So. Firstly, I'll say this: I'm not a gun person. Guns are nifty and all, and I like them, but I know little about them. I know a lot of people on this forum love them and are experts. That's why I bring this up.

I often see people saying how guns dont necessarily advance that quickly - we still use guns from 100 years ago, etc, etc. And they apply this to Shadowrun. That's fine.

I think it's bull.

And there's a reason I think this. Take a look at the Ares Predator. Over the course of twenty in game years, it has gone through 4 variations - The Predator, the Predator II, III, and IV (In SR4).

That, to me, screams that there's some manner of advancement that's a lot faster than what we have in real life. But I'm not terribly sure it makes 100% sense to say that gun technology is very slow in SR. In RL, yes, but not in Shadowrun.

Not at all. The various Predators were merely the same base gun with differant add-ons on (i.e. the smartlink).

The "advancement" of a gun would require the developement of new and better rounds (new metals, new powder...), or new firing techniques, like the electric ignition and such.

So yes, gun technology remains slow, but not at a stand-still. Gun gadgets, like smartlinks and new types of aiming modules, on the other hand, can be improved far more quickly.

Look at it this way: there are new versions of the 1911 Browning pistol being produced practically every month, but you can still outshoot somebody with the latest model with the made-in-1911 prototype without too much trouble.

The point stands, though.

Anyone with half a brain knows to ignore Shadowrun art.

Or have you all forgotten rockethorse?

The current incarnation of firearms will be around for a very long time. Chemical reaction accelerates projectile down rifled barrel, action works and a new potential chemical reaction and projectile take their respective places. How the process takes place and how many rounds can be carried as well as how well the rounds perform are all pretty much at around their maximum potential for the time being. Granted there have been leaps and bounds of advancement in things like electrical primers, binary propellants, caseless ammunition, bi-metal rounds, gas piston action and so on, but at the heart of it what we will see for the next little while is tinkering with what we have discovered and trying to find that best mixture. That is what the large variety in Glocks is all about. Slimline .45? Sure, Glock 36. Hi Cap .45? Got it, Glock 21. Want a Hi Cap fully auto 9mm? Right here we have the Glock 18. Want that same pistol with a muzzle compensator? Why we just have to pick up this Glock 18C. They are just trying to provide you with a pistol that will meet your needs that you will buy from them, rather than somebody else.

Heh, the M9 as a high capacity Walther P38. That's hysterical.

Obviously we're discussing relatively modern firearms.

A black powder musket still has the potential to kill a target, but fundamental differences in the weapon put it in a different class than modern weapons that can be grouped together.

The major areas of improvement in the last century have been in materials used to assemble the weapons - there have been mechanical innovations in the weapons themselves, but nothing as radical as, say, the self-contained cartridge which created created a discernable difference between powder weapons and "modern weapons."

None of the weapons demonstrated in SR have substantially differed from the fundamental principles behind all "modern" firearms - clip or magazine load and self-contained cartridge.

I will, of course, defer to any of the experts who wish to be more precise than my vague opinions.

-Siege

Edit:

MP5: Gotta catch 'em all!

Even the polymer frame had been done before, with HKs attempt at a machine pistol in the early seventies, now what was that thing called? The VP70, iirc.

Why does your networking professor carry a handgun at all?
Is he worried about being attacked by angry grad students or something?

I ride a bike or take the bus, and no, there are no functioning smoke detectors (so sue me) or fire extinguishers in this apartment. But then violent tire blow-outs and aggravated apartment fires are much less common around here.

I'd say let's just stick to the actual topic, but it seems the actual topic has been thoroughly handled already. Maybe it's best we just shut up instead?

Arethusa: If only more than 5-ish people here got that joke!

I wonder how much what weapons we consider acceptable, and whether any at all are acceptable, has to do with simple social class. In many cultures, weapon carry was specific to social caste - nobles got swords, merchants might have daggers or short swords and peasants got whatever was left - walking sticks, quaterstaffs, farm implements. Does that same attitude exist in America today?

Nobody thinks twice if a woman carries pepper spray. She's not paranoid or antisocial, it's just a smart precaution. If she were to tuck a .38 in her purse, tho . . .

The "rural classes" in America can get away with daily carry. In some states, open carry is allowed. Urban gang members and whatnot can carry firearms with social opprobrium from their peers - although they may be committing felonies just to own firearms. It's only in the urban or suburban and middle to upper class circles that you seem to find trouble with gun carry.

As far as advancement goes - a lot of it seems to be subtle shifts to deal with current tactical trends and beliefs. Were the sabers and rapiers of the 19th century more advanced than the broadswords of the 11th? Same technology (except the steel), but different tactical environment - no personal armor. Current handgun designs trend toward mid sized calibres - 9mm and .40 S&W. Yet few would consider moving seriously upward in power - or down. And neither is considered as efficient a manstopper as the venerable .357 magnum. Ammo capacity spiked upward in the late seventies and early eighties - then dropped in the nineties as a new generation of concealed carry pistols were developed. The impact of the Clinton era magazine ban also factors here, of course.

A radical innovation, to my mind, would involve a shift in the underlying mechanism - anything that deviates from metallic cartridge, manual sighting and chemical power.

In this case - Shadowrun does have significantly more advanced firearms. They use caseless ammunition and smartlink sighting. Either innovation would be considered revolutionary to modern day shooters - especially the smartlink. Current day laser and reflex sights are nowhere near as advanced. Computer assisted aiming would be a massive improvement.

Actually, Natec is producing a cartridge that's polymer, instead of metallic. I hear it's a vast improvement in every area. It has less heat transfer than the metal carts, so you can use 15% less powder and get the same bullet performance. This has the effects of reducing flash, reducing the carry weight (And that may not seem so much when you're using a pistol. But if you're humpin' an SMG or god forbid a belt-fed LMG's ammo, you're going to appreciate it,) and, I believe, reducing recoil. I may have remembered incorrectly here.

(Alternatively, I wonder if you can use the full powder charge and get superior bullet performance? PolyMagNum rounds?)

And yes, we do need some sort of new aiming revoloution to totally change how we shoot. But even in ShadowRun, they still build their weapons with ironsights. Always nice to have a manual backup.

Cultural values - once upon a time, it was expected that a man of a certain social caste would carry a weapon. Modern values are again different - and those may vary from region to region. Trucks with hunting rifles in downtown Atlanta are not a common sight. In areas outside of major urban areas, it becomes more common.

This corresponds to a social acceptance of firearms - not necessarily personal carry, but the instinctive reaction in a social setting previously exposed to weapons on a casual basis are less likely to react negatively. Or I'm just blowing smoke.

Caseless ammo and smartlinks are not significantly more advanced - those are aspects of the gun itself. Strapping a laser sight onto a Thompson doesn't change the basic principles that went into the basic gun.

-Siege

Edit: For clarity.

It's entirely possible. Still, do you think John Moses Browning never suffered failures while working towards the .50 BMG? You've got to give new technologies time to work the kinks out.

Case head seperations, though. That sounds mucho bad. Why can't they make the case head out of polymer, too?

The laser-guided spud gun.

-Siege

Edit: I was torn between posting the spud gun in this thread or the drop bear thread.

And I am bothered at how much a devil rat resembles a potato...

speaking of John Moses Browning, there's this really great comic book with historical photos I found.

http://www.herstalgroup.com/english/pdf/bd.pdf

tells the whole story, a heartwarming tale for young and adults alike.

trapper john: Who the devil invented a shootin' iron like this?
grizzley adams: A fella named Browning!
trapper john: You owe him a helluva lot!
grizzley adams: You said it, pardner!!"

Yeah, yeah, okay... The world's most technologically advanced military.

They have also mastered the equally important: "You don't pull the trigger and a bullet dosen't come out". What will they think of next?

So let me get this straight. In the idea world, when the trigger is held, bullets don't come out, and the moment you let go of the trigger and until such time as your finger depresses the trigger again, the thing barks lead like a yapper dog that got pinched in the ass?