Skip to main content
replaced http://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/ with https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

Aside from the explosive atmosphereexplosive atmosphere answer, having the atmosphere be the thing that prevents firearm usage is rather implausible. If the story allows it, I would say use other factors, such as a combination of history, manufacturing practices, and technology!.

Even if a single factor is unlikely to eliminate firearms and explosives, the combination of multiple factors makes it so impractical/dangerous that none would be used in favor of other weapons

  1. Technology. This one might be a major leap culturally, but technologically it's entirely possible. Consider the worldwide weapons ban mentioned below and add in a dash of government that (at least in the area your story takes place) implemented heavy Live Fire Detection Systems, which detect and respond to gunshots and/or explosions. Though the Geneva convention currently prohibits computers targeting and engaging (i.e. shooting at) humans without another human pulling some sort of trigger, I'm guessing the events leading up to the apocalypse threw that out the window. Combine aforementioned LFDS with advances in self-sustaining aircraft and laser weaponry, and a sky full of drones that fry anyone that fires a bullet is entirely possible. The kinda scary thing is that it's possible today, it would just be expensive before the systems enjoyed the economies of scale of mass production. South Korea's border already has a gun deployed that can auto-kill a human from 3 kilometers away, and that tech isn't even cutting edge!

  2. History - Consider that there is first a worldwide gun ban similar to Australia's ban, which massively reduces the number of guns in the world by physically destroying them. After a subsequent worldwide ground conflict and a sufficient amount of time, most modern ammunition may be spent. Not 100% foolproof on its own, but making guns and ammunition rare adds to the other factors. Some regions of the world (like yours, perhaps) would likely be gun-free altogether.

  3. Manufacturing - In a post-apocalyptic world, it can be assumed mass manufacturing is no longer possible. Modern ammunition was not produced until the mid-to-late-1800s, and neither were interchangeable parts (such as barrels, magazines, revolver cylinders, etc.). Before then, projectiles and powder were loaded into guns separately. They didn't have nearly the range or accuracy, were much heavier, and reloading was extremely slow. Practical for large-scale firing lines between standing armies, not so much for any other purpose... unless you only want one single, fairly low-accuracy shot. You can safely assume modern firearms are impossible to recreate in such a world, and who would risk a crappy musket shot when there are flying death lasers everywhere?

  4. Add in pockets or "springs" of explosive gasses leaking from underground from the explosive atmosphere answer. Why not? I think it's a good idea, and credit where it is due!

Aside from the explosive atmosphere answer, having the atmosphere be the thing that prevents firearm usage is rather implausible. If the story allows it, I would say use other factors, such as a combination of history, manufacturing practices, and technology!.

Even if a single factor is unlikely to eliminate firearms and explosives, the combination of multiple factors makes it so impractical/dangerous that none would be used in favor of other weapons

  1. Technology. This one might be a major leap culturally, but technologically it's entirely possible. Consider the worldwide weapons ban mentioned below and add in a dash of government that (at least in the area your story takes place) implemented heavy Live Fire Detection Systems, which detect and respond to gunshots and/or explosions. Though the Geneva convention currently prohibits computers targeting and engaging (i.e. shooting at) humans without another human pulling some sort of trigger, I'm guessing the events leading up to the apocalypse threw that out the window. Combine aforementioned LFDS with advances in self-sustaining aircraft and laser weaponry, and a sky full of drones that fry anyone that fires a bullet is entirely possible. The kinda scary thing is that it's possible today, it would just be expensive before the systems enjoyed the economies of scale of mass production. South Korea's border already has a gun deployed that can auto-kill a human from 3 kilometers away, and that tech isn't even cutting edge!

  2. History - Consider that there is first a worldwide gun ban similar to Australia's ban, which massively reduces the number of guns in the world by physically destroying them. After a subsequent worldwide ground conflict and a sufficient amount of time, most modern ammunition may be spent. Not 100% foolproof on its own, but making guns and ammunition rare adds to the other factors. Some regions of the world (like yours, perhaps) would likely be gun-free altogether.

  3. Manufacturing - In a post-apocalyptic world, it can be assumed mass manufacturing is no longer possible. Modern ammunition was not produced until the mid-to-late-1800s, and neither were interchangeable parts (such as barrels, magazines, revolver cylinders, etc.). Before then, projectiles and powder were loaded into guns separately. They didn't have nearly the range or accuracy, were much heavier, and reloading was extremely slow. Practical for large-scale firing lines between standing armies, not so much for any other purpose... unless you only want one single, fairly low-accuracy shot. You can safely assume modern firearms are impossible to recreate in such a world, and who would risk a crappy musket shot when there are flying death lasers everywhere?

  4. Add in pockets or "springs" of explosive gasses leaking from underground from the explosive atmosphere answer. Why not? I think it's a good idea, and credit where it is due!

Aside from the explosive atmosphere answer, having the atmosphere be the thing that prevents firearm usage is rather implausible. If the story allows it, I would say use other factors, such as a combination of history, manufacturing practices, and technology!.

Even if a single factor is unlikely to eliminate firearms and explosives, the combination of multiple factors makes it so impractical/dangerous that none would be used in favor of other weapons

  1. Technology. This one might be a major leap culturally, but technologically it's entirely possible. Consider the worldwide weapons ban mentioned below and add in a dash of government that (at least in the area your story takes place) implemented heavy Live Fire Detection Systems, which detect and respond to gunshots and/or explosions. Though the Geneva convention currently prohibits computers targeting and engaging (i.e. shooting at) humans without another human pulling some sort of trigger, I'm guessing the events leading up to the apocalypse threw that out the window. Combine aforementioned LFDS with advances in self-sustaining aircraft and laser weaponry, and a sky full of drones that fry anyone that fires a bullet is entirely possible. The kinda scary thing is that it's possible today, it would just be expensive before the systems enjoyed the economies of scale of mass production. South Korea's border already has a gun deployed that can auto-kill a human from 3 kilometers away, and that tech isn't even cutting edge!

  2. History - Consider that there is first a worldwide gun ban similar to Australia's ban, which massively reduces the number of guns in the world by physically destroying them. After a subsequent worldwide ground conflict and a sufficient amount of time, most modern ammunition may be spent. Not 100% foolproof on its own, but making guns and ammunition rare adds to the other factors. Some regions of the world (like yours, perhaps) would likely be gun-free altogether.

  3. Manufacturing - In a post-apocalyptic world, it can be assumed mass manufacturing is no longer possible. Modern ammunition was not produced until the mid-to-late-1800s, and neither were interchangeable parts (such as barrels, magazines, revolver cylinders, etc.). Before then, projectiles and powder were loaded into guns separately. They didn't have nearly the range or accuracy, were much heavier, and reloading was extremely slow. Practical for large-scale firing lines between standing armies, not so much for any other purpose... unless you only want one single, fairly low-accuracy shot. You can safely assume modern firearms are impossible to recreate in such a world, and who would risk a crappy musket shot when there are flying death lasers everywhere?

  4. Add in pockets or "springs" of explosive gasses leaking from underground from the explosive atmosphere answer. Why not? I think it's a good idea, and credit where it is due!

Clarifications and rephrasing
Source Link
automaton
  • 2.5k
  • 13
  • 17

Aside from the explosive atmosphere answer, having the atmosphere be the thing that prevents firearm usage is rather implausible. If the story allows it, I would say use other factors, such as a combination of history, manufacturing practices, and technology!.

Even if a single factor is unlikely to eliminate firearms and explosives, the combination of multiple factors makes it so impractical/dangerous that none would be used in favor of other weapons

  1. Technology. This one might be a major leap culturally, but technologically it's completelyentirely possible. Consider the worldwide weapons ban mentioned below and add in a dash of government that (at least in the area your story takes place) implemented heavy Live Fire Detection Systems, which detect and respond to gunshots and/or explosions. Though the Geneva convention currently prohibits computers targeting and engaging (i.e. shooting at) humans without another human pulling some sort of trigger, I'm guessing the events leading up to the apocalypse threw that out the window. Combine thisaforementioned LFDS with advances in self-sustaining aircraft, and laser weaponsweaponry, and a sky full of drones that fry anyone that fires a bullet is entirely possible. The kinda scary thing is that it's possible today, it would just be expensive before thesethe systems hitenjoyed the economies of scale of mass production. South Korea's border already has a gun deployed that can auto-kill a human from 3 kilometers away., and that tech isn't even cutting edge!

  2. History - Consider that there is first a worldwide gun ban similar to Australia's ban, which massively reduces the number of guns in the world by physically destroying them. After a subsequent worldwide ground conflict and a sufficient amount of time, most modern ammunition may be spent. Not 100% foolproof on its own, but making guns and ammunition rare adds to the other factors. Some regions of the world (like yours, perhaps) would likely be gun-free altogether.

  3. Manufacturing - In a post-apocalyptic world, it can be assumed mass manufacturing is no longer possible. Modern ammunition was not produced until the mid-to-late-1800s, and neither were interchangeable parts (such as barrels, magazines, revolver cylinders, etc.). Before then, projectiles and powder were loaded into guns separately. They didn't have nearly the range or accuracy, were much heavier, and reloading was extremely slow. Practical for large-scale firing lines between standing armies, not so much for any other purpose... unless you only want aone single, fairly low-accuracy shot. YouYou can safely assume modern firearms are impossible to recreate under these circumstancesin such a world, and who would risk a crappy musket shot when there are flying death lasers everywhere?

  4. Add in pockets or "springs" of explosive gasses leaking from underground from the explosive atmosphere answer. Why not? I think it's a good idea, and credit where it is due!

Aside from the explosive atmosphere answer, having the atmosphere be the thing that prevents firearm usage is rather implausible. If the story allows it, I would say use other factors, such as a combination of history, manufacturing practices, and technology!.

Even if a single factor is unlikely to eliminate firearms and explosives, the combination of multiple factors makes it so impractical/dangerous that none would be used in favor of other weapons

  1. Technology. This one might be a major leap culturally, but technologically it's completely possible. Consider the worldwide weapons ban mentioned below and add in a dash of government that (at least in the area your story takes place) implemented heavy Live Fire Detection Systems, which detect and respond to gunshots and/or explosions. Though the Geneva convention currently prohibits computers targeting and engaging (i.e. shooting at) humans without another human pulling some sort of trigger, I'm guessing the events leading up to the apocalypse threw that out the window. Combine this with advances in self-sustaining aircraft, laser weapons, and a sky full of drones that fry anyone that fires a bullet is entirely possible. The kinda scary thing is that it's possible today, it would just be expensive before these systems hit mass production. South Korea's border already has a gun that can auto-kill a human from 3 kilometers away.

  2. History - Consider that there is first a worldwide gun ban similar to Australia's ban, which massively reduces the number of guns in the world. After a subsequent worldwide ground conflict and a sufficient amount of time, most modern ammunition may be spent. Not 100% foolproof on its own, but making guns and ammunition rare adds to the other factors. Some regions of the world (like yours, perhaps) would likely be gun-free altogether.

  3. Manufacturing - In a post-apocalyptic world, it can be assumed mass manufacturing is no longer possible. Modern ammunition was not produced until the mid-to-late-1800s, and neither were interchangeable parts (such as barrels, magazines, revolver cylinders, etc.). Before then, projectiles and powder were loaded into guns separately. They didn't have nearly the range or accuracy, were much heavier, and reloading was extremely slow. Practical for large-scale firing lines between standing armies, not so much unless you only want a single shot. You can safely assume modern firearms are impossible to recreate under these circumstances, and who would risk a crappy musket shot when there are flying death lasers everywhere?

  4. Add in pockets or "springs" of explosive gasses leaking from underground from the explosive atmosphere answer. Why not? I think it's a good idea, and credit where it is due!

Aside from the explosive atmosphere answer, having the atmosphere be the thing that prevents firearm usage is rather implausible. If the story allows it, I would say use other factors, such as a combination of history, manufacturing practices, and technology!.

Even if a single factor is unlikely to eliminate firearms and explosives, the combination of multiple factors makes it so impractical/dangerous that none would be used in favor of other weapons

  1. Technology. This one might be a major leap culturally, but technologically it's entirely possible. Consider the worldwide weapons ban mentioned below and add in a dash of government that (at least in the area your story takes place) implemented heavy Live Fire Detection Systems, which detect and respond to gunshots and/or explosions. Though the Geneva convention currently prohibits computers targeting and engaging (i.e. shooting at) humans without another human pulling some sort of trigger, I'm guessing the events leading up to the apocalypse threw that out the window. Combine aforementioned LFDS with advances in self-sustaining aircraft and laser weaponry, and a sky full of drones that fry anyone that fires a bullet is entirely possible. The kinda scary thing is that it's possible today, it would just be expensive before the systems enjoyed the economies of scale of mass production. South Korea's border already has a gun deployed that can auto-kill a human from 3 kilometers away, and that tech isn't even cutting edge!

  2. History - Consider that there is first a worldwide gun ban similar to Australia's ban, which massively reduces the number of guns in the world by physically destroying them. After a subsequent worldwide ground conflict and a sufficient amount of time, most modern ammunition may be spent. Not 100% foolproof on its own, but making guns and ammunition rare adds to the other factors. Some regions of the world (like yours, perhaps) would likely be gun-free altogether.

  3. Manufacturing - In a post-apocalyptic world, it can be assumed mass manufacturing is no longer possible. Modern ammunition was not produced until the mid-to-late-1800s, and neither were interchangeable parts (such as barrels, magazines, revolver cylinders, etc.). Before then, projectiles and powder were loaded into guns separately. They didn't have nearly the range or accuracy, were much heavier, and reloading was extremely slow. Practical for large-scale firing lines between standing armies, not so much for any other purpose... unless you only want one single, fairly low-accuracy shot. You can safely assume modern firearms are impossible to recreate in such a world, and who would risk a crappy musket shot when there are flying death lasers everywhere?

  4. Add in pockets or "springs" of explosive gasses leaking from underground from the explosive atmosphere answer. Why not? I think it's a good idea, and credit where it is due!

added 88 characters in body
Source Link
automaton
  • 2.5k
  • 13
  • 17

Aside from the explosive atmosphere answer, having the atmosphere be the thing that prevents firearm usage is rather implausible. If the story allows it, I would say use other factors, such as a combination of history, manufacturing practices, and technology!.

Even if a single factor is unlikely to eliminate firearms and explosives, the combination of multiple factors makes it so implausible or impractical/dangerous that none would be used in favor of other weapons

  1. Technology. This one might be a major leap culturally, but technologically it's completely possible. Consider the worldwide weapons ban mentioned earlier,below and add in a dash of government that (at least in the area your story takes place) implemented heavy Live Fire Detection Systems, which detect and respond to gunshots and/or explosions. Though the Geneva convention currently prohibits computers targeting and engaging (i.e. shooting at) humans without another human pulling some sort of trigger, I'm guessing the events leading up to the apocalypse threw that out the window. Combine this with advances in self-sustaining aircraft, laser weapons, and a sky full of drones that fry anyone that fires a bullet is entirely possible. The kinda scary thing is that it's possible today, it would just be expensive before these systems hit mass production. South Korea's border already has a gun that can auto-kill a human from 3 kilometers away.

  2. History - Consider that there is first a worldwide gun ban similar to Australia's ban, which massively reduces the number of guns in the world. After a subsequent worldwide ground conflict and a sufficient amount of time, most or all modern ammunition may be spent. Not 100% foolproof on its own, but it could bemaking guns and ammunition rare enoughadds to make gun use extremely difficultthe other factors. Some regions of the world (like yours, perhaps) would likely be gun-free altogether.

  3. Manufacturing - In a post-apocalyptic world, it can be assumed mass manufacturing is no longer possible. Modern ammunition was not produced until the mid-to-late-1800s, and neither were interchangeable parts (such as barrels, magazines, revolver cylinders, etc.). Before then, projectiles and powder were loaded into guns separately. They didn't have nearly the range or accuracy, were much heavier, and would practically only usefulreloading was extremely slow. Practical for onelarge-scale firing lines between standing armies, not so much unless you only want a single shot in battle. You You can safely assume modern firearms are impossible to recreate under this situationthese circumstances, and no one is going towho would risk a crappy musket shot when there are flying death lasers everywhere.?

  4. Add in pockets or "springs" of explosive gasses leaking from underground from the explosive atmosphere answer. Why not? I think it's a good idea, and credit where it is due!

Aside from the explosive atmosphere answer, having the atmosphere be the thing that prevents firearm usage is rather implausible. If the story allows it, I would say use other factors, such as a combination of history, manufacturing practices, and technology!.

Even if a single factor is unlikely to eliminate firearms and explosives, the combination of multiple factors makes it so implausible or impractical that none would be used in favor of other weapons

  1. Technology. This one might be a major leap culturally, but technologically it's completely possible. Consider the worldwide weapons ban mentioned earlier, and add in a dash of government that (at least in the area your story takes place) implemented heavy Live Fire Detection Systems, which detect and respond to gunshots and/or explosions. Though the Geneva convention currently prohibits computers targeting and engaging (i.e. shooting at) humans without another human pulling some sort of trigger, I'm guessing the events leading up to the apocalypse threw that out the window. Combine this with advances in self-sustaining aircraft, laser weapons, and a sky full of drones that fry anyone that fires a bullet is entirely possible. The kinda scary thing is that it's possible today, it would just be expensive before these systems hit mass production. South Korea's border already has a gun that can auto-kill a human from 3 kilometers away.

  2. History - Consider that there is first a worldwide gun ban similar to Australia's ban, which massively reduces the number of guns in the world. After a subsequent worldwide ground conflict and a sufficient amount of time, most or all modern ammunition may be spent. Not 100% foolproof, but it could be rare enough to make gun use extremely difficult. Some regions of the world (like yours) would likely be gun-free altogether.

  3. Manufacturing - In a post-apocalyptic world, it can be assumed mass manufacturing is no longer possible. Modern ammunition was not produced until the mid-to-late-1800s, and neither were interchangeable parts (such as barrels, magazines, revolver cylinders, etc.). Before then, projectiles and powder were loaded into guns separately. They didn't have nearly the range or accuracy, were much heavier, and would practically only useful for one shot in battle. You can safely assume modern firearms are impossible to recreate under this situation, and no one is going to risk a crappy musket shot when there are flying death lasers everywhere.

  4. Add in pockets or "springs" of explosive gasses leaking from underground from the explosive atmosphere answer. Why not? I think it's a good idea, and credit where it is due!

Aside from the explosive atmosphere answer, having the atmosphere be the thing that prevents firearm usage is rather implausible. If the story allows it, I would say use other factors, such as a combination of history, manufacturing practices, and technology!.

Even if a single factor is unlikely to eliminate firearms and explosives, the combination of multiple factors makes it so impractical/dangerous that none would be used in favor of other weapons

  1. Technology. This one might be a major leap culturally, but technologically it's completely possible. Consider the worldwide weapons ban mentioned below and add in a dash of government that (at least in the area your story takes place) implemented heavy Live Fire Detection Systems, which detect and respond to gunshots and/or explosions. Though the Geneva convention currently prohibits computers targeting and engaging (i.e. shooting at) humans without another human pulling some sort of trigger, I'm guessing the events leading up to the apocalypse threw that out the window. Combine this with advances in self-sustaining aircraft, laser weapons, and a sky full of drones that fry anyone that fires a bullet is entirely possible. The kinda scary thing is that it's possible today, it would just be expensive before these systems hit mass production. South Korea's border already has a gun that can auto-kill a human from 3 kilometers away.

  2. History - Consider that there is first a worldwide gun ban similar to Australia's ban, which massively reduces the number of guns in the world. After a subsequent worldwide ground conflict and a sufficient amount of time, most modern ammunition may be spent. Not 100% foolproof on its own, but making guns and ammunition rare adds to the other factors. Some regions of the world (like yours, perhaps) would likely be gun-free altogether.

  3. Manufacturing - In a post-apocalyptic world, it can be assumed mass manufacturing is no longer possible. Modern ammunition was not produced until the mid-to-late-1800s, and neither were interchangeable parts (such as barrels, magazines, revolver cylinders, etc.). Before then, projectiles and powder were loaded into guns separately. They didn't have nearly the range or accuracy, were much heavier, and reloading was extremely slow. Practical for large-scale firing lines between standing armies, not so much unless you only want a single shot. You can safely assume modern firearms are impossible to recreate under these circumstances, and who would risk a crappy musket shot when there are flying death lasers everywhere?

  4. Add in pockets or "springs" of explosive gasses leaking from underground from the explosive atmosphere answer. Why not? I think it's a good idea, and credit where it is due!

Source Link
automaton
  • 2.5k
  • 13
  • 17
Loading