Bangstick

I.N.F.K

I.N.F.K

Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
1,896
I was watching "The Grey" and there was this scene where they attach 12 gauge shells to sharpened sticks to fend of the wolves. So I got curious about this and it looked like an interesting concept.

I found this site:
http://www.billsbangsticks.com

They use these bangsticks for hunting and defense against big fish. But I think attaching it to a 1.5" oak staff with a 12ga shell would be pretty cool.

I don't have a problem with bears where im at and very seldomly see them. I really don't have a need to carry a pistol at all. Just more weight for me to lug around.

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6560 using Tapatalk
 
Even in the country with the largest bear population and the lowest human population, you are much more likely to be attacked by a human.
 
Cougar Allen said:
Even in the country with the largest bear population and the lowest human population, you are much more likely to be attacked by a human.
Click to expand...

Yup....... Bears tend not to be active alcoholics, live in lower socio-economic conditions, and bitterly blame greater society for all their failures...... Interesting concept with transferring the Bangstick to land use. Almost definitely be seen as a firearm up here, for obvious reasons. Actually I see a few people using it on the end of a hiking staff and blowing his hand or face off. But I used to ride motorcycles and accepted the risks, so be it.
 
Last edited:
NO NO NO NO
Newton's 3rd Law. The bangstick is going to recoil with possibly lethal energy (lethal to you). A 12 gauge shot shell may have 2000 footpounds of muzzle energy. In the water a bangstick is controllable since the water buffers the shaft's tendency to come back at you. PLEASE, take it from this fool who fired a bangstick spear gun head on land, and had the shaft recoil back and wiz past my head with enough force to penetrate fully had it connected. Bangsticks are for water.
 
Quoted just in case some missed this.;)
Naro said:
NO NO NO NO
Newton's 3rd Law. The bangstick is going to recoil with possibly lethal energy (lethal to you). A 12 gauge shot shell may have 2000 footpounds of muzzle energy. In the water a bangstick is controllable since the water buffers the shaft's tendency to come back at you. PLEASE, take it from this fool who fired a bangstick spear gun head on land, and had the shaft recoil back and wiz past my head with enough force to penetrate fully had it connected. Bangsticks are for water.
Click to expand...
 
I think that this would be awesome to make and blow up watermelons with.

Stupid, but I've done worse.

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6560 using Tapatalk
 
Naro said:
NO NO NO NO
Newton's 3rd Law. The bangstick is going to recoil with possibly lethal energy (lethal to you). A 12 gauge shot shell may have 2000 footpounds of muzzle energy. In the water a bangstick is controllable since the water buffers the shaft's tendency to come back at you. PLEASE, take it from this fool who fired a bangstick spear gun head on land, and had the shaft recoil back and wiz past my head with enough force to penetrate fully had it connected. Bangsticks are for water.
Click to expand...
I think that you should have held on tighter.

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6560 using Tapatalk
 
Cougar Allen said:
Even in the country with the largest bear population and the lowest human population, you are much more likely to be attacked by a human.
Click to expand...

This can a misleading statistic. It refers to a whole country with cites, towns, and other population centers. That is likely true (I don't know but I will take your word for it), but it does NOT take into effect specific areas. If you are in a remote area of (mostly) northern America, especially in the mountains you have a much higher probability to be attacked by a bear than a human. When I fish or hike in the mountains, I have literally never seen someone that I didn't come with, but have seen many, many bears.

So, do you have to worry about bears as far as EDC or home carry, not likely; but DEFINITELY is an area to be concerned about when in bear country. Like it or not, people ARE attacked by bears, relatively frequently.

Just because people are more dangerous, that is no reason to ignore other reasonable threats, especially from an Apex Predator. And that statistic wont save you when you are face up to a bear. But a "boomstick" might.

To the OP's query, I have seen these sticks carried by people in croc or big cat country. I would imagine it would get a successful reaction from a bear, especially since they are the easiest apex predator to deal with/avoid without life threatening injuries.

I prefer bear spray. Much safer all around, easy/light to carry, and very quick to deploy. Have not used it on a bear but I can vouch that it will send coyotes running like they saw a monster.
 
WilliamCody said:
If you are in a remote area of (mostly) northern America, especially in the mountains you have a much higher probability to be attacked by a bear than a human.
Click to expand...
False.

Just because people are more dangerous, that is no reason to ignore other reasonable threats, especially from an Apex Predator. And that statistic wont save you when you are face up to a bear.
Click to expand...
True.

I prefer bear spray. Much safer all around, easy/light to carry, and very quick to deploy. Have not used it on a bear but I can vouch that it will send coyotes running like they saw a monster.
Click to expand...
Statistics show good results for bear defense, and bear spray works on other creatures too. :thumbup:
 
Naro said:
NO NO NO NO
Newton's 3rd Law. The bangstick is going to recoil with possibly lethal energy (lethal to you). A 12 gauge shot shell may have 2000 footpounds of muzzle energy. In the water a bangstick is controllable since the water buffers the shaft's tendency to come back at you. PLEASE, take it from this fool who fired a bangstick spear gun head on land, and had the shaft recoil back and wiz past my head with enough force to penetrate fully had it connected. Bangsticks are for water.
Click to expand...

Episode of Mythbusters I just watched (unsure if repeat) proves this wrong. They tried to recreate a bangstick just using wood and could not get it to work - even using Ipe wood. They then improvised using a nail at the end of the stick. Shotgun shell went off upon contact with the imitation wolf with no dire effects to the person holding the bangstick. Of course there was no penetration to the ballistic gel and they determined you'd be better off using the sharpened stick as a spear.
 
Halfneck said:
Episode of Mythbusters I just watched (unsure if repeat) proves this wrong. They tried to recreate a bangstick just using wood and could not get it to work - even using Ipe wood. They then improvised using a nail at the end of the stick. Shotgun shell went off upon contact with the imitation wolf with no dire effects to the person holding the bangstick. Of course there was no penetration to the ballistic gel and they determined you'd be better off using the sharpened stick as a spear.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen that one. But I imagine they didn't have the shell inside a steel tube to direct the force?

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6560 using Tapatalk
 
Cougar Allen said:
False.


True.


Statistics show good results for bear defense, and bear spray works on other creatures too. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

Fair. And if you did come into contact with a nefarious bipedal hominid that just happens to speak english (such as you suggested), the bear spray will leave you in much less legal hot water if deployed.
 
I.N.F.K said:
I haven't seen that one. But I imagine they didn't have the shell inside a steel tube to direct the force?

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6560 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Have not seen that either but you seem reasonable here. If I were to try this I might make the tube out of something like PVC or bamboo, maybe even bound. That way you could generally direct the force, but it would explode itself, limiting the amount of rearward recoil force. Would be a one time use, but if you need more than 1 shot this was never the weapon for you anyway.
 
WilliamCody said:
Have not seen that either but you seem reasonable here. If I were to try this I might make the tube out of something like PVC or bamboo, maybe even bound. That way you could generally direct the force, but it would explode itself, limiting the amount of rearward recoil force. Would be a one time use, but if you need more than 1 shot this was never the weapon for you anyway.
Click to expand...
I was thinking iron to direct all the force.

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6560 using Tapatalk
 
I.N.F.K said:
I was thinking iron to direct all the force.

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6560 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

But then you've got enough weight that you might as well carry the stock and trigger and magazine for you gun, too ;)
 
Lot of reinventing the wheel in this thread. There is already a very effective shotshell detonation device that can be used at range for self defense from both 2 legged and 4 legged predators. It's called a shotgun, and you don't need to poke the aggressor with the barrel to get it to go off.

Bangstick- the least effective shotgun ever invented...
 
hlee said:
Lot of reinventing the wheel in this thread. There is already a very effective shotshell detonation device that can be used at range for self defense from both 2 legged and 4 legged predators. It's called a shotgun, and you don't need to poke the aggressor with the barrel to get it to go off.

Bangstick- the least effective shotgun ever invented...
Click to expand...
Oh a shotgun, now why didn't I think if that. Oh wait here's a 5-shot weatherby semi right here by my bed.

Im doing it because I can, not because Im in need of it. I have a ruger super redhawk alaskan in 44mag that is more than needed to put down any black bear. But im not worried about bears.

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6560 using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top