On Friday, April 3, 2020 at 9:39:27 PM UTC-4, Dan Marotta wrote:
I think the odds of either of those maladies are remote enough as to be
non existent.

On 4/3/2020 2:27 PM, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
On Wednesday, April 1, 2020 at 3:50:46 PM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
Better to have it and not need it...Â* What if your engine won't start?

-
Dan, 5J
What if your gun won't go bang? What if it does at the wrong time and pointed in the wrong direction?

--
Dan, 5J

Statistics would disagree with both of these ideas about the danger of guns and animals, with a cursory analysis of the data being completely sufficient.

Some accidental shooting statistics. 2006 to 2016 had 6885 deaths.
https://www.aftermath.com/content/ac...hs-statistics/

And some cougar attack statistics. If you are an adult your risk dying from cougar attack is basically nil:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._North_America

Another quick internets search reveals an interesting connection with bear attacks and deaths... A cursory examination shows a high correlation of being attacked\dying by a bear with to your attempt to kill them. Shocker.

I spent a lot of time in the woods in the in my 20's across the western US, lower 48, frequently months at a time, with the most remote locations spent in a tent, some of that completely alone. I've never felt a need or a benefit to carrying a weapon. Ran into plenty of bears, wild ones in Montana and elsewhere, and play bears in southern California (probably just as dangerous). I've even been on the wrong side of a (very large) cougar stalking.. That one was 1000 feet from the La Cresenta, CA suburbs where the truly dangerous cougars are, lol.
An attempt at an honest understanding of the animals actual motivations seemed to serve me well. They are wild animals, but south of the Canadian border we are not on their food chain.