Probably because people are concerned about real penetration and power issues. Most people want to know that that first round will STOP the bear.
That said, your point is well made that several .308's will certainly stop a bear. The question is, would you rather quickly get your single
powerful shot off, or very quickly get your first moderately-powered shot off less accurately, your second moderately-powered shot off with similar accuracy even less quickly, your third moderately-powered shot of even
less quickly...?
So it is that the intermediately-powered rifle repeating rifle might actually be thought to be
slower, when attempting to STOP a charging bear. Kieth Rogan, a TFL member, has some interesting contributions about stopping bear attacks (he was himself attacked by a Kodiak (on K. Island) a couple of years ago), and notes that the Canadian Mounties and the Alaskan State Troopers did some testing and found that simple .38 LRN's will adequately penetrate to the brain pain of oa large bear from a frontal attack; you just have to aim low enough. Most people aim too high, putting round after round into the sinuses of the bear, generally just ticking the already mad bruin off. The brain resides just behind the muzzle. Not a very easy target, esp. if you're trying to shoot the bear off your buddy (read Keith's case). Many feel that you need a round that will stop a bear in the least-favorable conditions. (EG, quartering away from you as he runs at your buddy.)
Hey, a Mini-30 or a tanker Garand or an FAL would work all right for bear defense. Even a few rounds of .223... (though I'm calling "Impractical!" on "a C-Mag loaded w/100 rnds of .223..." Have you ever had to lug around rifle with such a contraption on the bottem? NOT handy! Feels like you're going into the jungle with a GE mini-gun, a la
Predator.) You have to take into account, too, that if it's too cumbersome, you won't have ANY bear defense that works, because you'll have left it behind. Or just as bad; you'll have it, but be unable to take in some of the beautiful sights you should have seen because you were too winded from lugging around the monster contaption that was envisioned as being the perfect bear stopper.
For me, compromise is important. I recognize that the chances of a bear attack are slim. Very slim. I will avoid at almost all costs shooting one if it wasn't my game of choice. But I don't venture out into bear country without a good powerful handgun. I go where I want, and am cautious. Usually when I'm in bear country, I'm hunting elk (I'm from TX), so I've already got a fairly powerful rifle with me.
A final point. When you're out wondering around in the woods, you can meet all kinds of people. I've met some super-nice folks while in the back country. I'd hate to think that some of those nice conversations would have been cut short before they started because of their ascance looks at my "assault weaponry." Many people who would not look twice at a lever-action carbine or a bolt rifle or even a large revolver or semi-auto holstered on the hip will goggle at a semi-auto military-style rifle with a high-cap magazine in what they're undoubtedly thinking of as "their" wilderness area. Am I being too PC? Probably. But part of me also says: You're trying to stop
a bear. A
theoretical bear. Not a concerted attack by several bears in ambush!
Use what you need, leave behind what you don't. I'm coming perilously close to saying "Why do you need
that?" When I find myself there, I know it's time to go take a nap; I've fallen victim to the dark side.
Best,
L.P.
