Regarding the 'worst case scenario'- you're walking through the woods and find yourself being charged at by an angry and up-to-now unknown bear. Either you unknowingly happened upon some food it was guarding, or it has a cub nearby, or its sick/injured, or simply because its animal brain determined you are a threat for no discernable reason, as happens from time to time. A rare case to be sure, but it DOES happen. Which weapon could you be carrying to give you the highest chance of surviving this desperate scenario? From what I've read, theres two main schools of thought on this. Maximum penetration vs maximum volume of fire. Either you have to kill this bear before it can get to you, or you have to damage it enough to turn its fight into flight. In a perfect world, something like a 'reaper' or other semiautomatic .308 rifle with a high cap mag would provide the best of both words- high penetration to get through the thick hide and bone of a bear, along with the quick repeatable shots of semi-auto and lots of ammo for when surprise and panic innevitably reduces accuracy of aim. But I'm not going to walk around in the woods all the time carrying a battle rifle at the ready, and neither are you. This may be a worthwhile option for travelling in known bear country just prior to hibernation season when they are most aggressive, but not so much for a day hike in an area where bears arent commonly found (but still occassionally are anyway). So we're most likely talking about a pistol, something that can be readily accessible in a holster. What is the best mix of penetration and repeatable fire in a holsterable pistol (I specify holsterable because there does exist semi-auto .308 'pistols', but we don't really want to be trying to hike with one of those strapped on either, and I doubt most people could fire one of those effectively anyway...)? What are your thoughts?