I’m pro-gun, but I switched from a sidearm to carrying bear spray years ago. It just makes sense - I’d rather have what is effectively a small flamethrower than be trying to hit the brain case of a charging grizzly with my .40 S&W.
That is the illusion which is sold.
Unfortunately, bear spray has many limitations, itself. It does not work well in cold temps, or wind at almost any velocity. It does not penetrate foliage. While I have not seen any tests, It is likely much diminished in rain. Many bears are able to shrug it off or ignore it, especially black bears, or any bears in a predatory mode.
Fortunately, with handguns, you don't have to hit the brain case in every instance.
When it happens, it works very well. But in most cases, it is not necessary.
Bears often break off their aggressive action because of warning shots.
A great number of aggressive bears do not start with a full on charge.
Lots of bears break off the attack if wounded.
Wounding a bear often slows them down enough to get killing shots into them.
Often, the person shooting the bear is someone the bear did not target.
Handguns are far more ergonomic,and have far better holsters than bear spray.
All of those add up to 98% effective for handguns when the handguns are fired.
No it does not make sense to use spray instead of a firearm.
The anti-pro bear propaganda worked well on you.
Spray has a lot of limitations most caused by mother nature.
It is called weather. Then there is just limitation of range.
If you are not a good enough shot. Get some professional training and practice some more.
As a professional firearms instructor.
I offer a bear and animal defense training.