Details of Bear Spray/Handgun Defense case in Glacier Park

Gun Watch ^ | 16 October, 2014 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

On 26 July, 2014, 57-year-old Brian D. Murphy defended himself against a charging grizzly in Glacier National Park.  The case is interesting for a number of reasons.  Two months after the attack, Murphy was charged with discharging a firearm in Glacier Park, a misdemeanor that carries a $500 fine.   On 9 October, a motion to dismiss the charge was put forward by the U.S. Attorney's Office after Murphy's attorney said that they would raise the  defense of self-defense.    Judge Keith Strong granted the motion last Thursday.  From missoulian.com:

The U.S. Attorney’s Office has dismissed the charge against 57-year-old Brian D. Murphy.

The charge was dismissed with prejudice, meaning a final determination has been made based on the merits of the case. Murphy cannot be re-charged at a later date.

Murphy’s attorney, Jason T. Holden of Great Falls, called it a “perfect scenario to have a case dismissed with prejudice.”

DNA samples of blood and hair taken at the scene confirmed that the bear was a grizzly.  Murphy had time to ready both defenses because he had seen the bear running toward other hikers.  When he yelled to warn them, the bear turned and came straight at him. 

Murphy first sprayed bear spray at the bear when it was 15 to 25 feet away, firing one shot from his .357 revolver when the bear had approached to within 7-10 feet.  The bear was charging uphill at the time.     He only fired one round at the bear, which fell back and stopped moving   when shot.   Many have suggested that he should have continued firing, but it is hard to argue with success.

The hiker, who was alone at the time, was not injured. He turned over the revolver to rangers, who reported it contained five unspent rounds and one spent casing.

It appears that Murphy was defending others as well as himself.  He quickly retreated back down the trail. 

“The bear fell back and was motionless,” Holden said. Murphy “withdrew and double-timed it out of there, taking the two hikers who were behind him with him. He stopped everyone else on the trail, too, told the first ranger he came to what had happened, and fully and voluntarily cooperated with rangers.”

The bear was apparently stunned, because it had left the area by the time rangers examined the scene.  

A charging grizzly, bear spray, short range defense with a .357 revolver; then bogus charges brought two months later, only to be immediately dismissed by a U.S. attorney and federal magistrate.  This case is one that will be remembered and discussed for a long time.   

A warning was issued to a hiker that used a gunshot to summon aid a couple of weeks after the grizzly attack. 

 ©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[marktwain]

One shot from a .357.

[Darteaus94025]

I love my Colt Python Stainless 6”!

[Mr. Peabody]

Are you Rick Grimes?!?

[1Old Pro]

The bear was apparently stunned, because it had left the area by the time rangers examined the scene. one shot just stunned the bear?

[Yo-Yo]

One shot from a .357.

...Wasn't enough to do the job.

The bear was apparently stunned, because it had left the area by the time rangers examined the scene.

[Cboldt]

Stunned the bear, which later left the scene.

[Hugin]

I thought he must have shot him straight on the nose, but then I read the part the bear being stunned and having left later. I wonder where he hit him?

[marktwain]

The job was to stop the attack. It worked.

[Robert A Cook PE]

But, you see, according to Obala’s federal government bureaucrats, it is illegal to discharge a handgun in a federally-designated natural park area!

(It is, however, apparently legal for a person to be eaten alive by a bear inside a federally-designated natural park area. However, it would also be illegal for a fat person to provide more than the Michelle’s federally-designated maximum-allowed calories per day to that bear inside a federally-designated natural park area ....)

[Zuben Elgenubi]

In 1980 I backpacked in Glacier for a week. At that time, one could apply for two-week gun permit to carry in the park. The application was filled out by hand, sent by postal service and arrived back in about a week, with approval. I have it around here somewhere...

[BeadCounter]

I’m glad the gentleman was well-prepared. I’ve read a lot on bear spray, visited sites selling it and stores and used pepper spray once myself. It’s interesting that the spray was not enough against the bear.

This is an interesting story because it seems to say a gun or pepper spray by themselves was not enough.

[marktwain]

I suspect two possibilities.

One, he hit the bear between the eyes, and the shot knocked the bear out without penetrating the skull. Bear skulls look a lot like a skid plate when viewed from the front.

Look at the bear skull at this link, and you can see that if the shot hit the bear between the eyes, but above the nose, the angle is very shallow.

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2013/10/maneater-of-boundary-waters-canoe-area.html

Two, the shot hit a glancing blow to the spine, which momentarily paralysed the bear.

[BeadCounter]

Supposedly, when you hike, you should have bells or something and that keeps wildlife away. I think that does work. Does it work always? I don’t know.

[marktwain]

The “studies” hyping bear spray have some problems:

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2014/10/wybear-spray-v-bullets-flaws-in-studies.html

[Blood of Tyrants]

It would be my luck that the bear liked spicy food.

[Tijeras_Slim]

John “Pondoro” Taylor designed a system of measuring big game rifles effectiveness based on a “Knock Out Value” of what it would take to incapacitate an animal such as an elephant.

Bullet weight in grains x bullet diameter (decimal inches) x velocity (FPS) / 7000 = KOV

That said, a KOV of 12 for a 158 grain bullet at 1400 FPS is pretty feeble for a grizzly.

This dude was lucky.

[SJackson]

If you’d like to be on or off this Outdoors/Rural/wildlife/hunting/hiking/backpacking/National Parks/animals list please FR mail me. And ping me is you see articles of interest.

[MeanWestTexan]

"This is an interesting story because it seems to say a gun or pepper spray by themselves was not enough."

[EODGUY]

Personally, I would have emptied my Python into the grizzly, reloaded and continued shooting with every round I had at my disposal. Of course I’d probably be making little rocks out of big rocks for doing so, but a grizzly bear is not an animal to trifle with.

I wonder if charges would have been brought if the hiker had shot the grizzly while it was attacking a bald eagle???

EODGUY

[Hugin]

You're probably right. If you compare a bears skull to it's head, it's very deceptive, because there is 3-4" of fat, hide and fur above the skull. Very easy to shoot one in the head and not hit anything vital.