Debunking the "8% forgot to take off the safety" in Bear Attacks Myth

Gun Watch ^ | 16 October, 2016 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

If you have been reading about defensive uses of firearms against bears, you have likely read that bear spray is more effective than firearms, and that a large percentage of people faced with bear attacks failed to disengage the safety.  Both are based on a highly flawed study.

In a discussion at The Truth About Guns, a commenter, writing about the subject thought that a high percentage, maybe 20%, of defenders, failed to take off the safety.  The commenter did some research, found the study by Tom Smith and Stephen Herroro and others, and corrected the number to "8 percent of people who faced a bear failed to disengage the safety".

I read the paper.  It is easy to misunderstand the numbers.  The number of people who failed to disengage the safety are much, much smaller, less than 2 percent.  The total number of firearm users in the study were 215.  That means four people out of 215 failed to disengage the safety on the firearm that they had.  About the same number (5) missed the bear.

The reason for the misunderstanding is clear, if you read the study carefully.  The eight percent is the percentage of the people with guns who failed to stop the bear or bears, not the percentage of people who tried to stop the bear or bears.

The overall percentage of people who successfully stopped the bear with a gun was a bit over 76 percent.  When only handguns were considered, the percentage was just short of 84%!  That is correct.  The study found handguns to be more effective than long guns.

If you are starting to wonder what is going on in this study, you are not alone.

The study has numerous flaws, the most glaring being that incidents where injuries to humans occurred were highly oversampled.  There was a strong selection bias toward incidents where firearms failed.  From the study:

Finally, additional records would have likely improved firearm success rates from those reported here, but to what extent is unknown.

This study is widely reported in the media to claim that firearms are not as effective as bear spray for protection against bear attack. 

The study is mildly interesting.  It is not persuasive science.  I am not going to go into all the flaws in this study.  It has been done.  One of the things that stands out is that a previous study, Human Injuries from Bears in Alaska, shows completely different results.

That study examined over a thousand Defense of Life and Property reports in Alaska from 1986 to 1996.  Only 2 percent of these incidents resulted in any injury to the people involved. That study was not mentioned in the bear attack study done by Tom Smith and Stephen Herrero.

Then next time you read "8% forgot to take off the safety", realize that it is a misunderstanding of the numbers. 

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch 

[American in Israel]

Bears learn to like pepperspray, I have sprayed a camp bear that after a while learned to make agressive displays to get more. Would sit there and lick his lips.
Rubber shot from a 12 GA worked as well, but he still hung around and made agressive displays. The 12 GA slugs worked first time.

Ahh, Alaska life...

[Hardastarboard]

Safeties are great on the firing range. They suck in real life.

I was wondering if it was just me. I don't think I would carry a gun with the safety on in bear country, but then again I never go to bear country, so it's a moot point.

[Hardastarboard]

IIRC - One of the FBI agents in that shoot out was a pistol champion of some sort, but lost his glasses early in the fight and couldn't see to shoot.

Jeff Cooper did an analysis of that fight (The Great Miami Shoot Out he called it) and of course blamed the 9mm ammo, in particular 147 grain 9mm Winchester Silver Tip hollow points, which I believe was standard FBI issue at the time. One of the bad guys soaked up several of those and was still in the fight.

The bad guys also had semi-auto rifles, against the FBI's handguns. Brings to mind the saying that the only good use for a handgun is to fight your way back to the rifle you should have had to begin with.

David Soul starred in a pretty good TV docudrama about that incident. It's a pretty decent movie and pretty true to the facts, as I recall, if you can find it.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

Fred Bear, of archery fame, carried a hidden .44 mag under his jacket while bow hunting, just in case. For his filmed hunts, he had a man with a rifle off screen, just in case.
I didn’t believe it until I read it from his own articles.

[marktwain]

“I walk most every day, but mostly in populated areas where the only dangerous beasts I have ever seen have been dogs and coyotes.”

Don’t you see any people? They are the most dangerous predators on the planet!

[BDParrish]

After reading your post we do not conclude that Ayoob is an idiot or an ass but we can understand about you.

Perhaps you are incapable of understanding what he meant about using handloaded ammunition, but I trust that the forum will discount the opinions of such an insulting person as yourself.

[BDParrish]

The 9mm Winchester Silvertip was blamed because it stopped just short of Platt’s heart after it went through an arm. But no one blamed the .223 for round for stopping short of Agent Mireles’ heart after it went through his forearm.

[CodeToad]

“After reading your post we do not conclude that Ayoob is an idiot or an ass but we can understand about you.”

Oh, shut up, stoopid. The most experience the dork ever had was as a small town cop.

[BDParrish]

No sir you are wrong. You should not make unsubstantiated and insulting declarations such as “they suffered from a huge case of ‘we are the FBI.’” You do not know such a thing! Platt and Matix had been going to the “rock pits” to befriend shooters target practicing, whom they would then murder and steal their guns. These cold-blooded predators desperately had to be stopped at whatever cost. And they WERE by these FBI heroes.

“A Matter Of Courage” by Mas Ayoob:
“Not until I interviewed John Hanlon in December 2010, did I learn Richard Manauzzi had risked his life ramming the Monte Carlo from behind because he saw Platt raising his rifle to shoot Hanlon and Mireles during the initial moments of the encounter. It was the impact that sent his revolver spinning out of reach, and it left him unable to shoot during the rest of the encounter. It saved the lives of two agents, including the one who ultimately ended the fight. That, in my opinion, is courage.

Hanlon, 48, ran across the street to fight and pitted a 5-shot .38 snub against a powerful, long-magazine, semi-auto rifle. Courage. McNeill did the same with a snubnose six-shooter: courage.

Dove and Grogan knew they had pistols against long guns when they engaged to protect the public: courage, which ultimately cost them their lives. Orrantia and Risner drove into the fight pitting their handguns against a rifle, both shooting the evil rifleman; Risner almost certainly firing the shot that smashed Platt’s gunhand and stopped the killing: courage. And Ed Mireles, shooting them 1-handed with his shotgun and finishing the evil bastards 1-handed with his revolver, his arm blown away, charging toward their guns — courage!

Only in 2010, did I learn from John Hanlon that while shots were still being fired, arriving Metro-Dade deputy Rick Frye ran through the live battlefield to assist Hanlon. Courage!”

[Big Red Badger]

I hope it’s a Seinfeld video,,,

[mad_as_he$$]

Blackhawk Down. Best line.

[BigpapaBo]

We have encountered black bears twice while hunting in northern Wisco. Everyone in my “northern” family has had run-in’s with them while fishing and hunting.
I carry both when up north.
1903A3 with upgrades
and
either a Ruger SBH 6” or Taurus Raging Bull.
Chest rig with some “homemade” rounds.
-
Even during bow season, I’ve got a hand howitzer on my hip.

[Big Red Badger]

Massad,
Any reason to Doubt the Man?

[Big Red Badger]

I was being a little snarky,
Revolvers have Many advantages.

[MileHi]

You still have to pull the hammer back to make it go boom. It is perfectly safe with the safety off even with a round in the tube. Just as safe as a revolver.

It is NOT safe to carry a 1911 with the hammer down a loaded chamber.

[riverrunner]

Having spent a career in law enforcement and was active at the time of the shooting.

I have read all the analysts of the shoot out the FBI’s tactics sucked so did their shooting.

They didn’t have their body armor on and did not have rifles with them that were available at head quarters.

Every passenger agent should have had a long gun in the vehicle with them and readily available.

They screwed up big time and paid the ultimate price.

Trying to blame the bullet which was a 115gr Winchester silver tip not the 147gr you claim. When another hundred or so missed their targets. is just ?BS cover up for the mistakes that they made.

No one said they were not brave.

But being brave does not always make up for poor shooting and poor tactics.

Just those fact tell me alone they were not mentally prepared to take on two hard core bad guys.

[Big Red Badger]

Booger Hook Off of BANG Switch !

Got it,
Thanks.

[Spruce]

[Covenantor]

LOL!

[KMJames]

Interesting... but I can’t decide if this supports or attacks the 2nd amendment right to arm bears...