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.

120

followers

107 Example Questions (9 closed)

active newest votes

up vote 0 down vote

added by sdavids Sep 16 '10 at 3:09

up vote 0 down vote

added by sdavids Sep 16 '10 at 3:16

Just trying to provide an example of an off-topic question. – sdavids Sep 16 '10 at 3:16

up vote -1 down vote

added by Tyler Carter 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 -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 -1 down vote

added by Tyler Carter, 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 -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 -1 down vote

added by Don Jun 24 '10 at 22:18

We're not going to know much about the current inventory at a retail store. – kbyrd Jul 27 '10 at 2:46

up vote -1 down vote

added by shemnon Jun 29 '10 at 19:36

closed as off topic by Steve S, pkaeding, Jesse, kbyrd, Jack Lloyd Aug 4 '10 at 22:38

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.

The point of this question is to get off topic votes to establish that discussion about gun /politics/ is not within the scope of a firearms stack exchange. – shemnon Jun 30 '10 at 2:33

up vote -1 down vote

added by Binoj Antony, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jul 10 '10 at 1:52

up vote -2 down vote

added by Holocryptic Jun 3 '10 at 20:23

this could be dozens or dozens of thousands - that comes down to how well the gun in maintained – warren Jun 17 '10 at 14:42

Don't think it's too bad a question.. A person may put 20,000 rounds through an AR with no problem. However, if they don't know what they are looking for; it may be beneficial to have it checked out. – Präriewolf Jun 22 '10 at 20:44

@tengu: How does that have anything to do with the question? – Geoffrey Chetwood Jun 23 '10 at 17:42

@Geoffrey Chetwood Other than everything? If I was an inexperienced shooter and had fire a lot of rounds through a gun. I might wonder how often I should have an armorer check the weapon. – Präriewolf Jun 23 '10 at 17:51

@tengu: The amount of rounds you put through a firearm is not a tangible measurement of when it will need to be serviced. You don't seem to understand the original question and the objections to it. – Geoffrey Chetwood Jun 23 '10 at 20:14

up vote -2 down vote

added by Don, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jul 18 '10 at 15:55

up vote -2 down vote

added by Joe Jun 29 '10 at 20:15

	How is this off-topic? There was nothing in the description that we were only asking questions that were legal to do. (and the 'legal' issue brings up that it might be legal for both the person to do, and for the person who answered, but I don't know how well the first amendment holds up to telling people how to do things that aren't legal in the US, when the server's hosted in the US.) – Joe Jun 30 '10 at 18:14
	Although legalities seem to be generally excluded with this site, having a question such as this seems very foolish for a US-hosted site. If a weapon was sold as semi-auto, it's generally a very bad idea (legally) to change that. – Jesse Jul 17 '10 at 10:10
	as long as there's a big bright "legalities" tag, i think this could be on-topic. maybe. – John Gardner Aug 24 '10 at 22:07

up vote -2 down vote

added by warren Jul 21 '10 at 3:17

	Safety and liability issues with this question. – Präriewolf Jul 21 '10 at 13:45
	Safety and liability issues will abound on a site such as this proposal - and with a proper caveat like "reloading is inherently dangerous, consult a reputable guide / professional", I think this can still be answered well – warren Jul 21 '10 at 16:57
	@tengu - if this is going to be a safety and liability issue, then it being "off-topic" would make a lot more sense than "not a good example" – warren Jul 29 '10 at 14:58
	@warren Why would that make more sense? – Präriewolf Aug 2 '10 at 15:37
	@tengu - because if reloading questions are out of scope for the site, then they are, by definition, "off-topic" – warren Aug 2 '10 at 19:00

show 1 more improvement suggestion

up vote -2 down vote

added by warren, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Aug 18 '10 at 18:26

Trying to word area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/164/firearms/… better for the site's purpose – warren Jul 27 '10 at 15:58

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 improvement suggestions

up vote -3 down vote

added by Zypher Jun 2 '10 at 5:51

I think this is a great question, particular models can be horribly finicky. – TheHurt Jun 2 '10 at 10:20

It sounds good in theory, but this information should never be relied on. Each firearm should be tested with each type of ammunition to be carried before being carried. Just because that Corbon Pow'r'ball worked nicely in your buddy's Kimber Desert Warrior, does not mean it will be reliable in yours. – Geoffrey Chetwood Jun 2 '10 at 13:56

@Geoff This is true, so maybe a more appropriate question would be "Has anyone had problems with [ammo] feeding in [firearm]?" – TheHurt Jun 2 '10 at 14:09

@Geoffrey: Relied on absolutely not, give you a starting point to start testing on yours, absolutely. Personally it pains me when i run a box of 20$/20 rounds through my gun to test and they don't run right. Having recommendations and other people experience as a starting point helps. @TheHurt: that may be a better wording, although maybe a bit too broad - which is why i limited it to self defense ammo. – Zypher Jun 2 '10 at 14:48

@Zypher: Again, this is less likely to be the model/manufacturer of the firearm and more likely to be your individual firearm and the way you are using/maintaining it. – Geoffrey Chetwood Jun 2 '10 at 18:21

show 1 more improvement suggestion

up vote -3 down vote

added by kbyrd Jun 2 '10 at 20:55

This could be an excellent type of question, especially if pictures are posted as well. – C. Ross Jun 3 '10 at 12:10

@C. Ross: Thanks. I actually want the answer to this, so it'll show up when the site goes "real". – kbyrd Jun 3 '10 at 13:43

Why isn't this a good example? – kbyrd Jun 5 '10 at 0:29

I'd say this isn't a great question because it is phrased backward. Instead of asking about every shotgun ever made by Browning, the poster should describe the gun he's trying to identify. The entire historical Browning catalog would make an unwieldy answer, and even then, it would probably lack enough information to identify any Browning shotgun ever made. – erickson Jun 17 '10 at 18:44

@erickson: ok, I've reworded the question. I was going for the type of thing I've seen on other sites where you can ask about a small .38 Colt revolver and get a bunch of help like: "if it has this feature, but not this one, it's a 1978 Detective Special". – kbyrd Jul 27 '10 at 3:05

up vote -3 down vote

added by rlb.usa Jun 3 '10 at 20:20

I think this is too subjective. – user452 Jun 3 '10 at 20:21

I still think this is pretty subjective. There will be as many opinions as there are calibers. – user452 Jun 3 '10 at 21:30

If it was "Which minimum caliber of gun do you suggest for [deer hunting] ?", I would say it would be closer. – TheHurt Jun 3 '10 at 21:35

@Geoff The vast majority of even enthusiasts don't make the distinction... – TheHurt Jun 3 '10 at 22:45

@TheHurt: Um, there is a huge difference between caliber and ballistics. Anyone who doesn't make the distinction is just flat out wrong. – Geoffrey Chetwood Jun 4 '10 at 12:06

show 2 more improvement suggestions

up vote -3 down vote

added by Binoj Antony, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jul 10 '10 at 1:51

on flat terrain, with a proper rifle - anyone "can" shoot 3 miles .. if you mean "accurately", well, that's a whole different story :) – warren Jun 30 '10 at 20:23

up vote -3 down vote

added by Binoj Antony Jun 30 '10 at 10:29

How is a bullet a replacement for gunpowder? One is a propellant and one is a projectile. – Geoffrey Chetwood Jun 30 '10 at 12:39

pretty sure the asker meant "cartridges" vs powder-wadding-bullet – warren Jun 30 '10 at 20:23

up vote -3 down vote

added by Luke, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jul 18 '10 at 15:30

After taking all the necessary licences tests and lessons etc. – Luke Jul 9 '10 at 12:55

having grown-up there, I can offer a couple suggestions: 1) no rim-fire, 2) if you're going to the Adirondacks or Catskills, the longest shot you'll be able to take is likely under 100yds, 3) some counties limit what you can use (eg shotgun-only in Albany county), 4) if you're going to non-wooded areas, you can easily have 400yds of sight line – warren Jul 9 '10 at 13:53

Keep in mind that we're discussing what questions are on and off topic, we're not actually asking and answering questions yet. We need to get to beta for that. – user452 Jul 9 '10 at 16:38

Perhaps a better question would be "I am moving to New york state in a year and would like to get into deer hunting. Are there any legal restrictions on which rifles can be owned and/or used for hunting in New York State?" – pkaeding Jul 14 '10 at 17:50

@warren thanks, I posted it as a new question so it can be voted on, etc: area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/164/firearms/… (though I had to modify it a little to get under the character limit) – pkaeding Jul 16 '10 at 18:04

show 4 more improvement suggestions

up vote -4 down vote

added by Binoj Antony Jun 30 '10 at 10:26

	What is a 'normal' gun? – Geoffrey Chetwood Jun 30 '10 at 17:47
	this would be better worded as "What are the functional differences between revolvers, semi-automatic handguns, rifles, and shotguns?" – warren Jun 30 '10 at 20:27

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

up vote -5 down vote

added by B. Onstot Jun 3 '10 at 14:30

Reasonable question to me. Different guns eject in different directions. Don't know why someone said it was not good. – Präriewolf Jun 22 '10 at 20:37

@Geoffrey Chetwood If you don't think flung brass is a safety hazard you need to re-evaluate your safety procedures. Also, it's because of attitudes like yours that nothing like this would ever work. – Präriewolf Jun 24 '10 at 19:49

The fact that you need to wear proper eye protection to prevent injury from ejected brass means that ejected brass is a safety concern. It's fairly easily addressed, and it's nothing compared to the more serious safety concerns related to shooting in general - but it's still a safety concern. The question is about left handed shooting for a particular model. I think this is a fair enough question, although not one of my top 5 picks for this topic. – user452 Jun 26 '10 at 23:48

@geoff pointlessly arguing with community members is a great way not to get a community created. – Jeff Atwood Jun 27 '10 at 6:04

@Geoffrey That's an answer to the question proposed, not a discussion as to whether the question the question belongs on the site. It'd be nice to keep it on topic ... – C. Ross Jun 27 '10 at 23:09

show 9 more improvement suggestions

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 -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 improvement suggestions

up vote -8 down vote

added by Tyler Carter May 27 '10 at 14:32

I just know someone will ask this question, just because. – Tyler Carter 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