>>1024079They also say straight up that their investigative efforts where restricted and if they tried harder, or had more data firearm success would’ve probably been even better.
>When we initiated this study in the late 1990s, we had access to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game’s defense of life or property (DLP) records. However, privacy laws restricted our access to records from 2001 to present… additional records would have likely improved firearm success rates from those reported here, but to what extent is unknown. Heres some more nice quotes directly from the study that DIRECTLY refute all the bullshit you’ve been spewing.
>Although bear spray, pyrotechnics, noise makers, and other deterrents may alter a bear’s behavior, only a firearm provides a lethal force option… In some cases, this reluctance proved detrimental when split second decisions were required for the person to defend themselves from an aggressive, attacking bear.>We did not have data regarding the level of expertise associated with those who carried firearms. Regardless, a person’s skill level plays an influential role in determining the outcome in bear– firearm incidents.But don’t forget, this study means next to nothing, not only for all the reasons Ive listed here about their shoddy work and willingness to admit such, but because there is no comparison to bear spray. AT ALL.
