefully you will get this message.

    Bears often make what’s known as a false charge, where they run at you, then pull up short to size you up. This is one of the reasons that bear spray is often ineffective. The bear stops outside of it’s range as often as it stops inside the range. If you run, it almost always triggers the bear’s attack. It’s simply not feasible for people to never roam where dangerous wildlife is. Bears and cougars make their way into big cities all the time. If you’d like, I’d be happy to link some stories about it. Staying inside a city may reduce your chance of encountering a grizzly, but I don’t think even other anti gunners would support prohibiting hikes in nature.

    I know you want for there to be fewer deaths and less crime in your country. Noble goals. It’s a shame how quickly what could be a productive conversation over an event turns into hurling insults at each other. I think the reason is because you want to achieve your goals of fewer deaths and less crime by removing all firearms from the civilian population. I think you also feel a moral superiority to those who disagree with you. At least, that’s how I interpret your arguments.

    It’s tough to have a polite and fact oriented conversation about a defensive gun use against a bear attack…. with someone who knows little about bears, admits they know little about guns, and wants to use the specific event as proof that gun owners are evil and need to be disarmed.

    1. avatar Timothy says:

      The best case scenario for avoiding the need to shoot this bear (outside of never leaving your house) would have been for the other hikers to sprint up to the front man. The bear’s false charge probably happened because the dog got to the point guy in the hike and the bear wanted to size the situation up again before attacking. Add 2 more people to that front guy AND bear spray on an animal within bear spray range and they may will have deterred the sow.

      The caveats are numerous. Sows are extremely protective of cubs and might have attacked anyway. We also have no idea if the 2 other hikers would have acted in the best way, even given the chance. Or if they would have succeeded in closing 50 foot before the bear decided to charge the remaining 10-12 foot.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        And if the armed guy started looking around to see if his companions were sprinting to his aid, he would have been lunch for a bear. No time for all those considerations and/or arguments. Time to shoot and let the legal system decide whether or not he was justified, whether he was facing a bear or a mugger. He did, they did, it’s all good.

    2. avatar 2Asux says:

      My understanding of bears under threat has now improved remarkably. Thank you. Watching the nature shows is apparently insufficient to gaining the full picture.

      Appreciate you reply, and the most civil tone of it.

  20. avatar Gun Owning American says:

    Good thing he didn’t use a 45 acp, because he would have also killed its soul.

  21. avatar little horn says:

    poor little cubs

  22. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    The grizzlies move further and further out from the Yellowstone boundaries every year. Look at where Cora is, and then look at where Yellowstone is. The environmentalists, through regulatory sleights of hand, get ever-larger areas of the western states lumped into these “ecosystems” where they “restore” apex predator species.

    Well, if the environmentalists want to re-establish bear and wolf populations, why don’t we do so in their backyards instead of ours? I think a grizzly sow would have a fun time tromping through Central Park in NYC. Or, better yet, allow a grizzly on the streets of San Francisco, right outside the HQ of the Sierra Club. Bet they would solve the “homeless problem” in SF in a couple of days.

  23. avatar lasttoknow says:

    i don’t understand. how can someone be two people here? aren’t the names protected from being repeated? how do you switch back and forth?

    1. avatar lasttoknow says:

      Just type in a different name under comment.

      1. avatar lasttoknow says:

        what just happened? how do you use my name without being tied to my sign-up email address? can someone just start a new account using an existing name? there is no protection?

        1. avatar lasttoknow says:

          This one is Legion, for he is many……

  24. avatar M Schreiber says:

    As a native to Wyoming, relatively near Cora, and having grown up in the thick of bear country for most of my life, this conversation is quite intriguing. While not a hunter, (just doesn’t interest me) I do own a mess of firearms. My home is within the Yellowstone Grizzly Conflict Zone and is frequented by occasional Grizz, numerous black bears, wolves, cougar, bob cats, etc. When hiking the trails around my home I carry both bear spray, as well as a Glock 20. I grew up with the Craigheads. (Very famous in the bear research world.)
    This is my first visit to this site, as I stumbled onto it. Reading through these posts, it is clear that 2ASUX is making an effort to hone your arguments. Personally I consider myself to be quite moderate. Pragmatic, more like. I own numerous firearms, am a CWL holder, carry regularly, and have no intention of giving them up. I run in pretty liberal circles, and the things that are most frustrating about the “Gun” community are the things this guy is trying to guide you to address. Use real facts. Educate. Be polite. I am in constant conversations with these leftist, socialist, communist Democrats, and I don’t know a single one that wants to ban guns all together, wants open borders, etc. Stop generalizing and use straight up facts in an argument that leaves emotion at the door. Have a real conversation about the how whys wheres and whens of firearms. I’ve never had a conversation with an anti-gun individual that didn’t end amicably. Maybe that is because I refrain from name calling and blind generalizations.
    I fear that at some point we will face legislation that will greatly diminish our ability to own/carry/use firearms, and it will be a direct result of the insolent behavior of a lot of gun owners who refuse to have a reasonable discussion about guns. And that is not to say that this isn’t a two way street. The anti-gun crowd must do the same so we can educate each other about our differing views and come to a reasonable understanding.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email