What is a good reason for every spaceship to carry gun on board?How can a pirate board a spaceship without...
Buying a "Used" Router
How to change a .eps figure to standalone class?
Prevent Nautilus / Nemo from creating .Trash-1000 folder in mounted devices
What can I do to encourage my players to use their consumables?
Was there a pre-determined arrangement for the division of Germany in case it surrendered before any Soviet forces entered its territory?
If angels and devils are the same species, why would their mortal offspring appear physically different?
What species should be used for storage of human minds?
Crack the bank account's password!
How much light is too much?
Can me and my friend spend the summer in Canada (6 weeks) at 16 years old without an adult?
Are all power cords made equal?
Why is "rm -r" unable to delete this folder?
What is a good way to explain how a character can produce flames from their body?
How long has this character been impersonating a Starfleet Officer?
Besides PR credit, does diversity provide anything that meritocracy does not?
Is Screenshot Time-tracking Common?
Remove isolated elements of a vector
"Starve to death" Vs. "Starve to the point of death"
"I showed the monkey himself in the mirror". Why is this sentence grammatical?
Is there any way to make an Apex method parameter lazy?
Charging phone battery with a lower voltage, coming from a bike charger?
What does an unprocessed RAW file look like?
Modern Algebraic Geometry and Analytic Number Theory
Plausible reason for gold-digging ant
What is a good reason for every spaceship to carry gun on board?
How can a pirate board a spaceship without teleportation?How would the rules for carry and use of weapons be affected by reliable stun guns?What is a good political reason for every spacecraft design to come with self destruct sequence?How to trigger a mutiny on board of a spaceship?How to solve the old 'gun on a spaceship' problem?What material to use for a near-future armoured spaceship?How could one board a spaceship during combat?Spaceship construction for travel to an earth-like planetReason to stay on a doomed spaceshipWhat is needed for people not to carry swords?
$begingroup$
In the near future human has started mining on Mars, international treaty governs the use of lethal weapon in space must carry a license. However every spaceship including those single seated carries some sort of ranged firearms, there is no danger of being hijack or abduction in space since only established big companies and wealthy nation can afford any kind of space program. Due to security reason all personnel have to go through thorough screening and checks before permitted to go to space so they should not cause harm to themselves or others, therefore what good reason to have a gun in a spaceship? SETI has not found anything so you know and no FTL.
weapons space-travel spaceships law
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In the near future human has started mining on Mars, international treaty governs the use of lethal weapon in space must carry a license. However every spaceship including those single seated carries some sort of ranged firearms, there is no danger of being hijack or abduction in space since only established big companies and wealthy nation can afford any kind of space program. Due to security reason all personnel have to go through thorough screening and checks before permitted to go to space so they should not cause harm to themselves or others, therefore what good reason to have a gun in a spaceship? SETI has not found anything so you know and no FTL.
weapons space-travel spaceships law
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In the near future human has started mining on Mars, international treaty governs the use of lethal weapon in space must carry a license. However every spaceship including those single seated carries some sort of ranged firearms, there is no danger of being hijack or abduction in space since only established big companies and wealthy nation can afford any kind of space program. Due to security reason all personnel have to go through thorough screening and checks before permitted to go to space so they should not cause harm to themselves or others, therefore what good reason to have a gun in a spaceship? SETI has not found anything so you know and no FTL.
weapons space-travel spaceships law
$endgroup$
In the near future human has started mining on Mars, international treaty governs the use of lethal weapon in space must carry a license. However every spaceship including those single seated carries some sort of ranged firearms, there is no danger of being hijack or abduction in space since only established big companies and wealthy nation can afford any kind of space program. Due to security reason all personnel have to go through thorough screening and checks before permitted to go to space so they should not cause harm to themselves or others, therefore what good reason to have a gun in a spaceship? SETI has not found anything so you know and no FTL.
weapons space-travel spaceships law
weapons space-travel spaceships law
edited 2 hours ago
user6760
asked 5 hours ago
user6760user6760
12.2k1367146
12.2k1367146
add a comment |
add a comment |
9 Answers
9
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
For the same reason some do in real life. Ship (or landing pod) landing isn't perfect so when they arrive back on earth the astronauts need to defend themselves against hostile animals or scavengers.
New contributor
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
In Svalbard, you are basically told to bring a gun if you're heading outside town due to the danger of polar bears.
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Spoki0: Not just "told to", AFAIK it's required by law. youtube.com/watch?v=ch7HwhGynXk a bit off-topic here though.
$endgroup$
– Nyos
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Nyos sysselmannen.no/en/Shortcuts/Firearms It is not required to carry a gun specifically, just recommended. Point is that you might crash land and need to defend yourself, as the answer stated. If you happen to land on Svalbard, you'd be a criminal if you didn't have the means to chase off polar bears!
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Warning: Dark
Imagine a situation where you're in your spaceship, you've run out of fuel, your comms are down, and you're flying through space away from civilisation.
You may have rations to last a few weeks, but with every passing hour, the chance of rescue gets slimmer and slimmer.
After a few days, you know there is no hope of anyone finding you.
You reach across to your firearm...
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
Environmental control is less painful, although not as fast. Disable the oxygen scrubbers and let CO2 build up in the cabin until you pass out.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
2 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Cue "Major Tom"
$endgroup$
– Martijn
2 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Martijn I'll never hear that song the same way again!
$endgroup$
– Renan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If you are not worried about Earth Wilderness landing like Leo Adberg has suggested (which is a very good real world answer), then an alternate would be to consider corportate/national espionage...
If there are only the biggest corporations and governments in space then its safe to assuming there is no space police, so if one company decided to hijack another's ship to either steal the presumably cargo, or possible find out what tech the rival company is working on, then its safe to assume the pilots would want to protect themselves.
Writing in that either companies or governments are in a type of cold war as to who can be the front runner in space travel and its not unreasonable to believe that with all the communication dead zones are the system (dark side of the moon for example, at least until china sent there probe a few weeks back) and there's plenty of areas where a ship could get be hijacked without anyone knowing.
Thankfully we've managed to avoid taking warfare to space so far but its not exactly out of character for the human race to do so...
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No good reason for purpose-designed firearms
Risk assessments are critical to space travel, even more than on Earth. Some of the obvious things that can go wrong because you are carrying a firearm are:
- propellant becomes unstable
- poor maintenance results in mechanism seizing up
- accidental/negligent discharge results in personnel injury or death
- accidental/negligent discharge results in destruction of critical spacecraft components (including atmospheric integrity)
- accidental/negligent discharge imparts momentum (linear or rotational) to spacecraft requiring fuel expenditure for course correction
In addition to these possible risks there is also the certainty that every single flight will be wasting mass on a dangerous object of negligible use - mass that could be used to carry more fuel or operational/profit-generating payload.
To offset these massive disadvantages, there has to be a concrete benefit to putting a firearms on a spacecraft. This is hard to see - in the anti-hijacking role weapons such as tasers are much preferred to things that punch holes in your own ship. Boarding actions are dubious in any hard science setting - docking with a cooperative target is hard enough, docking with an uncooperative target is practically impossible even if its propulsion systems are disabled. As for employing firearms (other than those mounted in sophisticated turrets) against other spacecraft - forget it. Then there is the problem of keeping all of the astronauts current in their firearms training - if they are rusty then they may as well not have a firearm.
But wait...
Not all is lost, however. As was well-portrayed in The Martian, astronauts are a technically competent group of trained improvisers. If the plot of your story requires that a firearm is used then a character can improvise one. Hand-held and/or drone thruster units are a plausible item to have on board a spacecraft - if you disconnect a few safety devices and plug the exhaust with a ball bearing (possibly with some tape wrapped around it to get a good seal) then you have a projectile weapon. A high-pressure air tank is a ready-made reservoir for a very dangerous air rifle, just add a metal tube for a barrel and a valve. (With more time a semi- and/or full-auto version could be manufactured.)
If the requirement is just for a ranged weapon, not necessarily a firearm, then slings are just as easy to make as on Earth. A spacecraft machine shop could be used to make a bow or crossbow.
In summary - just as in many situations on Earth, carrying a firearm is far more dangerous than not carrying a firearm. However, spacecraft have plenty of options for making ranged weapons in an emergency.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Idk in what world firearms in the hands of trained users acting as their training tells them to are more dangerous than improvising weapons from thrusters.
$endgroup$
– Giu Piete
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think the point is, that you don't bring anything to space without reason. So if there is no reason to bring a gun, then you don't. But if the plot requires you to have something like a gun, then you can craft one out of stuff you have with you (originally for other purposes)
$endgroup$
– elPolloLoco
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@elPolloLoco correctly identified the reasoning behind my answer, but I now realise that it wasn't clear. Have added a sentence to hopefully make it clear to all.
$endgroup$
– KerrAvon2055
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
One potential explanation (although not 100% satisfactory) is that it could form part of a survival kit. Bomber pilots, for example, were often equipped with survival kits including flares, emergancy rations and rifles such as here and
here, to help them forage for food and protect against wildlife should they crash land in remote areas. This could feasibly also apply to a spaceship, should they crash land on a remote part of earth.
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There's two possible reasons I can think of.
The first is for some sort of emergency situation - much like trains have hammers to break the windows in an accident - perhaps there could be some situation where they'd need a weapon (are the weapons traditional current conventional weapons?) to break free of a crashed pod or something? Certainly you could argue the carrying of flare guns for situations like this - as safety equipment
The other is if there are any tensions between the big companies and/or wealthy nations. They could then be argued as necessary to protect a claim on a certain sector. Perhaps there had been an incident in the past where one company took over another, so they all carry an stock of weapons for protection against this. (easy to argue it's similar to countries on earth with weapons that are they will never use)
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In space, accidents happen.
Just start some rumor, that space pirates/aliens/spies (or whatever fits your story the best) are responsible for those accidents (like missing people/spaceships). Until the investigations are closed and the results satisfy your astronauts, everyone starts to carry firearms "just in case". You can make those investigations really long, or maybe the custom to carry can stay.
You can also make one legitimate incident, where some madman started attacking his coworkers, and blame guns on him (shootings happen on Earth all the time), also an incident like this might be the best reason to introduce those checks in the first place.
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Imagine that for some reason you are stuck in the middle of a microgravity environment, with nothing within your reach to pull or push yourself and start moving and no way to get outer assistance.
Your only hope to get in motion is to use reaction: expel some mass by exerting a force on it and, by reaction, have the mass exerting a force on you.
A gun with the jolt it provides upon firing is a reasonable way to use this principle. You might want to avoid armored shells to avoid damaging the hull and yourself with ricocheting bullets. Dense liquid filled bullets which splash on impact should do.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
But you need to wear your weapon before getting stuck in the middle of microgravity. And frankly, it would work the same if you had a water bottle with you (or any other item that could be useful to you also in your regular schedule) that you could throw away.
$endgroup$
– SJuan76
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Security
Due to security reason all personnel have to go through thorough screening and checks
These checks do not end all of the possible security issues. They just ensure that a single individual or ar small group does not pose a significant threat.
But what if a group of individuals become the threat? Physical force is still a thing, and if a number of individuals mutiny or revolt, they could be dangerous, either by attacking the loyal crew or accessing critical parts of the ship.
Not to mention that people can become very imaginative when it comes to improvised weapon design.
To put an example, we already have places were people are very careful screened to avoid them inserting weapons in a controlled environments. Yet improvised weapons are made (shivs and the like), revolts do occasionally happen, and the guards do have weapons and/or have support from armed security forces readily available.
Imagine the situation in a spaceship where external support is not available and everyone on board knows about it.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f139969%2fwhat-is-a-good-reason-for-every-spaceship-to-carry-gun-on-board%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
9 Answers
9
active
oldest
votes
9 Answers
9
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
For the same reason some do in real life. Ship (or landing pod) landing isn't perfect so when they arrive back on earth the astronauts need to defend themselves against hostile animals or scavengers.
New contributor
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
In Svalbard, you are basically told to bring a gun if you're heading outside town due to the danger of polar bears.
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Spoki0: Not just "told to", AFAIK it's required by law. youtube.com/watch?v=ch7HwhGynXk a bit off-topic here though.
$endgroup$
– Nyos
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Nyos sysselmannen.no/en/Shortcuts/Firearms It is not required to carry a gun specifically, just recommended. Point is that you might crash land and need to defend yourself, as the answer stated. If you happen to land on Svalbard, you'd be a criminal if you didn't have the means to chase off polar bears!
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For the same reason some do in real life. Ship (or landing pod) landing isn't perfect so when they arrive back on earth the astronauts need to defend themselves against hostile animals or scavengers.
New contributor
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
In Svalbard, you are basically told to bring a gun if you're heading outside town due to the danger of polar bears.
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Spoki0: Not just "told to", AFAIK it's required by law. youtube.com/watch?v=ch7HwhGynXk a bit off-topic here though.
$endgroup$
– Nyos
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Nyos sysselmannen.no/en/Shortcuts/Firearms It is not required to carry a gun specifically, just recommended. Point is that you might crash land and need to defend yourself, as the answer stated. If you happen to land on Svalbard, you'd be a criminal if you didn't have the means to chase off polar bears!
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For the same reason some do in real life. Ship (or landing pod) landing isn't perfect so when they arrive back on earth the astronauts need to defend themselves against hostile animals or scavengers.
New contributor
$endgroup$
For the same reason some do in real life. Ship (or landing pod) landing isn't perfect so when they arrive back on earth the astronauts need to defend themselves against hostile animals or scavengers.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 4 hours ago
Leo AdbergLeo Adberg
1314
1314
New contributor
New contributor
2
$begingroup$
In Svalbard, you are basically told to bring a gun if you're heading outside town due to the danger of polar bears.
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Spoki0: Not just "told to", AFAIK it's required by law. youtube.com/watch?v=ch7HwhGynXk a bit off-topic here though.
$endgroup$
– Nyos
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Nyos sysselmannen.no/en/Shortcuts/Firearms It is not required to carry a gun specifically, just recommended. Point is that you might crash land and need to defend yourself, as the answer stated. If you happen to land on Svalbard, you'd be a criminal if you didn't have the means to chase off polar bears!
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
In Svalbard, you are basically told to bring a gun if you're heading outside town due to the danger of polar bears.
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Spoki0: Not just "told to", AFAIK it's required by law. youtube.com/watch?v=ch7HwhGynXk a bit off-topic here though.
$endgroup$
– Nyos
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Nyos sysselmannen.no/en/Shortcuts/Firearms It is not required to carry a gun specifically, just recommended. Point is that you might crash land and need to defend yourself, as the answer stated. If you happen to land on Svalbard, you'd be a criminal if you didn't have the means to chase off polar bears!
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
In Svalbard, you are basically told to bring a gun if you're heading outside town due to the danger of polar bears.
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
In Svalbard, you are basically told to bring a gun if you're heading outside town due to the danger of polar bears.
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
@Spoki0: Not just "told to", AFAIK it's required by law. youtube.com/watch?v=ch7HwhGynXk a bit off-topic here though.
$endgroup$
– Nyos
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Spoki0: Not just "told to", AFAIK it's required by law. youtube.com/watch?v=ch7HwhGynXk a bit off-topic here though.
$endgroup$
– Nyos
2 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@Nyos sysselmannen.no/en/Shortcuts/Firearms It is not required to carry a gun specifically, just recommended. Point is that you might crash land and need to defend yourself, as the answer stated. If you happen to land on Svalbard, you'd be a criminal if you didn't have the means to chase off polar bears!
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Nyos sysselmannen.no/en/Shortcuts/Firearms It is not required to carry a gun specifically, just recommended. Point is that you might crash land and need to defend yourself, as the answer stated. If you happen to land on Svalbard, you'd be a criminal if you didn't have the means to chase off polar bears!
$endgroup$
– Spoki0
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Warning: Dark
Imagine a situation where you're in your spaceship, you've run out of fuel, your comms are down, and you're flying through space away from civilisation.
You may have rations to last a few weeks, but with every passing hour, the chance of rescue gets slimmer and slimmer.
After a few days, you know there is no hope of anyone finding you.
You reach across to your firearm...
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
Environmental control is less painful, although not as fast. Disable the oxygen scrubbers and let CO2 build up in the cabin until you pass out.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
2 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Cue "Major Tom"
$endgroup$
– Martijn
2 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Martijn I'll never hear that song the same way again!
$endgroup$
– Renan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Warning: Dark
Imagine a situation where you're in your spaceship, you've run out of fuel, your comms are down, and you're flying through space away from civilisation.
You may have rations to last a few weeks, but with every passing hour, the chance of rescue gets slimmer and slimmer.
After a few days, you know there is no hope of anyone finding you.
You reach across to your firearm...
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
Environmental control is less painful, although not as fast. Disable the oxygen scrubbers and let CO2 build up in the cabin until you pass out.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
2 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Cue "Major Tom"
$endgroup$
– Martijn
2 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Martijn I'll never hear that song the same way again!
$endgroup$
– Renan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Warning: Dark
Imagine a situation where you're in your spaceship, you've run out of fuel, your comms are down, and you're flying through space away from civilisation.
You may have rations to last a few weeks, but with every passing hour, the chance of rescue gets slimmer and slimmer.
After a few days, you know there is no hope of anyone finding you.
You reach across to your firearm...
$endgroup$
Warning: Dark
Imagine a situation where you're in your spaceship, you've run out of fuel, your comms are down, and you're flying through space away from civilisation.
You may have rations to last a few weeks, but with every passing hour, the chance of rescue gets slimmer and slimmer.
After a few days, you know there is no hope of anyone finding you.
You reach across to your firearm...
edited 2 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
Gregroy CurrieGregroy Currie
36514
36514
7
$begingroup$
Environmental control is less painful, although not as fast. Disable the oxygen scrubbers and let CO2 build up in the cabin until you pass out.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
2 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Cue "Major Tom"
$endgroup$
– Martijn
2 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Martijn I'll never hear that song the same way again!
$endgroup$
– Renan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
7
$begingroup$
Environmental control is less painful, although not as fast. Disable the oxygen scrubbers and let CO2 build up in the cabin until you pass out.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
2 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Cue "Major Tom"
$endgroup$
– Martijn
2 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@Martijn I'll never hear that song the same way again!
$endgroup$
– Renan
1 hour ago
7
7
$begingroup$
Environmental control is less painful, although not as fast. Disable the oxygen scrubbers and let CO2 build up in the cabin until you pass out.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Environmental control is less painful, although not as fast. Disable the oxygen scrubbers and let CO2 build up in the cabin until you pass out.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
2 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
Cue "Major Tom"
$endgroup$
– Martijn
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Cue "Major Tom"
$endgroup$
– Martijn
2 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
@Martijn I'll never hear that song the same way again!
$endgroup$
– Renan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@Martijn I'll never hear that song the same way again!
$endgroup$
– Renan
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If you are not worried about Earth Wilderness landing like Leo Adberg has suggested (which is a very good real world answer), then an alternate would be to consider corportate/national espionage...
If there are only the biggest corporations and governments in space then its safe to assuming there is no space police, so if one company decided to hijack another's ship to either steal the presumably cargo, or possible find out what tech the rival company is working on, then its safe to assume the pilots would want to protect themselves.
Writing in that either companies or governments are in a type of cold war as to who can be the front runner in space travel and its not unreasonable to believe that with all the communication dead zones are the system (dark side of the moon for example, at least until china sent there probe a few weeks back) and there's plenty of areas where a ship could get be hijacked without anyone knowing.
Thankfully we've managed to avoid taking warfare to space so far but its not exactly out of character for the human race to do so...
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If you are not worried about Earth Wilderness landing like Leo Adberg has suggested (which is a very good real world answer), then an alternate would be to consider corportate/national espionage...
If there are only the biggest corporations and governments in space then its safe to assuming there is no space police, so if one company decided to hijack another's ship to either steal the presumably cargo, or possible find out what tech the rival company is working on, then its safe to assume the pilots would want to protect themselves.
Writing in that either companies or governments are in a type of cold war as to who can be the front runner in space travel and its not unreasonable to believe that with all the communication dead zones are the system (dark side of the moon for example, at least until china sent there probe a few weeks back) and there's plenty of areas where a ship could get be hijacked without anyone knowing.
Thankfully we've managed to avoid taking warfare to space so far but its not exactly out of character for the human race to do so...
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If you are not worried about Earth Wilderness landing like Leo Adberg has suggested (which is a very good real world answer), then an alternate would be to consider corportate/national espionage...
If there are only the biggest corporations and governments in space then its safe to assuming there is no space police, so if one company decided to hijack another's ship to either steal the presumably cargo, or possible find out what tech the rival company is working on, then its safe to assume the pilots would want to protect themselves.
Writing in that either companies or governments are in a type of cold war as to who can be the front runner in space travel and its not unreasonable to believe that with all the communication dead zones are the system (dark side of the moon for example, at least until china sent there probe a few weeks back) and there's plenty of areas where a ship could get be hijacked without anyone knowing.
Thankfully we've managed to avoid taking warfare to space so far but its not exactly out of character for the human race to do so...
$endgroup$
If you are not worried about Earth Wilderness landing like Leo Adberg has suggested (which is a very good real world answer), then an alternate would be to consider corportate/national espionage...
If there are only the biggest corporations and governments in space then its safe to assuming there is no space police, so if one company decided to hijack another's ship to either steal the presumably cargo, or possible find out what tech the rival company is working on, then its safe to assume the pilots would want to protect themselves.
Writing in that either companies or governments are in a type of cold war as to who can be the front runner in space travel and its not unreasonable to believe that with all the communication dead zones are the system (dark side of the moon for example, at least until china sent there probe a few weeks back) and there's plenty of areas where a ship could get be hijacked without anyone knowing.
Thankfully we've managed to avoid taking warfare to space so far but its not exactly out of character for the human race to do so...
answered 4 hours ago
Blade WraithBlade Wraith
7,90411241
7,90411241
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No good reason for purpose-designed firearms
Risk assessments are critical to space travel, even more than on Earth. Some of the obvious things that can go wrong because you are carrying a firearm are:
- propellant becomes unstable
- poor maintenance results in mechanism seizing up
- accidental/negligent discharge results in personnel injury or death
- accidental/negligent discharge results in destruction of critical spacecraft components (including atmospheric integrity)
- accidental/negligent discharge imparts momentum (linear or rotational) to spacecraft requiring fuel expenditure for course correction
In addition to these possible risks there is also the certainty that every single flight will be wasting mass on a dangerous object of negligible use - mass that could be used to carry more fuel or operational/profit-generating payload.
To offset these massive disadvantages, there has to be a concrete benefit to putting a firearms on a spacecraft. This is hard to see - in the anti-hijacking role weapons such as tasers are much preferred to things that punch holes in your own ship. Boarding actions are dubious in any hard science setting - docking with a cooperative target is hard enough, docking with an uncooperative target is practically impossible even if its propulsion systems are disabled. As for employing firearms (other than those mounted in sophisticated turrets) against other spacecraft - forget it. Then there is the problem of keeping all of the astronauts current in their firearms training - if they are rusty then they may as well not have a firearm.
But wait...
Not all is lost, however. As was well-portrayed in The Martian, astronauts are a technically competent group of trained improvisers. If the plot of your story requires that a firearm is used then a character can improvise one. Hand-held and/or drone thruster units are a plausible item to have on board a spacecraft - if you disconnect a few safety devices and plug the exhaust with a ball bearing (possibly with some tape wrapped around it to get a good seal) then you have a projectile weapon. A high-pressure air tank is a ready-made reservoir for a very dangerous air rifle, just add a metal tube for a barrel and a valve. (With more time a semi- and/or full-auto version could be manufactured.)
If the requirement is just for a ranged weapon, not necessarily a firearm, then slings are just as easy to make as on Earth. A spacecraft machine shop could be used to make a bow or crossbow.
In summary - just as in many situations on Earth, carrying a firearm is far more dangerous than not carrying a firearm. However, spacecraft have plenty of options for making ranged weapons in an emergency.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Idk in what world firearms in the hands of trained users acting as their training tells them to are more dangerous than improvising weapons from thrusters.
$endgroup$
– Giu Piete
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think the point is, that you don't bring anything to space without reason. So if there is no reason to bring a gun, then you don't. But if the plot requires you to have something like a gun, then you can craft one out of stuff you have with you (originally for other purposes)
$endgroup$
– elPolloLoco
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@elPolloLoco correctly identified the reasoning behind my answer, but I now realise that it wasn't clear. Have added a sentence to hopefully make it clear to all.
$endgroup$
– KerrAvon2055
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No good reason for purpose-designed firearms
Risk assessments are critical to space travel, even more than on Earth. Some of the obvious things that can go wrong because you are carrying a firearm are:
- propellant becomes unstable
- poor maintenance results in mechanism seizing up
- accidental/negligent discharge results in personnel injury or death
- accidental/negligent discharge results in destruction of critical spacecraft components (including atmospheric integrity)
- accidental/negligent discharge imparts momentum (linear or rotational) to spacecraft requiring fuel expenditure for course correction
In addition to these possible risks there is also the certainty that every single flight will be wasting mass on a dangerous object of negligible use - mass that could be used to carry more fuel or operational/profit-generating payload.
To offset these massive disadvantages, there has to be a concrete benefit to putting a firearms on a spacecraft. This is hard to see - in the anti-hijacking role weapons such as tasers are much preferred to things that punch holes in your own ship. Boarding actions are dubious in any hard science setting - docking with a cooperative target is hard enough, docking with an uncooperative target is practically impossible even if its propulsion systems are disabled. As for employing firearms (other than those mounted in sophisticated turrets) against other spacecraft - forget it. Then there is the problem of keeping all of the astronauts current in their firearms training - if they are rusty then they may as well not have a firearm.
But wait...
Not all is lost, however. As was well-portrayed in The Martian, astronauts are a technically competent group of trained improvisers. If the plot of your story requires that a firearm is used then a character can improvise one. Hand-held and/or drone thruster units are a plausible item to have on board a spacecraft - if you disconnect a few safety devices and plug the exhaust with a ball bearing (possibly with some tape wrapped around it to get a good seal) then you have a projectile weapon. A high-pressure air tank is a ready-made reservoir for a very dangerous air rifle, just add a metal tube for a barrel and a valve. (With more time a semi- and/or full-auto version could be manufactured.)
If the requirement is just for a ranged weapon, not necessarily a firearm, then slings are just as easy to make as on Earth. A spacecraft machine shop could be used to make a bow or crossbow.
In summary - just as in many situations on Earth, carrying a firearm is far more dangerous than not carrying a firearm. However, spacecraft have plenty of options for making ranged weapons in an emergency.
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
Idk in what world firearms in the hands of trained users acting as their training tells them to are more dangerous than improvising weapons from thrusters.
$endgroup$
– Giu Piete
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think the point is, that you don't bring anything to space without reason. So if there is no reason to bring a gun, then you don't. But if the plot requires you to have something like a gun, then you can craft one out of stuff you have with you (originally for other purposes)
$endgroup$
– elPolloLoco
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@elPolloLoco correctly identified the reasoning behind my answer, but I now realise that it wasn't clear. Have added a sentence to hopefully make it clear to all.
$endgroup$
– KerrAvon2055
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No good reason for purpose-designed firearms
Risk assessments are critical to space travel, even more than on Earth. Some of the obvious things that can go wrong because you are carrying a firearm are:
- propellant becomes unstable
- poor maintenance results in mechanism seizing up
- accidental/negligent discharge results in personnel injury or death
- accidental/negligent discharge results in destruction of critical spacecraft components (including atmospheric integrity)
- accidental/negligent discharge imparts momentum (linear or rotational) to spacecraft requiring fuel expenditure for course correction
In addition to these possible risks there is also the certainty that every single flight will be wasting mass on a dangerous object of negligible use - mass that could be used to carry more fuel or operational/profit-generating payload.
To offset these massive disadvantages, there has to be a concrete benefit to putting a firearms on a spacecraft. This is hard to see - in the anti-hijacking role weapons such as tasers are much preferred to things that punch holes in your own ship. Boarding actions are dubious in any hard science setting - docking with a cooperative target is hard enough, docking with an uncooperative target is practically impossible even if its propulsion systems are disabled. As for employing firearms (other than those mounted in sophisticated turrets) against other spacecraft - forget it. Then there is the problem of keeping all of the astronauts current in their firearms training - if they are rusty then they may as well not have a firearm.
But wait...
Not all is lost, however. As was well-portrayed in The Martian, astronauts are a technically competent group of trained improvisers. If the plot of your story requires that a firearm is used then a character can improvise one. Hand-held and/or drone thruster units are a plausible item to have on board a spacecraft - if you disconnect a few safety devices and plug the exhaust with a ball bearing (possibly with some tape wrapped around it to get a good seal) then you have a projectile weapon. A high-pressure air tank is a ready-made reservoir for a very dangerous air rifle, just add a metal tube for a barrel and a valve. (With more time a semi- and/or full-auto version could be manufactured.)
If the requirement is just for a ranged weapon, not necessarily a firearm, then slings are just as easy to make as on Earth. A spacecraft machine shop could be used to make a bow or crossbow.
In summary - just as in many situations on Earth, carrying a firearm is far more dangerous than not carrying a firearm. However, spacecraft have plenty of options for making ranged weapons in an emergency.
$endgroup$
No good reason for purpose-designed firearms
Risk assessments are critical to space travel, even more than on Earth. Some of the obvious things that can go wrong because you are carrying a firearm are:
- propellant becomes unstable
- poor maintenance results in mechanism seizing up
- accidental/negligent discharge results in personnel injury or death
- accidental/negligent discharge results in destruction of critical spacecraft components (including atmospheric integrity)
- accidental/negligent discharge imparts momentum (linear or rotational) to spacecraft requiring fuel expenditure for course correction
In addition to these possible risks there is also the certainty that every single flight will be wasting mass on a dangerous object of negligible use - mass that could be used to carry more fuel or operational/profit-generating payload.
To offset these massive disadvantages, there has to be a concrete benefit to putting a firearms on a spacecraft. This is hard to see - in the anti-hijacking role weapons such as tasers are much preferred to things that punch holes in your own ship. Boarding actions are dubious in any hard science setting - docking with a cooperative target is hard enough, docking with an uncooperative target is practically impossible even if its propulsion systems are disabled. As for employing firearms (other than those mounted in sophisticated turrets) against other spacecraft - forget it. Then there is the problem of keeping all of the astronauts current in their firearms training - if they are rusty then they may as well not have a firearm.
But wait...
Not all is lost, however. As was well-portrayed in The Martian, astronauts are a technically competent group of trained improvisers. If the plot of your story requires that a firearm is used then a character can improvise one. Hand-held and/or drone thruster units are a plausible item to have on board a spacecraft - if you disconnect a few safety devices and plug the exhaust with a ball bearing (possibly with some tape wrapped around it to get a good seal) then you have a projectile weapon. A high-pressure air tank is a ready-made reservoir for a very dangerous air rifle, just add a metal tube for a barrel and a valve. (With more time a semi- and/or full-auto version could be manufactured.)
If the requirement is just for a ranged weapon, not necessarily a firearm, then slings are just as easy to make as on Earth. A spacecraft machine shop could be used to make a bow or crossbow.
In summary - just as in many situations on Earth, carrying a firearm is far more dangerous than not carrying a firearm. However, spacecraft have plenty of options for making ranged weapons in an emergency.
edited 2 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
KerrAvon2055KerrAvon2055
4,0481817
4,0481817
2
$begingroup$
Idk in what world firearms in the hands of trained users acting as their training tells them to are more dangerous than improvising weapons from thrusters.
$endgroup$
– Giu Piete
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think the point is, that you don't bring anything to space without reason. So if there is no reason to bring a gun, then you don't. But if the plot requires you to have something like a gun, then you can craft one out of stuff you have with you (originally for other purposes)
$endgroup$
– elPolloLoco
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@elPolloLoco correctly identified the reasoning behind my answer, but I now realise that it wasn't clear. Have added a sentence to hopefully make it clear to all.
$endgroup$
– KerrAvon2055
2 hours ago
add a comment |
2
$begingroup$
Idk in what world firearms in the hands of trained users acting as their training tells them to are more dangerous than improvising weapons from thrusters.
$endgroup$
– Giu Piete
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
I think the point is, that you don't bring anything to space without reason. So if there is no reason to bring a gun, then you don't. But if the plot requires you to have something like a gun, then you can craft one out of stuff you have with you (originally for other purposes)
$endgroup$
– elPolloLoco
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@elPolloLoco correctly identified the reasoning behind my answer, but I now realise that it wasn't clear. Have added a sentence to hopefully make it clear to all.
$endgroup$
– KerrAvon2055
2 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
Idk in what world firearms in the hands of trained users acting as their training tells them to are more dangerous than improvising weapons from thrusters.
$endgroup$
– Giu Piete
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Idk in what world firearms in the hands of trained users acting as their training tells them to are more dangerous than improvising weapons from thrusters.
$endgroup$
– Giu Piete
2 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
I think the point is, that you don't bring anything to space without reason. So if there is no reason to bring a gun, then you don't. But if the plot requires you to have something like a gun, then you can craft one out of stuff you have with you (originally for other purposes)
$endgroup$
– elPolloLoco
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
I think the point is, that you don't bring anything to space without reason. So if there is no reason to bring a gun, then you don't. But if the plot requires you to have something like a gun, then you can craft one out of stuff you have with you (originally for other purposes)
$endgroup$
– elPolloLoco
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@elPolloLoco correctly identified the reasoning behind my answer, but I now realise that it wasn't clear. Have added a sentence to hopefully make it clear to all.
$endgroup$
– KerrAvon2055
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@elPolloLoco correctly identified the reasoning behind my answer, but I now realise that it wasn't clear. Have added a sentence to hopefully make it clear to all.
$endgroup$
– KerrAvon2055
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
One potential explanation (although not 100% satisfactory) is that it could form part of a survival kit. Bomber pilots, for example, were often equipped with survival kits including flares, emergancy rations and rifles such as here and
here, to help them forage for food and protect against wildlife should they crash land in remote areas. This could feasibly also apply to a spaceship, should they crash land on a remote part of earth.
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
One potential explanation (although not 100% satisfactory) is that it could form part of a survival kit. Bomber pilots, for example, were often equipped with survival kits including flares, emergancy rations and rifles such as here and
here, to help them forage for food and protect against wildlife should they crash land in remote areas. This could feasibly also apply to a spaceship, should they crash land on a remote part of earth.
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
One potential explanation (although not 100% satisfactory) is that it could form part of a survival kit. Bomber pilots, for example, were often equipped with survival kits including flares, emergancy rations and rifles such as here and
here, to help them forage for food and protect against wildlife should they crash land in remote areas. This could feasibly also apply to a spaceship, should they crash land on a remote part of earth.
New contributor
$endgroup$
One potential explanation (although not 100% satisfactory) is that it could form part of a survival kit. Bomber pilots, for example, were often equipped with survival kits including flares, emergancy rations and rifles such as here and
here, to help them forage for food and protect against wildlife should they crash land in remote areas. This could feasibly also apply to a spaceship, should they crash land on a remote part of earth.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 1 hour ago
JackJack
912
912
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There's two possible reasons I can think of.
The first is for some sort of emergency situation - much like trains have hammers to break the windows in an accident - perhaps there could be some situation where they'd need a weapon (are the weapons traditional current conventional weapons?) to break free of a crashed pod or something? Certainly you could argue the carrying of flare guns for situations like this - as safety equipment
The other is if there are any tensions between the big companies and/or wealthy nations. They could then be argued as necessary to protect a claim on a certain sector. Perhaps there had been an incident in the past where one company took over another, so they all carry an stock of weapons for protection against this. (easy to argue it's similar to countries on earth with weapons that are they will never use)
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There's two possible reasons I can think of.
The first is for some sort of emergency situation - much like trains have hammers to break the windows in an accident - perhaps there could be some situation where they'd need a weapon (are the weapons traditional current conventional weapons?) to break free of a crashed pod or something? Certainly you could argue the carrying of flare guns for situations like this - as safety equipment
The other is if there are any tensions between the big companies and/or wealthy nations. They could then be argued as necessary to protect a claim on a certain sector. Perhaps there had been an incident in the past where one company took over another, so they all carry an stock of weapons for protection against this. (easy to argue it's similar to countries on earth with weapons that are they will never use)
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There's two possible reasons I can think of.
The first is for some sort of emergency situation - much like trains have hammers to break the windows in an accident - perhaps there could be some situation where they'd need a weapon (are the weapons traditional current conventional weapons?) to break free of a crashed pod or something? Certainly you could argue the carrying of flare guns for situations like this - as safety equipment
The other is if there are any tensions between the big companies and/or wealthy nations. They could then be argued as necessary to protect a claim on a certain sector. Perhaps there had been an incident in the past where one company took over another, so they all carry an stock of weapons for protection against this. (easy to argue it's similar to countries on earth with weapons that are they will never use)
New contributor
$endgroup$
There's two possible reasons I can think of.
The first is for some sort of emergency situation - much like trains have hammers to break the windows in an accident - perhaps there could be some situation where they'd need a weapon (are the weapons traditional current conventional weapons?) to break free of a crashed pod or something? Certainly you could argue the carrying of flare guns for situations like this - as safety equipment
The other is if there are any tensions between the big companies and/or wealthy nations. They could then be argued as necessary to protect a claim on a certain sector. Perhaps there had been an incident in the past where one company took over another, so they all carry an stock of weapons for protection against this. (easy to argue it's similar to countries on earth with weapons that are they will never use)
New contributor
New contributor
answered 49 mins ago
SmockSmock
212
212
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In space, accidents happen.
Just start some rumor, that space pirates/aliens/spies (or whatever fits your story the best) are responsible for those accidents (like missing people/spaceships). Until the investigations are closed and the results satisfy your astronauts, everyone starts to carry firearms "just in case". You can make those investigations really long, or maybe the custom to carry can stay.
You can also make one legitimate incident, where some madman started attacking his coworkers, and blame guns on him (shootings happen on Earth all the time), also an incident like this might be the best reason to introduce those checks in the first place.
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In space, accidents happen.
Just start some rumor, that space pirates/aliens/spies (or whatever fits your story the best) are responsible for those accidents (like missing people/spaceships). Until the investigations are closed and the results satisfy your astronauts, everyone starts to carry firearms "just in case". You can make those investigations really long, or maybe the custom to carry can stay.
You can also make one legitimate incident, where some madman started attacking his coworkers, and blame guns on him (shootings happen on Earth all the time), also an incident like this might be the best reason to introduce those checks in the first place.
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In space, accidents happen.
Just start some rumor, that space pirates/aliens/spies (or whatever fits your story the best) are responsible for those accidents (like missing people/spaceships). Until the investigations are closed and the results satisfy your astronauts, everyone starts to carry firearms "just in case". You can make those investigations really long, or maybe the custom to carry can stay.
You can also make one legitimate incident, where some madman started attacking his coworkers, and blame guns on him (shootings happen on Earth all the time), also an incident like this might be the best reason to introduce those checks in the first place.
New contributor
$endgroup$
In space, accidents happen.
Just start some rumor, that space pirates/aliens/spies (or whatever fits your story the best) are responsible for those accidents (like missing people/spaceships). Until the investigations are closed and the results satisfy your astronauts, everyone starts to carry firearms "just in case". You can make those investigations really long, or maybe the custom to carry can stay.
You can also make one legitimate incident, where some madman started attacking his coworkers, and blame guns on him (shootings happen on Earth all the time), also an incident like this might be the best reason to introduce those checks in the first place.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 2 hours ago
NyosNyos
811
811
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Imagine that for some reason you are stuck in the middle of a microgravity environment, with nothing within your reach to pull or push yourself and start moving and no way to get outer assistance.
Your only hope to get in motion is to use reaction: expel some mass by exerting a force on it and, by reaction, have the mass exerting a force on you.
A gun with the jolt it provides upon firing is a reasonable way to use this principle. You might want to avoid armored shells to avoid damaging the hull and yourself with ricocheting bullets. Dense liquid filled bullets which splash on impact should do.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
But you need to wear your weapon before getting stuck in the middle of microgravity. And frankly, it would work the same if you had a water bottle with you (or any other item that could be useful to you also in your regular schedule) that you could throw away.
$endgroup$
– SJuan76
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Imagine that for some reason you are stuck in the middle of a microgravity environment, with nothing within your reach to pull or push yourself and start moving and no way to get outer assistance.
Your only hope to get in motion is to use reaction: expel some mass by exerting a force on it and, by reaction, have the mass exerting a force on you.
A gun with the jolt it provides upon firing is a reasonable way to use this principle. You might want to avoid armored shells to avoid damaging the hull and yourself with ricocheting bullets. Dense liquid filled bullets which splash on impact should do.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
But you need to wear your weapon before getting stuck in the middle of microgravity. And frankly, it would work the same if you had a water bottle with you (or any other item that could be useful to you also in your regular schedule) that you could throw away.
$endgroup$
– SJuan76
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Imagine that for some reason you are stuck in the middle of a microgravity environment, with nothing within your reach to pull or push yourself and start moving and no way to get outer assistance.
Your only hope to get in motion is to use reaction: expel some mass by exerting a force on it and, by reaction, have the mass exerting a force on you.
A gun with the jolt it provides upon firing is a reasonable way to use this principle. You might want to avoid armored shells to avoid damaging the hull and yourself with ricocheting bullets. Dense liquid filled bullets which splash on impact should do.
$endgroup$
Imagine that for some reason you are stuck in the middle of a microgravity environment, with nothing within your reach to pull or push yourself and start moving and no way to get outer assistance.
Your only hope to get in motion is to use reaction: expel some mass by exerting a force on it and, by reaction, have the mass exerting a force on you.
A gun with the jolt it provides upon firing is a reasonable way to use this principle. You might want to avoid armored shells to avoid damaging the hull and yourself with ricocheting bullets. Dense liquid filled bullets which splash on impact should do.
answered 2 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
84.8k28201415
84.8k28201415
$begingroup$
But you need to wear your weapon before getting stuck in the middle of microgravity. And frankly, it would work the same if you had a water bottle with you (or any other item that could be useful to you also in your regular schedule) that you could throw away.
$endgroup$
– SJuan76
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
But you need to wear your weapon before getting stuck in the middle of microgravity. And frankly, it would work the same if you had a water bottle with you (or any other item that could be useful to you also in your regular schedule) that you could throw away.
$endgroup$
– SJuan76
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
But you need to wear your weapon before getting stuck in the middle of microgravity. And frankly, it would work the same if you had a water bottle with you (or any other item that could be useful to you also in your regular schedule) that you could throw away.
$endgroup$
– SJuan76
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
But you need to wear your weapon before getting stuck in the middle of microgravity. And frankly, it would work the same if you had a water bottle with you (or any other item that could be useful to you also in your regular schedule) that you could throw away.
$endgroup$
– SJuan76
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Security
Due to security reason all personnel have to go through thorough screening and checks
These checks do not end all of the possible security issues. They just ensure that a single individual or ar small group does not pose a significant threat.
But what if a group of individuals become the threat? Physical force is still a thing, and if a number of individuals mutiny or revolt, they could be dangerous, either by attacking the loyal crew or accessing critical parts of the ship.
Not to mention that people can become very imaginative when it comes to improvised weapon design.
To put an example, we already have places were people are very careful screened to avoid them inserting weapons in a controlled environments. Yet improvised weapons are made (shivs and the like), revolts do occasionally happen, and the guards do have weapons and/or have support from armed security forces readily available.
Imagine the situation in a spaceship where external support is not available and everyone on board knows about it.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Security
Due to security reason all personnel have to go through thorough screening and checks
These checks do not end all of the possible security issues. They just ensure that a single individual or ar small group does not pose a significant threat.
But what if a group of individuals become the threat? Physical force is still a thing, and if a number of individuals mutiny or revolt, they could be dangerous, either by attacking the loyal crew or accessing critical parts of the ship.
Not to mention that people can become very imaginative when it comes to improvised weapon design.
To put an example, we already have places were people are very careful screened to avoid them inserting weapons in a controlled environments. Yet improvised weapons are made (shivs and the like), revolts do occasionally happen, and the guards do have weapons and/or have support from armed security forces readily available.
Imagine the situation in a spaceship where external support is not available and everyone on board knows about it.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Security
Due to security reason all personnel have to go through thorough screening and checks
These checks do not end all of the possible security issues. They just ensure that a single individual or ar small group does not pose a significant threat.
But what if a group of individuals become the threat? Physical force is still a thing, and if a number of individuals mutiny or revolt, they could be dangerous, either by attacking the loyal crew or accessing critical parts of the ship.
Not to mention that people can become very imaginative when it comes to improvised weapon design.
To put an example, we already have places were people are very careful screened to avoid them inserting weapons in a controlled environments. Yet improvised weapons are made (shivs and the like), revolts do occasionally happen, and the guards do have weapons and/or have support from armed security forces readily available.
Imagine the situation in a spaceship where external support is not available and everyone on board knows about it.
$endgroup$
Security
Due to security reason all personnel have to go through thorough screening and checks
These checks do not end all of the possible security issues. They just ensure that a single individual or ar small group does not pose a significant threat.
But what if a group of individuals become the threat? Physical force is still a thing, and if a number of individuals mutiny or revolt, they could be dangerous, either by attacking the loyal crew or accessing critical parts of the ship.
Not to mention that people can become very imaginative when it comes to improvised weapon design.
To put an example, we already have places were people are very careful screened to avoid them inserting weapons in a controlled environments. Yet improvised weapons are made (shivs and the like), revolts do occasionally happen, and the guards do have weapons and/or have support from armed security forces readily available.
Imagine the situation in a spaceship where external support is not available and everyone on board knows about it.
answered 2 hours ago
SJuan76SJuan76
12k12449
12k12449
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f139969%2fwhat-is-a-good-reason-for-every-spaceship-to-carry-gun-on-board%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown