NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/org/sca/17199

Text File | 1992-12-31 | 3.5 KB | 67 lines

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!news.iastate.edu!vincent2.iastate.edu!viking
From: [e-mail] (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: Primitive FireArms
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 05:30:04 GMT
Lines: 55

[e-mail] (Mark Schuldenfrei) writes:

>These are decent people, of good will and intent, who don't want guns
>around.  How can we address their needs, as well?

    What "need" is this?  A gun is not a dangerous object unless the
user is dangerous; ie: has dangerous intent or no concept of proper
handling.  I've had some people give fearful looks at certain events
where I've shot my muzzle-loaders off-site and was cleaning them on-site,
but these same people think nothing of watching a dance at Pensic involving
a very sharp katana and a circle of people closely watching by lamplight.
In my opinion, the latter was certainly more hazardous than any gun
I've ever owned.  Frankly, I don't feel that an irrational fear is a
need that should force compliance upon others; rather, I feel that a
common-sense approach can be developed that serves to minimize the
inconveniences of all concerned.

    Muzzle plugs could be placed in the barrel of any firearm
when not actually at the firing range.  This gives easy notice that
the gun is blocked and cannot fire a bullet (though if it were loaded
and fired it would most likely fire parts of the breech about).  The
hammer mechanism may be likewise tied with a leather thong, just as my
sword wears a peace bond.  Easily visible, and both render the weapon
inert and at least as safe as any rattan sword.

>While the shooting and use of period firearms is, well, period, the
>noise and commotion of such firearms would disturb their recreations,
>even as it improves and enhances the recreations of other gentles.
>How do we introduce this recreation into the Society wide current
>Middle Ages, without really ruining the fun that already exists for
>some?

    At ranges greater than 100 yards, and I cannot imagine a firing
line at closer range, the noise is not annoying and in fact is easily
ignored.  At a church camp we used to fire .22's a mere 50 yards from
an open chapel during services (we were in thick woods), and the
sound was barely audible.  Large-bore muskets and the like make a fair
racket, but it is not an annoying, high-pitched BANG!  It's more like
a muffled "WHUMP!"  Given proper siting of the firing range, I doubt
that noise will be much of an issue.

>When it comes to the authenticity game, I believe slightly more strongly
>in the "I'll do my thing, you'll do yours" rule than I do in being
>authentic.  Nevertheless, I thing authenticity is fun most of the time.

    Since firearms are period, but decidedly unsafe compared to
those of modern manufacture, the question to me is in three parts.
1) Do firearms have a place in the Society?
2) If they do, will we allow their firing as a contest?
3) If we do fire them, what balance between safety and authenticity?

< Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 [e-mail] [e-mail] >
<  ISU only censors what I read, not what I say.  Don't blame them.  >
<  "Are you *SURE* he's worth a Harley-Davidson?" -- my grandmother  >
< to my girlfriend, about me.  "I'd better not say" -- my girlfriend >