Clearly I haven’t shot anything irl ever and don’t know much about weapons either. Oh and relax, I’m not planning on shooting anyone.
Question comes after videogames, which can sometimes have both weapon types used interchangeably and/or behaving in a similar way.
I would personally believe guns are easier, and that the only advantage a bow would ever have is that they’re not as noisy. But I hear people say aiming with a bow is easier. I guess the type of bow and gun used would also weigh on the matter?
Absolutely a gun. The thing they don’t tell you about bows is that you have to be the one to draw back the bowstring, and you need to exert enough force on that bowstring that your stored potential energy sends an arrow flying. If you’re physically weak, good fucking luck. Yeah, maybe if you’re strong enough or use a compound bow to reduce the amount of strain aiming is easy, but in my experience, it’s pretty rough getting to a point where you can conveniently draw, aim, and fire a bow.
Meanwhile, a .22 rifle barely has enough kick for a child to feel. A shotgun or any higher calibre rifle might give a teenager a bit of a sore shoulder. Movies exaggerate it a little bit, but it really isn’t that much harder than “point and click.” The answer is gun by a mile.
Source: I had a lot of ranged weapons training in the Scouts. If I had to choose one, I’d go with hatchets.
Of all the weapons in the vast Soviet arsenal nothing was more profitable than Avtomat Kalashnikova model of 1947, more commonly known as the AK-47, or Kalashnikov.
It’s the world’s most popular assault rifle, a weapon all fighters love. An elegantly simple nine pound amalgamation of forged steel and plywood, it doesn’t break, jam, or overheat. It will shoot whether it’s covered in mud or filled with sand.
It’s so easy even a child can use it, and they do.
The Soviets put the gun on a coin, Mozambique put it on their flag. Since the end of the Cold War, the Kalashnikov has become the Russian people’s greatest export. After that comes vodka, caviar, and suicidal novelists. One thing is for sure; no one was lining up to buy their cars.
~ Lord of War
People say that aiming with bows is easier? What kind of world do they live in?
I’ve shot a decent amount of bows and guns, and guns are far easier to shoot. The difference is that because guns are easier to shoot, there’s a greater expectation of accuracy. Shooting a bow at 30 meters and hitting your target is considered accurate, shooting a gun at 30 meters is considered nothing.
That being said, I still like archery more. There’s just something very personal about the experience of pulling the bowstring and manually making the arrow fly
Yeah, I haven’t shot many guns, but it’s way easier. It’s fun, maybe because it feels really intuitive, but I find bow shooting almost meditative as you try to repeat your actions and feel your body line up with your bow
Bows are actually incredibly hard to use. When you see a “draw weight” of the bow, this is the force you need to exert to pull it back to its full draw. 40-50lbs is considered normal, I believe, while the English Longbow - famous for its use in the Hundred Years’ War - had a draw weigh of at least 80 pounds, with some scholars suggesting even 50% greater numbers than that. Imagine lifting a weight that heavy each time you wanted to loose an arrow!
Bows, then, require extended training to use properly. Not just strength training, although professional archers were jacked, but in how to properly employ the weapon. The dominance of early firearms had much to do with not just their absolute performance - at times, they were actually outperformed by bows in absolute terms - but by that their effective use could be broken down into simple actions which could be easily drilled into new recruits.
If we’re talking about modern guns, this effect is much exaggerated. Guns can take some getting use to, sure, and modern bows have added features for ease of use. But guns are, honestly, shockingly easy to use for what they can accomplish.
Indeed, longbowmen can be identified as their skeletons are significantly deformed over years of training.
Beyond just being able to draw a bow, being able to draw it well enough to have a chance of shooting at all repeatably takes a lot of training - it’s not just lifting a 50+lb weight, pulling it towards you with one and and pushing it away with the other while keeping your arms stable requires a lot of strength in muscles the people don’t tend to use.
Source: former colleague is an international competition level archer - the sheer amount of core strength and coordination and balance you need to be a good archer is wild
They don’t always need to do a full draw for every shot though, especially at shorter ranges. E. G. In this video by Lars Anderson he does some very quick short range shots and doesn’t look like he does a full draw for them: https://youtu.be/BEG-ly9tQGk
That said, firing a gun still seems like it would take way less skill and training, except maybe something with a lot of kick like an AWP and deagle? 😅
Low draw means low power and penetration. For speed shooting or distracting/stunning a target, that would be helpful, but you’re not gonna kill someone unless it’s a very lucky shot. There’s a reason war bows were such high draw weight, and it wasn’t for piercing plate. More power means more energy retained over distance and more energy delivered to the target. If you’re needing to speed shoot in close quarters in a self defense scenario, you’re probably better off using the bow as a club or stabbing them with an arrow directly. Archers usually carried other weapons for that reason.
you’re not gonna kill someone unless it’s a very lucky shot.
Skill issue 😜
Looool. Lars Anderson is such a meme joke with my archery friends cause he’s clearly drawing incredibly light draws at super close range. It’s like the equivalent of being showy with a rubber band slingshot. I’m sure a darts player can hit the same targets.
Full disclaimer, I haven’t shot a real gun, just an air pistol and it did feel more intuitive and a little easier to get more accurate shots in comparison to all the tiny, preflight checks I need when I’ve drawn a compound bow.
There’s also the point of needing to draw actual weight (40lbs+ is ideal for hitting targets 60-70 yards away) for effective shots that would make archery more tedious to get into if someone’s not very physically active.
I’m sure both hobbies have their tedium, it’s just a matter of what one finds more interesting to master.
Bows take years to learn and a lifetime to master. Crossbows were a military revolution simply because they were easy to learn. In that sense, crossbows and firearms are very similar, but depending on your range you’ve got more dropoff in accuracy with xbows due to gravity.
100% firearms. Easier to aim and keep on target and easier for people of any strength,size or handicap to use moderately well with minimal training. The only place bows are really better is that they are functionally more simple.
A complete novice can pick up a gun and with minimal coaching be on target after a short time. To get close to the same proficiency and accuracy with a how would take exponentially more time and practice.
Aiming a bow is pretty easy, and it doesn’t require that much strength
(Obviously I’m not talking about a medieval British longbow)
Ask yourself a question, have you ever heard of a toddler accidentally shooting someone with a bow? Firing a gun is so easy that you have to keep them away from babies or the babies are likely to kill themselves.
Yes, you can take on a broad interpretation on what I meant by “easy”, but what I’m asking here is which one makes hitting a desired (not random) target easier.
A firearm, easily. I’ve fired both and bows require much more strength even if it’s a compound bow. On top of that aiming an arrow is much less intuitive than using even iron sights on a gun. Not to mention you can get rounds off much faster on a bolt action gun than a bow. Additionally I think you’re probably more likely to hurt yourself with a bow by smacking your arm than with a gun, assuming you get basic training for both
There’s a reason guns were called the great equalizer.
“God may have created man, but Sam Colt made them equal.”
–Unknown
guns are much easier to aim and use. technically a bow is quieter, but guns can be made to be fairly quiet and are generally much less bulky than bows. generally speaking, guns are point and click. bows are dependent on how you hold the bow, how you hold the arrow, and the form with which you release the arrow (letting the bow move the right way and amount is involved). on top of that even the quietest configuration of a gun will have more power per size than a bow because gunpowder is very energy dense and the barrel of a gun is a great way of focusing that energy into a projectile.
Anyone can pick up a bow and fling a few arrows downrange with minimal coaching but becoming proficient takes longer with archery than with a rifle. IMO, shotguns are even easier: cover the bird with the muzzle and slap that trigger. Dinner is served.
As anecdotal evidence: If you get skunked during rifle season you’re a chump, bow hunters EXPECT to get skunked
Gun is far easier to hit your target with. Crossbow is compareable with much lower range but a bow, wether it be long, recurve or compound is quite hard.
Having hunted with a bow for years; a rifle is 100X easier to use, with range and accuracy an order of magnitude better.
Why the bow preference then?
I think most places have a longer hunting season for bows
We have an insane number of deer around here and with a rifle it’s not exactly hunting when I can step out my back door and fill all my tags with a mag dump. Bow hunting is more sporting and makes me better.
I use a rifle for elk and moose (and boar), but using a bow on those is borderline insane, and there’s not as many of those around.
I consider bows more fun. If I want food on the table the gun is better. However the legal bow season is often much longer and that makes the bow more likely to put food on the table if you can hunt everyday. (hunting is in large part waiting for the animal to come by)
I shoot as a hobby and I’ve dabbled with archery
Bows take strength to use and are also harder to be consistent with. The way you nock the arrow on the string, keeping constant pull while aiming and inconsistencies in the arrows all play a part. Rifles aren’t nearly as bad as long as you have good fundementals.
Ballistics are a big deal with ranged weapons. Arrows don’t go very far or very fast so you really need to know how the arrow will arc and account for that as you aim. The farther the shot the more wind, drop etc will have to be factored into your aim. Elevation matters too if you’re on a hill or in a tree stand or something.
I’m going to make up a number but let’s say 50 yards would be a tough shot for a bow to hit something consistently. For a rifle that is no problem and most rifle bullets’ paths won’t start to arc or get blown by wind significantly until it has travelled several hundred yards.
I find that long range shooting with a bolt action “feels” roughly the same as shooting archery. You really need to focus and make sure you’re doing everything right for good results. But that also makes it that much more satisfying when you do well!
