Area 51 » Recreation

The Firearms site didn't have enough activity during the beta, and has been closed. You can download the data dump of all questions here.

121

followers

107 Example Questions (9 closed)

active oldest votes

up vote 17 down vote

added by TheHurt May 27 '10 at 3:19

	Not sure if I would call this on-topic or not. I would rate this as too vague, and would ask the original poster for more specific information about how exactly things are going wrong. – kbyrd Jun 2 '10 at 20:37
	The only reason I would say that this is not on-topic is because it is to vague. There is no way to answer this question the way it is currently written. If it has specifics then I would think this would be a very good question. – B. Onstot Jun 2 '10 at 20:42

up vote 19 down vote

added by Kredns May 27 '10 at 3:55

up vote -7 down vote

added by Kredns May 27 '10 at 4:05

Excellent question. There are a ton of places that you CAN carry, that most people think you cannot. Public schools, airports, police stations come to mind as places most people think you cannot carry (at least in OR). – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 4:14

This is too localized. – erickson Jun 17 '10 at 18:46

up vote -1 down vote

added by Chacha102 May 27 '10 at 4:06

I would vote this no as is, but I think given some situational specifics, this would be an on-topic question. Ex: Is it legal for a minor to carry an arm while hunting without a parent in the vicinity? – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 4:17

Legally where? Which country? Potentially too localized. – Gnoupi May 27 '10 at 6:03

@Gnoupi Good point, but I think in general it's a good question. – C. Ross May 27 '10 at 18:35

Liability issues, anyone? – Will Jul 17 '10 at 15:20

up vote 0 down vote

added by Adam Davis May 27 '10 at 4:13

A good FAQ type topic I think. – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 4:48

Since this is controversial (3-3 at this time) could people please explain their reasoning. – Good Person May 28 '10 at 14:23

@Good Just based on comments on other questions, I would venture to say the downvotes are because it is too localized, legal, or the info is already readily available. I personally don't agree with those as being arguments against a good question. – TheHurt May 28 '10 at 14:54

This is too localized to time, isn't it? If I saw this on a real site, I would post a link to handgunlaws.us. – kbyrd Jun 2 '10 at 21:10

@kbyrd - I don't think these laws change frequently enough to be worried about posting outdated information, and while other gun reference sites exist, ideally we wouldn't need to send people away for on topic information. It doesn't matter if it's available elsewhere - should this information be considered on topic or off topic for this site? – Adam Davis Jun 3 '10 at 2:59

show 4 more comments

up vote -1 down vote

added by Adam Davis May 27 '10 at 4:14

I think this is too vague. Maybe given more information would make this suitable. I dunno, I would put this in the "What is the best *" category. – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 4:58

up vote 0 down vote

added by Adam Davis May 27 '10 at 4:14

@TheHurt its maybe not a great question but it is on topic – Willbill Jun 22 '10 at 19:43

@Geoffrey Chetwood The firearms industry is only second to the golf industry in gimmicky products. The "tactical" buzzword of the last decade is a testament to that. – tengu Jun 23 '10 at 17:50

I agree - this question is perfectly on topic. – nicorellius Jun 23 '10 at 21:31

@Geoffrey Chetwood There are silver bullets, literally made of silver. Yes, rare, yes useless, yes for muzzle loaders, but they do exist. – tengu Jun 24 '10 at 15:02

@Geoffrey Chetwood hurog.com/books/silver/silverbullet13.shtml – tengu Jun 24 '10 at 19:48

show 13 more comments

up vote 0 down vote

added by Adam Davis May 27 '10 at 4:15

closed as off topic by Holocryptic, Troggy, Brandon, erickson, Doresoom Jun 17 '10 at 20:25

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

This should ABSOLUTELY be off-topic as it would encourage unsafe gun handling practices. – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 4:47

"DON'T DO IT!" would be the right answer :) – Ladybug Killer Jun 2 '10 at 20:39

Scary question to delete. If someone wanted to learn how to do this, I would want them to find the overwhelming screams of "DON'T DO IT!" – tengu Jun 22 '10 at 20:40

up vote 1 down vote

added by Adam Davis May 27 '10 at 4:16

I would think all topics on loading/reloading would be suitable. I had a friend that did blank reloads for WWII reenactment, there is more to it than prime, load crimp... – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 4:54

up vote 0 down vote

added by Adam Davis May 27 '10 at 4:16

I think this is on-topic, sort of. Reloading a cartridge with pre-manufactured tracer bullets would be on-topic. Creating the tracer bullet from scratch would be off-topic because that is not generally a safe practice. – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 5:15

up vote 3 down vote

added by Troggy May 27 '10 at 4:17

up vote 0 down vote

added by Adam Davis, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jul 11 '10 at 20:28

	This is controversial (2-2) at this time: would people please explain their votes. – Good Person May 30 '10 at 19:18
	@Good The answer is ALWAYS .577 Tyrannosaur...BOOOM! :P (Voted yes btw) – TheHurt May 30 '10 at 19:22
	if you shoot it properly.. anything? And if you don't, a bazooka! – warren Jun 17 '10 at 14:57
	@Warren: You seem to have a very optimistic view of ballistics. A view that conflicts with reality. – Geoffrey Chetwood Jun 21 '10 at 22:47
	@Geoffrey Chetwood - a .22 will easily kill a deer if the deer is shot properly. Likewise it can kill a cow (a "large animal"). Could it take out a charging cape buffalo, rhinocerous, or elephant? Improbable at best - but here the issue would be one of defining "large animal". The example (horse, cow, etc) implies farm/domesticated animals which can easily be dropped with a light caliber piece if show through the eyes into the brain. I'd personally prefer something like a 380 with JHP ammunition into the head, but that's another story. – warren Jun 30 '10 at 20:29

show 1 more comment

up vote 1 down vote

added by Adam Davis, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jul 11 '10 at 20:25

Hmm, I am a bit torn on this one. Wildcatters "create" their own guns by modifying the bore, sometimes the bolt and creating a custom tailored ammunition shell and load, this is perfectly legal. A person can manufacture firearms IF they have a federal license to do so, the "firearm" being the part that is registered (frame on a pistol, lower on an AR), all other parts are not considered a "firearm" in the strictest sense. I think all gunsmithing questions are 100% valid, which would touch on many of the subtopics in your question. – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 4:43

@TheHurt is it illegal to manufacture or sell a weapon without an FFL. – C. Ross May 28 '10 at 1:34

@C.Ross There are a bunch of rules around this...so these sorts of questions would be good. – TheHurt May 28 '10 at 3:10

up vote 2 down vote

added by Adam Davis May 27 '10 at 4:23

What is the question? – Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 22:28

up vote 2 down vote

added by Troggy May 27 '10 at 4:33

Or could be... what causes a stove pipe? or something like that. – Troggy May 27 '10 at 4:35

Since there are so many variables that cause firearm malfunctions, I think this specific question would be too subjective. It is definitely in the ballpark. The questions that will always be asked are what gun? what ammo? limp wristing? – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 6:32

@TheHurt: The cause is highly variable, the fix not so much: keep the gun downrange, drop the mag, lock the slide back, clear the rounds, inspect for damage. So this question isn't subjective, "What causes 'stove pipes'" would be – Zypher Jun 2 '10 at 5:39

@Zypher Good point. – TheHurt Jun 2 '10 at 9:30

Potentially great question, but the first thing I would ask would be model/make/ammo. – kbyrd Jun 2 '10 at 20:45

show 1 more comment

up vote 1 down vote

added by Troggy May 27 '10 at 4:36

closed as off topic by Brandon, erickson, Simurr, Tadeusz A. Kadłubowski, C. Ross Jun 21 '10 at 20:00

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	This could be one that is not wanted. – Troggy May 27 '10 at 4:37
	I think being able to identify and appraise firearms is a good topic. There is a lot of minutiae involved in identifying origin of older firearms and those details have a huge impact on value. – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 4:56
	On topic, but potentially to specific to time. Professional and expert enthusiasts in a given niche will have this info and it's a really long tail. – kbyrd Jun 2 '10 at 20:59
	I agree - good idea .. but valuations change semi-frequently – warren Jun 17 '10 at 14:40

up vote 1 down vote

added by Rog May 27 '10 at 4:58

closed as off topic by Holocryptic, C. Ross, Brandon, Mocky, warren Jun 17 '10 at 14:57

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

I think all paintball should be off-topic. At the same time places like Australia (and many other countries) where the firearm laws are very strict and penalties can be quite harsh, this might be on-topic...hmmm – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 5:09

How do people acquaint 'firearm' with a gun that shoots projectiles with compressed air? Where does the 'fire' part come in with a paint ball gun? – Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 22:28

and technically paintball guns are markers. – percent20 Jun 2 '10 at 23:27

up vote -1 down vote

added by Chacha102, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jul 18 '10 at 15:58

closed as off topic by WikiSpeedia hang-around, erickson, Geoffrey Chetwood, TehShrike, Robert Cartaino♦ Jun 25 '10 at 2:05

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Given localization this is a good question. – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 20:49

only concern I have is keeping it up-to-date with locality law changes – warren Jun 17 '10 at 14:48

up vote 0 down vote

added by TheHurt May 27 '10 at 6:40

Why would this be voted off topic? – TheHurt Jun 2 '10 at 10:24

up vote 3 down vote

added by TheHurt May 27 '10 at 6:41

The real question is how do I get that f*()!@ back on? :) – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 6:45

a plasma torch would do it.. of course, it'd destroy the gun in the process :) – warren Jul 14 '10 at 19:17

up vote 4 down vote

added by TheHurt May 27 '10 at 6:42

up vote 1 down vote

added by TheHurt May 27 '10 at 6:46

A: Get a different gun. (Sorry, couldn't help it.) – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 6:47

up vote 2 down vote

added by Good Person May 27 '10 at 6:54

This is a great example of a "discussion"-y question. – kbyrd Jul 27 '10 at 3:00

up vote 2 down vote

added by Good Person May 27 '10 at 6:59

at the no people - could you explain why? – Good Person May 27 '10 at 15:21

I think shooting technique questions are on-topic, but this is a very subjective question. Technically speaking, reducing recoil and reducing perceived recoil are 2 very different topics. – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 16:45

I read this as what could be done to a firearm to reduce kickback. That would definitely be on topic. – C. Ross May 27 '10 at 18:36

@Ross: 'Techniques' implies that you are incorrect in your assumption. – Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 18:45

@Geoff I think this brings up a need to have some well put together FAQs that explain various terms to users. The "average" person may not have any idea what kickback vs recoil means...I wouldn't say this is a stupid question, just a naive one. – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 18:51

show 6 more comments

up vote -8 down vote

added by Stu Thompson May 27 '10 at 11:37

(This q is just to demonstrate how folks that don't follow (and hence support) a proposal can influence it. I've written the Area51 suggesting that only proposal follower be allowed to submit example questions.) – Stu Thompson May 27 '10 at 11:38

I disagree. I doubt I will join the firearms site but I still think that I could help the community there by proposing questions. Also what happens if I follow-submit-question-unfollow ? – Good Person May 27 '10 at 12:06

@Good Person, @Joel Spolsky: I think the communities will be healthier if they form more democratically, from the stake holders themselves...rather than be influenced from outsiders with only a passing interest. It's less about vandalism, more about "ownership". – Stu Thompson May 27 '10 at 15:12

Subjective and argumentative. – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 15:15

@Good, @Joel, @Stu I think in the "discuss" phase it is ok to allow anyone to contribute ideas for questions, however in the "commit" phase it should be locked down a bit more. I plan on following quite a few interesting topics, but I wouldn't necessarily commit to being an active participant once they go live, but I would go to the sites to get my questions answered :) – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 15:18

show 14 more comments

up vote 20 down vote

added by WikiSpeedia hang-around May 27 '10 at 11:54

up vote 3 down vote

added by Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 13:44

How is this not on topic? – Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 14:20

Why? This is of distinct value to the firearms community and this kind of discussion happens all the time on other firearms sites. If you avoid this kind of content, you will be left trailing their good information. – Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 14:47

@Geoff Oops! My bad, I thought there was another question about open carry. Carry on (no pun intended) :) – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 15:52

@Geoff Also amended the comments to include open carry :) – TheHurt May 27 '10 at 18:35

Any question related to open/concealed carry would fit into this broad category of "firearms" in my opinion. – nicorellius Jun 23 '10 at 21:32

show 7 more comments

up vote -3 down vote

added by Jonathan Sampson, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jul 11 '10 at 20:33

@TheHurt: It is rotten right to the core. No male should be mandating their wife carries. If your wife wants to explore the option of carrying, get her to a good firearms class that specializes in females and defensive carry. Let her try a bunch of different guns in different calibers and then let her pick out what and how she wants to carry. A husband should not be mandating any of this, and it is rare that a husband does well in training a wife with firearms. It is a great way to make sure your wife will never have an interest in firearms. – Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 20:50

@TheHurt Good questions. Of course had I asked the question I would have preferred you ask me to tell you a bit about my wife before you close it ;) As for the controversy over the wording, note that it doesn't indicate in any way that I'm obligating my wife to carry a gun, or that I would do so against her will. "I would like" != "I'm mandating." – Jonathan Sampson May 28 '10 at 5:15

Dude, @Geoff, chill. What if the conversation went something like "Honey, you have a dangerous job, have you ever considered some form of self defense?", "I have but I am not sure where to look.", "Well I could toss out a question on the stack?" "That would rule, thanks sweetheart"...Geoff, you cannot know what the basis of the question is, we are not here to defend the honor of anyone, we are here to answer good questions. – TheHurt May 29 '10 at 2:26

Are we going to have a badge for consecutive ad hominem attacks or just flaming in general? And should we call it "rotten to the core" or "ridiculously vapid" – Mocky Jun 24 '10 at 19:22

The question is: How to choose a good weapon for a particular scenario. Is it a good question for the future Q&A site? We're trying to develop a Q&A site here. You will discuss pros and cons of feminine purses once this Q&A site gets created. – Tadeusz A. Kadłubowski Jun 28 '10 at 10:04

show 19 more comments

up vote 1 down vote

added by Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 14:27

This is more like the "long tail" type of question Joel keeps talking about. – kbyrd Jul 27 '10 at 2:51

up vote 2 down vote

added by Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 14:28

up vote 6 down vote

added by Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 14:32

This is controversial (2-2) at this time: would people please explain their votes. – Good Person May 29 '10 at 17:30

seems directly related to using firearms safely, so i voted on-topic. but i could see it being too basic for the community, or leaning too heavily towards self-defense. context, context, context. – quack quixote May 31 '10 at 5:53

@quack: You make no sense. This is not basic, nor does it matter whether it is 'related to self defense'. – Geoffrey Chetwood Jun 1 '10 at 11:57

I'd like to see someone who actually voted no respond. – C. Ross Jun 1 '10 at 12:15

@quack @Geoff In my opinion self defense and techniques with regards to shooting are on-topic. It IS more of a discussion type question which are generally discouraged, but it happens. – TheHurt Jun 2 '10 at 9:26

show 3 more comments

up vote -8 down vote

added by Chacha102 May 27 '10 at 14:32

I just know someone will ask this question, just because. – Chacha102 May 27 '10 at 14:33

Is it illegal to kill someone without using a gun? ;) – Good Person May 27 '10 at 15:20

I vote delete, this is a stupid question. If this gets deleted, questions like this on the SE will probably be closed without question. – Arlen Beiler Jun 2 '10 at 14:38

up vote 1 down vote

added by Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 14:36

up vote -1 down vote

added by Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 14:40

'No' with no justification. How does this not relate to firearms? – Geoffrey Chetwood May 28 '10 at 12:06

how is this any different than an IWB holster for a male? – warren Aug 11 '10 at 20:49

@warren - some women are shaped differently than men. At least the ones I like to look at are :P – user452 Aug 11 '10 at 21:42

@Jon B - they most certainly are... but I guess I view the IWB holster as a unisex object. Perhaps I'm wrong :) – warren Aug 12 '10 at 1:14

How could something that relies on the shape and clothing of the carrier be the same for a male and a female? – Geoffrey Chetwood Aug 12 '10 at 11:27

up vote 2 down vote

added by Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 14:42

How does this not relate to firearms? – Geoffrey Chetwood May 28 '10 at 12:07

up vote -5 down vote

added by Geoffrey Chetwood May 27 '10 at 14:56

depends. do you want it to ricochet or penetrate? – quack quixote May 31 '10 at 5:48

If the goal is the promote safe firearm handling and shooting, then this isn't a safe thing to do without more information. From what distance? Is the propane tank full? Where is it taking place? – NinjaBomb Jun 28 '10 at 2:56

Bingo. That is why this is a good example of what should not be on the site. What else did you think a question like this would be for? – Geoffrey Chetwood Jun 28 '10 at 11:17