Would a culture that holds guns in a high esteem and romanticise them in the same way medieval people held a sword be...

In spain too, he also made a ballista

The Dark Tower series has the main character coming from a culture like this, you could look there for some inspiration.
If you want this to be a feature of a more modern setting you might run into issues though, since replaceable parts and assembly lines are pretty antithetical to peoples relations with weapons during the medieval period.

So long as you don't draw too many parallels to real world cultures your players will probably not think it too weird.

Literally America?

too much gun fetish plz help :'(

It's a movie called Equilibrium watch it and decide for yourself

God made all men free.
Sam Colt made them equal.

Literally the US - complete with revised history of the importance of the gun.

>switzerland never has any gun violence
I'm gonna say 'less gun violence' due to a smaller nation and differing culture, population distribution and so on is fine but 'never?'

Full retard.

Nevermind that the first recorded 'school shooting' involved a forty year old guy building a bunch of bombs and killing a whole bunch of people at a college.

Protip: people are assholes. If you take away guns and gunpowder you'll find a sudden rise in stabbing incidents. Take away knives and they'll use clubs.

The only thing that's really important is to make sure that the gun isn't just a weapon. It's a symbol that stands for something greater.

Just as the European sword stood for nobility, justice and heroism, the Japanese katana stood for loyalty, tradition and self-sacrifice, and the ubiquitous American "gun" stands for independence, self-sufficiency and protection.

It doesn't matter that those values are rarely reflected in their actual use and are mostly the result of political interests, nationalist propaganda and historical revisionism. Once an object (or a person, for that matter) becomes a symbol it becomes unassailable and over time accumulates a sense of relevance that's far greater than its actual, practical use.

did he backstab someone with it?

I think the context sought for here is the symbolism of the sword as a sign of authority, integrity and honor, which the gun has largely failed to gain due to being more associated with due to a general lack of status requirement for gun ownership and carry. The handgonners and the harquebusiers were drawn from the levies, not the elites.

The second dimension of this discussion I see is that of legendary swords - cortana, tizona, colada, joyeuse, caladbolg, tyrfing, and all their fantastical abilities. What sorts of legendary firearms would arise from a culture presented by OP? Would we not see colt peacemakers, but a singular Peacemaker that would always draw second yet always shoot first in the hands of a just man?

>I think the context sought for here is the symbolism of the sword as a sign of authority, integrity and honor, which the gun has largely failed to gain
I don't think that's entirely correct. As states, guns are very much associated with certain values. Just look the the rhetoric the NRA and associated types use. It's rarely just about "muh guns", but about what the guns mean. It's about how restricting guns would take away their liberty, their ability to defend themselves from both criminal aggressors and a corrupt government, etc. In that way, guns definitely ARE used as symbols. Which is a big part of why the gun control debate tends to run really hot. The rhetoric use doesn't focus on restricting the use of a certain tool, but on taking away a fundamental piece of freedom and self-determination. And even if you don't care at all about who can or cannot own a certain type of gun, there aren't many people who won't have an strong opinion if they're led to believe their -freedom- is being violated.

Something that immediately jumps to my mind is, I know what Caladbolg was, but I honestly cannot recall the name of the person who used it. Conversely, I know quite a bit about Wild Bill Hickok, but for the life of me I can't remember what kind of revolver he used. The literal, physical gun is just a tool, what's more important is what a man can do with one.

God, I hope so. Not even a bolt, just snuck up behind somebody and jammed an entire ballista into his kidney.

To someone from Europe or Asia? Absolutely.

>Colt Walker
>The gun that can pierce through any armor or defense when used for a just cause and protecting the innocent
>Will break if ever used against an innocent.
>In time, another gunsmith will be able to reforge the Colt Walker.

Swiss law mandates that your rifle and ammo are kept in separate containers, you may only fire it at gun ranges (aside from in self defence) and is combined with national service to instill the training and discipline necessary to wield weapons without being a danger to others.

There is a massive difference between Switzerland and the US.

Well, if I get it right, OP's talking about a culture where the firearm is the symbol of the elite, rather than the masses.
Which does, admittedly, go against the established narratives of the gun, and so forth, but...not like we have anything better to do, so seriously, Veeky Forums, how do you make guns for the l33t?

These guys have it, basically America up until the 80's/End of the Cold War.

Make black powder expensive. Insanely expensive.

An enterprising inventor has figured out how to make a very lethal and accurate rifle, but no one has the resources to produce black powder in the quantities required to arm an army, making black powder weapons specialist weapons or toys for the elite.

Though I don't know how you'd go about that convincingly.

Have you even read the Dark Tower? Look into the gunslingers. It's exactly what you are looking for

Invent some reason for technology to be advanced enough that making guns is possible, but without making them cheap and plentiful enough to be available to everyone. Like for example. If black powder is insanely rare and expensive, it would make no sense for a commoner to own a gun, or to mass-produce them for military uses.

I'm going to be honest here on Veeky Forums and not /k/ but I hate revolvers, mostly just the aesthetic. Cowboys are alright, but their revolvers are unsexy with few exceptions like the Walker Colt. Police revolvers without exception are fucking retarded looking.

Yeah. And that literal physical tool was just a factory piece, one amongst possibly millions. Meanwhile legendary swords would be one-of-a-kind masterpieces forged by a clan of cave-dwelling black midgets out of a fallen star, in the hilt would be inset a piece of the true cross, and it would be quenched in the piss of twelve popes, and feral cherubs would descend when its true wielder first drew it. And the cherubs would get into people's trash, shit all over their horse carts, and attempt to molest the hens, but you couldn't do shit because it had to do with some big kahuna's divinely bestowed nobility.

How does it feel to have bad taste?

>not liking the smell of sulfur
What

hello glockwhore

Look up /k/ubism, it will be helpful

Well you have a more modern version of that, which is, admittedly very individualistic, is how a cowboy, operator, or general gunslinger tunes and modifies his weapons to match him.

Thirding Dark Tower. Make the world a place where guns were mass manufactured in the recent past, but political/global turmoil has destabilized international trade and production. Guns are still fairly plentiful, but there is little hope that any more will be made in significant quantities anytime soon. Gunsmiths will still manufacture them, but one person hand crafting a weapon takes time and it will probably be customized to most suit the patron. So you've got a weapon that is a symbol of authority (have the state/ruler control the majority supply of firearms, but certainly not all) but also a depleting resource. Every time a gun is destroyed or determined to be damaged beyond repair it is customary to give it a funeral. Guns wielded by heroes become relics known for important battles that they participated in. A soldier or mercenary would be superstitious to use firearms used to commit treachery.

Also

>This is my gun, there are many like it but this one is mine

Pre-industrial gunsmithing was a complicated, time-consuming affair requiring a highly specialized set of skills.

youtube.com/watch?v=lui6uNPcRPA

Happened in real life. Prior to the 19th century most armies didn't have much live fire training due to the cost of the powder needed.

>always draws second
>but always shoots first

I like it. The Just man does not inflict violence upon others, but responds to it. The Peacemaker does not make war, but he ENDS it.

The former being a white nation certainly helps.

no it doesn't.

And gun culture, while heavily linked to the military, is absolutely not limited by it in any way, ex. you don't need to do your conscription in order to buy guns, or even in order to join shooting courses. The main difference is that the Swiss are more socially restrained and disciplined than Americans, as a general rule.

t. Swiss guy.

Behold, the legendary moist nugget!
The legend says the one who draws it from the stone shall be crowned and lauded as the Emperor of Mankind.

That's the one thing that pisses me off about murrican gun culture. All these people laud the weapons, but too few learn to use the damn things properly.

Especially the police, but they don't even need to maintain their fitness standards either.

Keep in mind that there was an economic perspective behind swords being romanticised in historical context. They were expensive to make and maintain, and required significant time to be proficient with them, thus largely limiting their availability to nobility/upper classes up until we started to be able to mass manufacture stuff.

So a similar situation could arise in the future where there are firearms, but also 'real' guns that are significantly more uncommon. The easiest way I can think of to work around this is someone invents and opens the patents (for the better of humanity) to a new material that produces extremely effective and inexpensive body armour. Suddenly run of the mill firearms (while still potentially dangerous) aren't that effective in combat. Lo and behold, some ironmonger invents guns 2.0, which can shred through the new protection with ease, but is prohibitively expensive for the average indiviual.

>Would a culture that holds guns in a high esteem and romanticise them in the same way medieval people held a sword be too weird?
Drop by /k/ sometime.

Nah, /k/ isn't elitist enough.

>/k/ isn't elitest
haw

>enough

...

America already is that culture, for sure. The gun is a symbol of many American ideals - individualism, self-sufficiency, independence, equality. But reading the thread, I see people pointing to European legends of swords and stuff and saying "then why doesn't America have these?"

The answers has to do with the cultures in question. The European legends, particularly those associated with King Arthur, arise from a culture of aristocracy. One individual can very much be greater than another, in a way another can very much never hope to overcome. Bloodline and right to rule are important. A legendary sword, handed down through the ages, is emblematic of that. There are legendary swords because they belong to mythical individuals - people decidedly separate from the everyman. This specialness is represented by external forces, like legendary weapons.

Meanwhile, the narrative of the gun is best summed up by the line "God created man and Sam Colt made them equal." Individuals can be exceptional, but it's not by virtue of resources or bloodline. They're everyman who distinguish themselves by virtue of courage, wit, and skill. They would not be lesser man with a different gun (nor would another man be made greater by having their gun), because the man is everything. These are self made men and they pay no heed to external forces.

To give an example of a larger than life hero who used a gun to accomplish something legendary: Pecos Bill was said to shoot stars out of the sky with his revolver. But the revolver was nothing special - the man was.

I hate to burst your bubble here, people, but swords were not restricted to nobility. You could buy a sword with about two days worth of pay with even the shittiest jobs. Outside of legends swords in medieval times were pretty much looked at the way guns are now. Hell, some cities even would classify swords as assault weapons and ban them.

This. People get off on the police for a lot of shit (especially lately) but the one thing that genuinely pisses me off is that their fitness standards are piss poor and even those are loosely enforced. It leads to fat cops who are terrified of the fucking jacked criminals they might encounter, which leads to an over-reliance on shooting.

The problem with proper fitness standards, however, is that implementing them will be seen by some as further "militarizing" the police.

Fuck them. Those are the same people who whine that the police have handguns. This isn't a fucking rocket launcher, it's just a cop that can beat up a thug with a nightstick and is confident in doing so instead of just shooting the poor dumb fuck.

>killing degenerate criminals
>a bad thing

It causes fucking riots that get more cops killed and disrupt daily life. They kill each other in far greater numbers than cops ever could, and it means we don't have to put up with their whiny-ass bullshit 24/7.

>causing riots
Literally the perfect situation to use the "militarized" police.