Is the .22LR the most versatile caliber for urban/wilderness survival.

[ieraseu]

I looked it up on google, and from 1991 to 2003, there have been a total of only 7 mountain lion attacks in California, 2 of which were fatal. During that same period, in the entire United States there were 73 attacks, 10 of which were fatal.

Going back even further, there were zero fatal attacks from 1909 through 1986..........that's 77 years without a fatal attack.

Those numbers do not indicate to me that mountain lions are making a habit of attacking humans. In fact, I would say they indicate that mountain lions are avoiding humans as much as possible.

Source ( http://tchester.org/sgm/lists/lion_attacks.html )

 

[Rat Finkenstein]

Also- a human is slower, weaker, and less alert than a deer.

 

[ieraseu]

^^

Humans are much more dangerous then deer, come on, let's be serious. Humans are hunters and predators.

 

[Rat Finkenstein]

^^

Humans are much more dangerous then deer, come on, let's be serious. Humans are hunters and predators.

If a deer decided to attack you, it could kill you. Humans are more dangerous because they are smart, aggressive and use tools. Physically, we are weak compared to wild animals.

 

[Rat Finkenstein]

[youtube]0BZ_fMnikDA[/youtube]

 

[ieraseu]

Tool use in combination with social hunting makes humans more dangerous then any other land animal. That holds true even before the invention of firearms, and since then the difference has been magnified many times.

 

[PayetteRucker]

Ieraseu... I don't know where you come up with this stuff. If you want a lesson in the lethality of a lion, watch the movie The Ghosts in the Darkness. It took two experienced world class hunters with combat experience 6 months to kill two lions that wound up eating an entire work camp. True story. Yes, lion attacks are rare-because lions are rare. Their territory is being invaded by wolves and bears, they are being starved out, getting pissed off and recently have taken drastic measures to find food. If you want to actually learn something instead of speculate about the issue, I invite you to read the Beast in the Garden, a book by someone who actually knows what they are talking about.

 

[ieraseu]

The lions in that movie were African lions, and much bigger then mountain lions. African lions are large enough to hunt humans effectively. African lions also hunt in groups, unlike mountain lions.

 

[PayetteRucker]

I call two a couple, but if you want to call it a group... 100 stitches a second... I call that effective hunting. I would like to see you inflict 100 stitches per second with a firearm...

 

[Wildewinds]

The lions in that movie were African lions, and much bigger then mountain lions. African lions are large enough to hunt humans effectively.

I guarantee you've never seen a mountain lion up close if you say something like that. Get within 10 feet of a mountain lion and then come back and tell me you didn't think it could kill you "effectively."

 

[Rat Finkenstein]

Mountain lions are the 4th largest cat.

 

[Rat Finkenstein]

Besides, thinking that one can measure weights and sizes of humans vs animals is erroneous. A 100lb Chimp could pull the arms off a bodybuilder and then eat his face.

 

[PayetteRucker]

A 5 pound eagle can snag a 5 pound rattler with ease, then proceed to rip its muscle from its ribs. A 200 pound mountain lion will drag down a 300 pound elk. A 50 pound constrictor will inhale a baby kadu. Size doesn't have a whole lot to do with what an animal can "effectively hunt".

 

[Cpl Punishment]

They're right, dude, it simply doesn't compare.

I'm a big guy, 240 pounds, pretty darn muscular (can bench 405), and a mountain lion would rip me limb from limb.

I wouldn't stand a chance against a (scrawny) 250 pound black bear.

You simply cannot take animals for granted. Besides, we're talking about having to survive for long enough time in the wilderness, that people feed they have to give up effectiveness to be able to carry more ammo, yes? That is an extremely unlikely event. So if you're going to war game that, you might as well take into account other low probability event, such as animal attack.

You must also take into account that as animal and human territories encroach on each other, animals will lose their fear of humans. Couple that with misguided eco-nut bans on killing these animals (a lot of time you can get in trouble for defending your life), means they will lose their fear of humans that much faster because they will have imperical evidence that humans won't fight back.

Now, if you want to throw in the end of the world into this? You're talking about animals being able to control larger tracts of territory. Also, predators will fear humans less and less as they become accustomed to picking off sick and weak members of a dying race.

In places where life is still fairly primitive, especially where the rank and file person can't afford, or isn't allowed to own guns, or where there is very little contact with man, large predators show little fear of man. Look in the deep jungles of SA, Pacific Islands and Africa and Asia. Big cats are the top of the food chain and they know it. It isn't unknown for them to pick off a human, even in a group and make off with it before it can be reacted to. It's well known in the arctic that polar bears have little to no fear of men, despite having been nearly hunted to extinction in the past. Large bears are stilla threat in Alaska. So if you want to contemplate the end of the world, that type of scenario will put us much closer to being on par with other large predators than we are now.

One last comment on dogs/wolves. No, they aren't the same, but they act much the same. They are primarily dangerous in packs. Reason being, because the one coming out to challenge you in your sight isn't the threat. It's the others moving in to attack you from behind that the lead dog is distracting you from. Large packs have, historically, been known to attack even groups of humans. This is the very reason large dog packs, and wolf packs were killed off nearly to extinction, because they were such a threat.

Don't take nature lightly.

 

[PrimitiveMan]

Cats and bears react differently.

Bears tend to maul their victims to death, cats just gain control and drag their victim to a place where they then bite the throat to suffocate their prey.

This is generally speaking of course. Your results may vary.

I'm thinking mmaybe of getting one of those "Judge" revolvers. 45 Long Colt and 410 shotshell. Alternating 45 colt and buckshot would be awesome.

 

[ieraseu]

I guarantee you've never seen a mountain lion up close if you say something like that. Get within 10 feet of a mountain lion and then come back and tell me you didn't think it could kill you "effectively."

So it looks scary up close? What kind of a qualifier is that? How about in the last nearly 100 years, less then 20 people have been killed by mountain lions in the entire continent of North America.

Less then 20 out of how many millions? Also take into account that (by far) most attacks resulted in the human surviving, and likely nearly all of them probably occurred when the human was unprepared such as hiking without any weapons and was just ambushed. Everything was in favor of the mountain lion, and still most of the time the human escaped. This not even taking into account unreported attacks and encounters where minor injuries were suffered, or where the mountain lion ran off.

If the cats are such big human predators, why can't they even bag a human when they ambush him alone in the woods with stealth and surprise and everything on their side? We are also not aware of how many of the victims of the attacks were women, children, or elderly.........and still we are getting more survivals then deaths.

Why is that? I say it's because mountain lions are not a big enough predator to take down humans reliably without risking injury or death. Does this mean that they can *never* kill a human?....Of course not..........Hey, it's possible that a coyote may kill a human in a freak of nature accident, but that certainly does not mean that humans are 'on the menu' for coyotes.

 

[ieraseu]

Also I want to say to the guy that mentioned a chimpanzee tearing a bodybuilders arms off and biting him in the face. No offense to you personally, but I'm sorry that's just absurd. That is one of those things you hear similar to, "Be careful, a bunny rabbit can bite your finger off."......Maybe in theory it can, but that's not something you really need to worry about.

Can you picture a human with a club against a chimpanzee? Do you really think the chimpanzee would be tearing off arms and biting faces? It would probably look like such a brutal massacre that I would not even want to picture it in my mind. The chimpanzee would get pounded to death in a very violent fashion.

In general I think a lot of people are letting their imagination run a little wild. If humans were as fragile as some here are suggesting, they would have become extinct long ago. Humans are vicious, vicious predators. Just think back to Roman times when legions landed on the shores of Africa and other exotic continents............and without any firearms at all, no anesthetic darts, no heavy machinery..........captured and brought back lions, elephants, tigers, crocodiles, hippo's and basically the most vicious and dangerous game in the world just to be shown to the emperor for glory, or for use in the Colosseum. This was done by groups of humans working together with much more primitive tools then we have available today. Now you might ask......"Ok, but how many humans died attempting this."...........Less humans then animals died, that much we can take for granted.

The human animal is not the pushover that many think they are.

 

[Todd A]

Can you picture a human with a club against a chimpanzee? Do you really think the chimpanzee would be tearing off arms and biting faces? It would probably look like such a brutal massacre that I would not even want to picture it in my mind. The chimpanzee would get pounded to death in a very violent fashion.

How about a human with a shovel?

Then a cop with his handgun?

http://www.wfsb.com/news/18726175/detail.html

 

[EMT_Lee]

Also I want to say to the guy that mentioned a chimpanzee tearing a bodybuilders arms off and biting him in the face. No offense to you personally, but I'm sorry that's just absurd. That is one of those things you hear similar to, "Be careful, a bunny rabbit can bite your finger off."......Maybe in theory it can, but that's not something you really need to worry about.

Can you picture a human with a club against a chimpanzee? Do you really think the chimpanzee would be tearing off arms and biting faces? It would probably look like such a brutal massacre that I would not even want to picture it in my mind. The chimpanzee would get pounded to death in a very violent fashion.

In general I think a lot of people are letting their imagination run a little wild. If humans were as fragile as some here are suggesting, they would have become extinct long ago. Humans are vicious, vicious predators. Just think back to Roman times when legions landed on the shores of Africa and other exotic continents............and without any firearms at all, no anesthetic darts, no heavy machinery..........captured and brought back lions, elephants, tigers, crocodiles, hippo's and basically the most vicious and dangerous game in the world just to be shown to the emperor for glory, or for use in the Colosseum. This was done by groups of humans working together with much more primitive tools then we have available today. Now you might ask......"Ok, but how many humans died attempting this."...........Less humans then animals died, that much we can take for granted.

The human animal is not the pushover that many think they are.

Actually, mature chimps are very dangerous. They are extremely strong, and prone to random attacks. An adult human with a club would stand very little chance against a mature, male chimp.

 

[dawsonbob]

One on one most humans are wimps in comparison to the animals we've been talking about here. I know there are those who like to believe in the supremacy of human beings, but in individual encounters (not against groups of organized hunters), these animals are far superior to a human being. Killing is what they do to survive: they are fast, strong, and merciless. Don't make the mistake of thinking that just because they would rather avoid an unknown food source (humans), that they're not capable of taking it down and killing it. Anyone who thinks that a mountain lion, bear, or yes, a chimpanzee cant kill them one on one is living in a fantasy land. I know the statistics are favorable to humans, but there are reasons for that: most humans aren't wandering around alone in lion country. When it's my ass out there, to hell with statistics: I don't want to become one.