I’ll need one if, for instance, I get a job that involves visiting less safe parts of the country on a regular basis (that only happens for 3-4 weeks a year, and when it does, they give me something a bit more serious than a pistol). As things stand, I live in the middle of a big city, I work from home, and I’m not about to strap a shootin’ iron to my hip to pick my son up from kindergarden. No way am I going to spend good money for something that will spend 99.9% of its time in a high shelf in my closet.
Scandinavia. Generally, in Norway, Sweden and Finland hunting and sporting long guns are quite easily aquired, but at least in Norway and Sweden handguns are under radically tougher control.
AFAIK, handguns are (in practice) prohibited for private citizens in the UK. But they still license hunting and sporting long guns.
You’d probably need some pretty serious stuff to take out a big bear (European brown, grizzly, polar). Despite all the hype, a .44 magnum is not a very powerful round. The muzzle energy is comparable to a .223Rem (albeit with a bigger hole, heavier bullet and probably a bit more knock-down power) and is, in my country, not powerful enough to be legal for hunting large game like brown bear, moose or red deer.
For protection in the wilderness, I’d take a shotgun with slugs over any handgun. Every time. I once saw a TV program about biologists radiotagging polar bears, and in addition to the long-barreled .44mag they wore on their hip, they always had a guy in the background with a real gun (a rifle!)
Amen. At close range, the pellets haven’t spread much, and a shotgun at close range is really one of the most intimidating weapons to look into from the wrong end. With a very good reason.
That is mentioned in a novel by Donald Hamilton, whose parent’s were from Sweden. 