www.ditl.org

Or just because there are plenty of things out in the galaxy that'll kill or enslave you just because you meet them.

Stitch said earlier these might've been repurposed mining tools. What if they're built from scratch and whatever scrap they've got lying around their ship?

Most "scrap" wouldn't really make an effective, safe (for the shooter,) or reliable weapon.

Well, 'scrap' in a general sense. Equipment, spare parts. Admittedly they're not Starfleet engineers, or Macgyver, but you never know.

You know, that almost makes sense. As clearly, these are guns that were not designed by professionals, but rather seem like something someone with just a basic understanding of what a gun does and is suppose to be generally shaped like.

Lighthawk wrote:You know, that almost makes sense. As clearly, these are guns that were not designed by professionals, but rather seem like something someone with just a basic understanding of what a gun does and is suppose to be generally shaped like.

For good or ill, most weapons built under those circumstance tend to return to "scrap metal" status relatively quickly, and tend to be both more dangerous to the user and less dangerous to the target than intended.

True, but how long did we see any of those guns being used for? Maybe a few dozen shots each?

Yeah. It's not the most solid theory, but one that happens to fit the facts.{/Spock]

Knowing what I - that is, what anybody who stops to think about it - know about weapons, I think the theory which best fits the facts is that they have guns. There is no reason to muddy the situation with hypotheses about them being scratch-built by people who aren't weaponsmiths when there is nothing to indicate that they were procured in any way other than most weapons are.

In other words, if I owned a revolver (I'm still toying with the idea of getting a GP-100) and you saw it in my house, there would be no reason for you to think I made it from old furnace parts or whatever rather than just having bought it from a gun shop, right?

That would depend...first off, is it only for display, because if yes, than any weirdness about it can be dismissed as it having never meant to be used. If no, and it possesses little extras that not only do not improve it's use as a weapon, but rather hamper it (or more accurately, the user), then it would hardly be surprising if one would raise questions about whoever had cobbled the thing together.

Lighthawk wrote:That would depend...first off, is it only for display, because if yes, than any weirdness about it can be dismissed as it having never meant to be used. If no, and it possesses little extras that not only do not improve it's use as a weapon, but rather hamper it (or more accurately, the user), then it would hardly be surprising if one would raise questions about whoever had cobbled the thing together.

Lever actions. They still not only exist, but are popular. However, they have severe limitations - they are restricted to revolver calibers, they can't be fired from a prone position, and the user takes his life (or at least his investment) in his hands if he uses spitzer bullets (they use tubular mags.) But, people like them anyway. I think that a few extra spikey bitz at the cost of ergonomics is just the selling point for the crew of a guy like Nero.

They're spiky, so they're cooler and more badass!

Dear god, they got sold on weapons for 90's anti-heroes!

Mikey wrote:Lever actions. They still not only exist, but are popular. However, they have severe limitations - they are restricted to revolver calibers, they can't be fired from a prone position, and the user takes his life (or at least his investment) in his hands if he uses spitzer bullets (they use tubular mags.) But, people like them anyway. I think that a few extra spikey bitz at the cost of ergonomics is just the selling point for the crew of a guy like Nero.

A lever action though provides a trade off. Yeah they have some faults/limitations, but they're also fast for a manual operated system. Spikey bitz that prevent one from achieving a good position to aim from for the sake of "looking cool" is a really bad trade off.

Bear in mind that Romulan starship designs are often designed to be impractical and enormous (the D'Deridex is most prominent) for an imposing figure; keep the slave races in line with scaryness. Whose to say Romulan weapons are any different?

Reliant121 wrote:Bear in mind that Romulan starship designs are often designed to be impractical and enormous (the D'Deridex is most prominent) for an imposing figure; keep the slave races in line with scaryness. Whose to say Romulan weapons are any different?

Then the question becomes, does the psychological effect of the weapon adequately balance its impractical design elements. The hull shape of a starship out in a vacuum won't make as much difference externally as long as all the internal machinery can be laid out but the shape of a tool meant to be handled manually does have a great impact on performance. In this case I don't think the trade-off is worth it. A handheld weapon can't be designed for intimidation with a minimal performance penalty. This seems like a strategy that produces a weapon with a worse bark than bite, to to speak.