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?

  • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    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!

  • MTK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 month ago

    100% firearms. They are so easy that literally (sadly) toddlers have used them and killed with them. A bow takes some practice and skill, almost all basic guns you can use and hit close by targets with, after like 5 minutes of practice.

      • SupraMario@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        It still requires strength to chamber a round. The firearm was already loaded with any kid that’s accidentally used it.

        It is a lot less though than a bow.

  • ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Having hunted with a bow for years; a rifle is 100X easier to use, with range and accuracy an order of magnitude better.

      • ikidd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        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.

      • bluGill@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        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)

  • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    fire arms.

    Hands down.

    Lets just put it this way. you don’t hear about toddlers accidentally killing their parents because they got into the parent’s bows and arrows.

  • Joshi@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    Modern guns a extremely precisely engineered devices that are incredibly easy to use, for better or worse. I know modern sporting bows are also but it’s no contest in my opinion.

    I’ve shot both, bows as a complete amateur and relatively competent with a rifle. There is no question that a modern gun is way easier to pick up as an amateur and hit what you want to hit and I cannot possibly believe there are anything other than extremely niche uses where a bow is superior.

  • Zonetrooper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    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.

    • RegalPotoo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      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

    • Venator@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      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? 😅

      • erin (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        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.

      • pbjelly@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        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.

    • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 month ago

      Indeed, longbowmen can be identified as their skeletons are significantly deformed over years of training.

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Bows are not “incredibly hard to use”. There’s a reason 8 year old cub scouts get to shoot them and manage to hit a target. Weaker draw bows, obviously.

      However, for an adult man a 40 pound draw on a compound bow is pretty easy. That’s also the bottom end of draw strength for hunting. In fact, most teens could pull it back. Typical is about a 60 pound draw.

      Now aiming takes a bit of practice with a bow or a gun or a rifle. Also, if you’re using a compound bow or a traditional bow.

      All of them are not too difficult to learn, but accuracy wise you can learn to be accurate with guns and rifles faster than with bows. Bullets have a much flatter trajectory than slower moving arrows, so if you aim at something you think is 30 yards away, but it’s really just ten yards further out with a bow, you’ll miss. A bullet has almost no change in trajectory over such a small change of distance. Rifles also seem more intuitive to aim.

  • makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 month ago

    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

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    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.

    • Mothra@mander.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      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.

  • Majorllama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    The act of using a prepped weapon? The gun for sure.

    The complexity of the mechanical nature and upkeep? Bow far simpler.

    If you were to just hand a prepped weapon to someone and tell them to shoot a target the gun user would be far more likely to succeed first.

    If you expected someone to figure out how to prep a weapon (stringing the bow vs loading a mag) I think people would intuitively understand how to prepare the bow for use, but the specific motions and buttons for guns might stump some people.

    Now I really want to find a bunch of people who have somehow never seen or heard of either and see which one they intuitively understand easier.

  • unknown1234_5@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    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.

  • Contramuffin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    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

    • Geobloke@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      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

  • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    I have little experience but have fired each and your instincts are right. gun much easier. now because my experience is low maybe large kickback firearms are worse than bows but I went regularly to an archery range but only for like some months and I can say I never got that good with hitting close to a bullseye but with a rifle it was not hard to get better than that the first session. Your example though is video games so im not sure if run and gun might be different. I mean when you are not moving and aiming the sites work pretty well (presumably if calibrated right but I have never done that and assumed whoever did it did a good job) but like if your running around shooting things then I dunno maybe the bow could be better but I doubt it.

  • lgmjon64@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 month ago

    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.

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Bow is too slow to be useful against a home invader. And you need a lot of strength to pull the thing (not sure what its called) back to make it ready for the next bolt. Good for zombie apocalypse scenarios tho.

  • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    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.