My 2cents is this: Bear spray has its place, its perks & its downfalls. But sidearms without a doubt fill a void in certain conditions & scenarios where spray (& long-guns for that matter) just can't properly serve the situation... and articles like the OP posted keep proving so
It's also in my opinion that it's both foolish & ignorant for anybody to dispute or completely argue against a handgun (or spray; & vice versa) because every situtation is different. The argument of one vs the other can literally go on forever. The bottom line is that a sidearm is a tool of availability that (we-should; in Canada) have the right to include with us no different than sprays, shotguns or rifles. Each and every one has an application & a place, and each their downfalls too.. but presently, it's the sidearms we are being blocked from from-use. So instead of pounding at each other with a one vs the other debate, we should be pushing for a re-write of the permitting to open that barrier we're blocked of...
Articles like posted here are better used for leverage on the topic than for pointless debate against ourselves. Facts are Facts. Sidearms should be permitted in some form for backcountry-users and hunters & fisherman alike. Not just the select-few the system is set up for at the moment.
|