History of expression "armed for bear?" Other languages have shorthand/slang for packing heat?

Factual Questions
1

  1. First query is a spinoff from a very informative thread on what to do when running across a bear. Not asking here (or was it asked there per se) just what firearms one might carry when meeting bears. But the expression is a common, and evocative one in the USA for a single person heavily armed, and possibly counting on such preparation. Anyone know the history of the phrase?

  2. Moving along: Many of these terms have been spread through Hollywood to mean “carrying (hand) weapons”:

strapped
carrying
wearing
heavy (although I only saw this once in the Sopranos NJ mafia TV show)

Any others? I’m pretty sure the military (where everyone in the field is armed anyway) has variations/slang for special circumstances.

  1. I’m interested in non-US expressions as well, if you know any.
2

As to the first question, I’ve only heard the phrase a couple times, usually as “loaded for bear”. Googling that turns up a number of references tracing it back to the mid 1800s, when it referred, as one might guess, to actual bear hunters needing the most powerful weapons available. I can’t vouch for any of those cites, though.

As to the second question, “packing” or “packing heat” are also common in movies and TV.

3

My ex was a cop, I laughed hysterically when he used the phrase “packing heat.”

“Loaded for bear,” to me, is not so much about being armed with a gun as it is about being ready for a fight. I’ve said I was loaded for bear about a work situation that had come to a head, but no weapons were going to be involved.

4

From Wordwizard:

5

Karl May - a fiction writer who did Research, but didn’t go to the Wild West directly (at that time) - wrote Western stories in the mid-to-late 1800s, and described two very Special guns that made his alter ego, Old Shatterhand, superior to most other Trappers, Native Americans etc. in the Wild West:
one was the so-called Henry Rifle, a Special patent that could fire 25 shots without overheating or jamming (based on Henry rifle - Wikipedia)

and the “Bärentöter” (Bear killer), an old Special big-bore gun, unusually heavy for normal People, so difficult to hold, that has a big enough bore and power to take Special bullets to kill a grizzly bear because the usual rifles at that time would only make a Grizzly “angry”. (photo of replication in Museum today Old Shatterhand - Wikipedia)

6

If I may, my understanding comes with no source but it makes the most sense to me. In the early days of exploring the frontiers of the new world, all firearms were muzzle loaded smooth bore muskets. The guns were long and of heavy construction. How much powder one used, and what one shot with that powder would be determined by what the target was. The load it would take to kill a deer at seventy yards would blow a rabbit, squirrel, or tweedy bird to smithereens at ten yards. I understand it wasn’t unusual to use rocks or salt as the projectile as they were about free compared to a lead ball. For even the lightest load you needed to use enough powder to get the projectile flying in a predictable straight line in order to aim. On the other side of the scale, a bear was the largest, most ‘bullet proof’ target. There are any number of firearms articles that will tell you that any modern handgun that isn’t a magnum will not even penetrate the skin of a bear. Bears are big, and tough, and hard as hell to knock down. Anyone who knows will tell you that shooting a bear with six .38 rounds will just piss him or her off and cause no permanent damage

So, back in the days when one long gun was used for all hunting and survival purposes, when bear were about, one loaded LOTS of powder and two balls, a dozen nails, and the kitchen sink. (Okay, you got me—there were no kitchens, or sinks back then.) Being loaded for bear, literally meant having your musket prepared with a load meant to bring down a bear. It should also be noted that it took a long, long time to reload. You got one shot, and it better bring him down and keep him down. Being loaded for bear was the extreme edge of preparing for an encounter with an animal that could completely eviscerate you with one swipe of a paw, and was way faster than you.

Eventually, firearms became better and cartridges were introduced. The phrase by that time had become adopted to mean “preparing for a worst case scenario battle”. It wasn’t about being armed; it was about being prepared to defend against an adversary that ordinary bullets literally bounced off of.

In reference to post #2, by the second half of the 1800’s, cartridges were pretty common. Since each cartridge had the same load as every other cartridge in that caliber, one went up in caliber to gain firepower. The most powerful rifle in common use at that time was most likely a ‘buffalo gun”. It seems buffalo are pretty hard to kill with one shot also. These guns were very limited however, a rifle that will drop a buffalo at a hundred yards, could not be used to hunt any small animals or even game. I mean a buffalo gun would surely kill a deer- but it might ruin a third to a half of the meat.

The older musket could be loaded with pellets for birds and rodents, maybe up to a turkey. A ball for game meat and possibly double powder loads for up to bear and moose hunting. Have to be pretty close though, not as accurate as a rifle.

7

In Spain I’ve heard cops say llevo el arma (I’m carrying my [regulation] weapon), where the weapon in question is a handgun that’s not necessarily evident; hunters and people who shot for sport name the actual weapon (ex. llevo la escopeta, I’m carrying my shotgun). Another expression is ir armado “to walk around armed”, but that’s more commonly used in the third person. Any of them can be used for non-gunpowder weapons, it’s the context or the complements which tell you which it is.

8

Brown bear. According to Winchester and their CXP ratings, black bears are considered as equally squishy as a deer, and aren’t particularly dangerous besides. Buffalo/American bison are a class above brown bear.

9

Thank you for the clarification. I suppose I should have done a little research before posting. The information I was trying to convey was told to me by outdoors men long before there was an internet. What they were trying to teach me was that a muzzle loaded gun was more versatile, but less effective than a modern rifle. That it could be loaded to meet a variety of needs (including one where only the wad [paper or fabric poked down the barrel after the powder, but before the projectile] fired at the target to scare off trespassers and the like).

I am not sure if the information you added was well known in my youth or not— but I can certainly picture Boon and Crockett types running around in fringed animal skins lumping all bears into one category. Visually, there is a big difference between a dove, a goose, and a turkey; but any bear might be considered dangerous.

Did Winchester list Grizzly bears on this scale? Once I was old enough to distinguish between types of bear, my understanding was that Griz are pretty similar to Terminator’s on the scale of how hard to kill.

10

A Grizzly is just another name for a subspecies of brown bear from Wyoming to Alaska. They tend to be larger than other subspecies (except Kodiak brown bear, the largest besides polar bears), but their size is quite variable.

Muzzle loaders tend to be larger caliber (diameter) than modern rifles, and the wounds are gnarly. Amputations in the Civil War were part less-developed surgery methods, but also they often weren’t left with much limb and bone to fix. But modern rifles are otherwise more effective, especially at longer ranges, since the invention of more aerodynamic Spitzer (pointed) bullets.

Here’s an explanation of the CXP system. Note it is a marketing thing by Winchester to tier their ammo, so don’t take it as anything official/biological. Black bears aren’t particularly hard to kill, and avoid humans, except in situations where people are feeding them or providing an easy food source. Even so, they are responsible for I think under 1 human fatality per year.

Baader-Meinhof effect: I just saw today that Wyoming is considering opening a grizzly hunting season next year.

11

Quite the contrary. I find it impossible that experienced hunters who had to know everything about every animal they might encounter would not bother to distinguish among bears.

You might as well say that as Indian fighters they just lumped every Indian into a single category. Experts simply do not operate that way. especially not when their lives are at stake.

12

I assume he meant Daniel Boone and Davy Crockett. There were no hunting laws then. If you mean the modern B&C Club founded by Roosevelt, then they take species identification very seriously and you can get in a heap of trouble for killing a Grizzly on a black bear tag. Some states even want you to ID the sex of the bear - there are some that are obviously boars, but a middling size one is quite difficult to distinguish at a distance without training and careful observation.

13

In German, one can be “bis an die Zähne bewaffnet” - armed to the teeth.(The suggested Explanation is that similar to the top of the head and hair, teeth refer to the top of the Body, so somebody is armed all over.
I wondered if it was related to the pirates-holding-knifes-in-their-teeth Pictures, that Pratchett deconstructed several times…)

14

You are correct, I was making reference to the famous frontiersmen themselves and not to the society named for them (although my spelling blunder would apply to either I suppose). While those two gentlemen have a reputation for knowing everything about the flora and fauna of their beloved wilderness, perhaps not everyone on the frontier was as well versed. It is even possible, I believe, that neither man could quite live up to all that was said about them. Mr. Crockett might have been as old as an adolescent by the time he bagged his first bear I hear tell.

You are quite correct that I was guilty of lumping all bears into one category, and I do not find it impossible that others back through history all the way back to the noble and surely knowledgeable indigenous tribes, might have been guilty of the same. Without doubt many, perhaps even most frontiersmen knew that black bear were an easier kill and not particularly dangerous to men; while brown bear were on a higher level. But some may have been guilty, as I was of generalization. I am not sure but suspect many of them didn’t know anything out of their own experience. Even if each of them was literate, I am not sure they read that days equivalent of Field and Stream in their free time. They may hear stories at the trading post, and gossip with their neighbors about the game they had taken. But I am not sure each of them was an expert on bears. Hell, I don’t even know if the populations of black bear and brown bear overlap back east—but I assume they do. I do believe that when the thaw was established and bear were foraging about for food for the first time in months, they might have loaded up for the worst case scenario. Further, I would suggest that many but not all of them might consider stumbling upon ANY bear a less than ideal situation, even if they knew all the detail mentioned above.

My point is that the phrase that survived was not: “Loaded for Brown Bear”, and certainly; “A Grizzly Load” would have made a great if possibly impolite phrase if that subspecies was found that far east. The phrase we do have: “Loaded for Bear” most certainly generalizes. If the range and approximate date of coming out of hibernation were similar for both types of bear, one might have to play cautious and load for the more dangerous. But I speculate that loaded for bear was loaded for bear. We do not have the phrase: “Loaded for rabbit”, or water fowl, etc. I think it is a safe assumption that loaded for bear meant loaded for the most extreme encounter possible, and to most if not all that meant any bear.

As if I haven’t blather on long enough, I do want to mention that one of those older outdoors man who was trying to teach me about muzzle loaded weapons when I was probably a tween or young teen on my first game hunt, was the son of a now long dead relative who did have an antelope in Boone and Crockett way back when. He was a great old guy who we didn’t know was quite such an accomplished man. Walt Disney made a documentary movie about a hunt in Alaska, and he was on the same hunt-- although he never appeared on screen. When his antelope was first documented, apparently it was ranked pretty high. By the time I found out about it had dropped to #36, and the last time it was discussed by the hunters in the family it was assumed it must have fallen off of the list by now. If I recall correctly, the list for most species was fifty (50) places. In any case, I was not the brightest kid and as I looked at the different sized cartridges we had with us, I had a hard time imagining a single long gun that could be loaded so differently (from varmint to large game). I wasn’t creative enough to imagine a muzzle loader (although I must have seen them all the time on TV). I kept picturing a rifle that could alternately shoot the cartridge of whatever pea shooter I was carrying, as well as the twice as big Weatherly Magnum my uncle was carrying. Being loaded for bear just meant using my uncle’s rifle to me (or finding a way to load his cartridges into my rifle).

15

Yes, of course. I was guilty of generalizing. My apologies for suggesting, or even thinking our third most beloved American archetype (#1- Cowboy, #2- Astronaut, #3- Mountain Man) would be guilty of that kind of broad stroke, reactionary generalization. Scholars all, I am sure these rugged adventures were versed in the details of all the inhabitants of their frontier woods, be those inhabitants animal or vegetable. The mistake was mine alone, and compounded by attributing it to those whom upon reflection, could never be guilty of that base and uninformed view.

And the idea that good Americans would be guilty of confusing the various Native American tribes is aberrant to me! Certainly none of the early European settlers of the new world were guilty of such short sightedness. As European settlements expanded toward the west, it must be assumed that each and every tribe was treated with dignity, respect, and knowledge of the things that made them distinct from other local groups. Why, that would ring of elitism!! That would be the equivalent of racism, of bigotry. If there is one thing our country has never been guilty of, it is lack of empathy. America has always treated each individual – without regard for his or her origin – with dignity, and respect, and a clear and nuanced understanding of all that is unique about them and their struggle. The very idea that minority populations could be subjected to such horrors is quite unthinkable.

16

By the time they encountered brown bear, they would’ve known black bears for quite some time. The former wasn’t found east of the Rockies by the time humans came, though they lived eastward earlier… Even so, even if these individuals hadn’t encountered brown bears yet, they weren’t unknown to Europeans, being seen via Russia and Scandinavia. I think Louis and Clark would’ve been among the first Europeans to encounter them (unless there are some Canadians I don’t know of), and would’ve at least had hearsay to be wary via native contact.

17

FWIW: The phrase I’ve heard many times is “loaded for bear” and is only used as a euphemism for a woman dressed up to attract someone.

Not once have I heard it or something like it used to imply carrying a weapon or some such.

Shorthand for packing heat is “packing heat” and similar phrases.

18

Thank you. I realize I could read up on the subject, but I wouldn’t bother without some sort of background. (Truthfully, I might have been subjected to this knowledge earlier- but it never stuck.) Now that I have a very basic understanding- I might read up on if I find myself in front of the computer with nothing particular to accomplish. My favorite is during bouts of insomnia. I get caught up in something about which I am mostly ignorant- - - and the next morning I wake up with six new sources of information about something I now find compelling. Bears are now on deck; up until now my interaction has been limited to posing for pictures with stuffed ones in some sort of boxing pose. (Bears in three states have been subjected to fake right uppercuts to the breadbasket.)

19

I’ve heard “packing,” “packing heat,” and “carrying.”

I always liked this bit from Conan Doyle’s The Hound of the Baskervilles:

“Are you armed, Lestrade?” [Holmes asked].

The little detective smiled. “As long as I have my trousers I have a hip-pocket, and as long as I have my hip-pocket I have something in it.”

20

“Loaded for bear” usually means “very drunk”?

I have never, ever heard it used to mean that. I haven’t heard of WordWizard, but if this is a typical that’s all I need to know.

More typically, since bear shooting is so rare these days, “loaded for bear” means that one is or claims to be fully prepared to complete some major task or to succeed in some adversarial situation, e.g. as an attorney going into a major trial, those involved in major business deals, etc.