Forum: Author Hangout

movies are notorious for their 'fact based' use of weapons in films.

Oh? And here I was convinced that the technology of magically reloading handguns had been perfected decades ago.

And here I was convinced that the technology of magically reloading handguns had been perfected decades ago.

What's magical about characters re-loading their guns when off camera?

@Ross at Play

And here I was convinced that the technology of magically reloading handguns had been perfected decades ago.

What's magical about characters re-loading their guns when off camera?

The issue is that sometimes there is no "off camera" time available for a reload.

Granted, my pet peeve is for a character to make a stealth approach, and only "check to see if his weapon is loaded" after making that approach.

The issue is that sometimes there is no "off camera" time available for a reload.

That's very rare. Most Hollywood shootouts include repeated close ups of each side, as well as bullet impacts. Championship level competition shooters have been timed with semi-auto pistols, going through 40 rounds or more, (4 magazines) in under a minute. It takes only seconds for each reload.

The one that gets me is when someone is in front of a glass window and shot from behind. The glass is splattered with blood — but where does the bullet go? Not through the window.

That depends on the type of bullet used. Probable split up into tiny segments, most of them remaining in the body, those leaving the body through the large exit hole without enough energy to penetrate the windowpane.

If the glass is splattered with blood the bullet must have created an exit hole. My favourite explanation would else be the bullet hadn't enough energy to go through and remained in the body.

HM.

If the glass is splattered with blood the bullet must have created an exit hole. My favourite explanation would else be the bullet hadn't enough energy to go through and remained in the body.

armoured glass p e r h a p s but is highly unlikely.

After Cert A (army basic training) and competition shooting I agree that much of it is nonsense. You would not get a sniper simply drop to the ground and get a head or heart shot on a target at 1000 yards. He would take time to check range, light, wind and movements of the target waiting for that optimum moment. A far more realistic scenario is in Florida Friends when Chuck Johnson waits two days to get a drug boss and on another occasion overnight to stop a bomb carrying vehicle

What I like is that people think that 5.56 is the same as .223.

You are correct, it's actually even smaller.

Rifle caliber refers to bore diameter. The standard NATO round used by the AR15 is 5.56mm US caliber in .xxx is in inches. 5.56mm = .219 inches

Rifle caliber refers to bore diameter. The standard NATO round used by the AR15 is 5.56mm US caliber in .xxx is in inches. 5.56mm = .219 inches

This is sort of reminiscent of a television cigarette ad (remember those ????) that pushed the fact that their cigarette was 101 mm long. At the time, a lot of cigarette companies were pushing 100 mm cigarettes. The big push line reinforced with a jingle was ".....a silly millimeter longer....."

Kind of fits here too.

As a reader uninterested in the details of firearms, I prefer well-written descriptions: "she had a little 5-inch single-shot pistol taped to her forearm under her sleeve" (if such a thing exists). Or "he toted a gun big enough to blow a 4-inch hole in your belly." I would recognize a BB gun, a .22 rifle or a 12-gauge shotgun. Get beyond that and I'm simply not going to go look up what it means if you say "I shoot a mix of NATO rounds and .308 Win. through my Century Arms CETMI 7.62x51." To me, that means the author was more interested in making me believe he is an expert than he is in telling me a story I understand. On the other hand, I acknowledge that I may be the only person in the world who feels that way.

I prefer well-written descriptions: "she had a little 5-inch single-shot pistol taped to her forearm under her sleeve" (if such a thing exists).

There are some very small pistols out there that are neither semi-auto or revolvers, for concealed carry. Typically, however, they are two shot over/under double barrel Derringer type guns.

https://bondarms.com/bond-arms-handguns/girl-mini/

On the other hand, I acknowledge that I may be the only person in the world who feels that way.

No, you're not. We are two at least and there might be even more.

We are two at least and there might be even more.

And then there are gun enthusiasts who want their gun porn. They will hate you if you get even the smallest detail wrong.

There's room for stories written for both audiences.

And then there are gun enthusiasts who want their gun porn.

We need a 'Gun Porn' tag!

then a 5,000 word definition of it you do, because no 2 people agree on where the line about weapons is.

Shrugs, many tags are like that. Tags are warning as well as advertisement; a 'Gun Porn' tag would be as well.

Gun porn

then a 5,000 word definition of it you do,

The imagination boggeleth how you would do porn with a gun. "He stuck the barrel of his Lee Enfield ..... and the foresight ...."

Sure, some people go into a lot of detail about the guns in the story, and some don't, but the same is true of everything being mentioned in a story.

I'd welcome any tag, warning of 'boring long descriptions'. However, I doubt any author, AJ aside, would willingly apply such a tag to code their story. Despite the fact the discussion about a 'Gun Porn' tag started as a joke, I think such a code wouldn't be any less useful than many of the codes we do have now.

With a long story with a lot of mixed types of sex scenes you can use up a dozen codes on the various ages and gender mixes before you even get onto what they do in the story.

You're probably right; I wouldn't know since I never read stories with such excessive coding. If the number of codes exceeds a dozen, the chances are high one of my many squicks is tagged already.

ETA: Even the number of codes is a squick for me.

We are two at least

#MeThree

I agree on the desirability of a tag I could read as "gun porn". But for said perps to use it, it might need to be something like "gun aficionado". I can't think of the right word, but you'll know what I'm trying to say.

something like "gun afficionado"

Gun nut.

Gun nut.

Those come in several varieties. The two most extreme are as follows:

Type 1: believes that they should be allowed to own any and all weapons that can be termed "gun".

Type 2: No one (besides a possible exception of their security personnel) is to be allowed to touch or even see any "gun".

"gun"

In Basic Training they taught the little rhyme: "This is my rifle, this is my gun, one is for fighting, the other for fun." Usually push-ups were involved if you used the wrong word.

The gun for fun in that little rhyme would definitely fit into porn.

The reason it was in quotes is that I was remembering a kid getting into trouble in school for biting a pop-tart in the shape vaguely reminiscent of a flat pistol or revolver.

Granted the so-called adults in that case (school officials, persecutors, judges) showed that they are the second kind of nuts.

The kid in that case would likely have also gotten into the same -if not worse - trouble had he said that little rhyme in school along with the gestures are (were?) taught with it :).

It's a good thing the military doesn't control our dictionaries.

In the Artillery you can call your weapon a gun, as long as it isn't a rifle. A howitzer or cannon can be a gun. As far as I know, you can't call a mortar a gun.

As far as I know, you can't call a mortar a gun.

Your first and last sentences seem to be in conflict. A mortar is smooth-bore, not rifled.

Now does one shoot better than the other, I have no idea.

Generally speaking, if you want precision shooting, the longer the barrel the better, until it gets long enough to be difficult to handle properly.

A proper AR-15 is a full scale rifle, though it comes in a shorter barreled carbine. Even an AR carbine would have a longer barrel then an MP5. The MP5K-PDW is a semi-auto version of what was originally designed as a sub-machine gun (the original MP5) for military use.

A sub-machine gun generally uses pistol rather than rifle ammo. The classic American Thompson sub-machine gun fires .45 ACP(Automatic Colt Pistol).

The conditions under which they will be used matter.

At long range, the AR-15 or a sniper rifle would be better to reach out and touch someone.

In close quarter combat, over-penetration can become a problem with rifle ammo, it's easier to maneuver with a shorter weapon, and the loss of long range precision from a short barrel doesn't matter much, and you get less blow through with pistol ammo.

Ar 15 is a rifle for medium to long range shooting, but not extreme range shooting like you need s sniper rifle for. An MP5 is for shirt to medium range, and the exact situation you will change the model you would want..

The automatic weapon was first designed for the close in work of trench warfare in WWI. It worked well in the close in house-to-house combats of WWII also. As well as today. The short barrel makes it more maneuverable in close quarters.

And sawed off 12 gauges loaded with 00 are horrendous weapons at short range. They found use in clearing trenches in WWI. And as urban warfare weapons of today.

Shinerdrinker, if you're going for accuracy, investigate the weapons of choice for the Special Forces branches of the military. A lot of their work is short range and their weaponry reflects this.

the maker and model of the car Jodie Foster drove in The Accused? Yes, I mean SXY-SADIE.

You can see it is a Chevy Camaro in this clip at about 1:50. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf8NklFXAd4

Instead of "gun nut", why not Weapons Enthusiast?

I had the same idea earlier. I suggested "something like Gun Aficionado", even though I knew that term was not right.
We both thought "Gun Porn" and "Gun Nut" have derogatory connotations which make them unsuitable.

We both thought "Gun Porn" and "Gun Nut" have derogatory connotations which make them unsuitable.

I thought of gun fetishist, also unsuitable.

OTOH, a female shoe fetishist isn't unsuitable for many (most?) men.

HM