Reasons why one nation may have firearms but another doesn't?

Bolt action rifles were used by pretty much everybody up through WWII. It doesn't take long at all to get another round in the chamber.

 

I come from Iran. The leaders in my country keep saying that they don't want wmds on religious grounds, but everyone and their mom knows they do! The economy has been decimated because of international sanctions imposed on the country for those programs. It's really unconscionable to starve your own people to develop those kinds of programs and antagonize the whole world.

 

This is more of a muzzle-loader issue than bolt action. A high rate of fire with a muzzle-loader is 3 shots per minute. For a bolt action like the M1917 Enfield, you can fire far more.

 

I was referring to the act of hunting rather than the efficiency of the weapon itself. Hunting is mostly about patience and waiting for the perfect shot. If you miss your shot, the deer runs off. Maybe some people will fire at a running target, but I've always been taught that it's bad form and dangerous.

 

It could be due to the country being technologically behind and being isolated away from the more advanced one because of the long distance. The nation could be an isolated tropical island (or an arctic one).

 

Fundamentally different technological levels require a lot of distance barriers to work. Like, the extreme examples are the various South/Central American empires vs the various European powers, which is clear because of the massive moat called the Atlantic. Heck, if you look at the Aztecs/Mayans, you would notice that via their completely different environments and distance, their writing systems, social structure, weaponry, food, were completely different from that of the Spanish conquistadors. On the other hand, we have the Koreans, Chinese and Japanese all adopting a lot of things from each other throughout their civilizations.

 

Are there any of them here? This seems to be a safe place to say that...

There are also different regions within the same country where each region have different rates of gun ownership. One example is the United States. Maybe different cultures and nations in the story would have different preferences about guns?

 

Consider that the manufacture of guns needs more than just explosives. For example, the ability to create gun bores, slow match, cast musket balls etc. Missing any of these key technologies could well restrict production ability.

 

Technically.....

I mean, you need those for good guns.

 

This is a good point. Your main focus so far seems to be on either the ammo or the technological level. What if the scarcity of guns is not due to either of these, but rather a lack of experienced manufacturers. This could easily be achieved in your world by having guilds of gunsmiths who are very secretive or protective in their craft. Most of the guild members could belong to the more advanced nation, therefore making guns more common. Communication between the two nations is still available, and the same guild could even exist in both countries. The only restriction on gun making is the lack of experienced gunsmiths.

 

But guns are so simple. You need a barrel, a projectile to travel down the barrel, some sort of propellant, and some sort of lock or action to set off the propellant and send the bullet down the barrel. You also need some way to hold the damn thing. This guy made a 12 gauge with some pipe.

 

Check out this article, particularly the photographs. Not a very sophisticated operation.
Darra Adam Khel: The Village of Illegal Gun Manufacturers | Amusing Planet

 

Except manufacturing small pipes with a uniform width is not that straightforwards if you don't have the appropriate technology, tools and knowhow.

Early 16th century European firearms could often not interchange musket balls because they all had different size bores, and each musket had to have balls specifically cast for it (and were sold with the mould for the musket ball).

 

My point was how simple guns can be on a mechanical level. I'm not an expert but I don't think forging a barrel would be too difficult for a society that has airships and tanks. People were making barrels in the Middle Ages.

 

Beyond the need for a region to have the right resources to develop metallurgy (which includes un-obvious things like the right kind of clay), they also needed to develop the milling machine and lathe in order to pave the way for something like an industrial revolution. I saw a show once about it, or read the description of a book or something, but I don't remember what it takes in order to develop mechanically precise straight edges and smooth surfaces, so that intricate machines can be developed and the parts manufactured.

Of course this is about manufactured firearms, not the home-forged crude barrels currently under discussion on this thread. Hell, the Mythbusters made a cannon by hand-drilling a hole though a log bound with ropes I think! So yeah, crudely forged barrels are definitely a thing, but would take a lot of time and effort and couldn't supply much of an army unless there were a lot of forges in use for the purpose.

 

It's been done historically. During the Boshin War, shogunate forces tried to up their defences by doing exactly this, wooden cannon firing stone projectiles. They could only fire 4-5 shots before bursting. They can be seen in Sendai City Museum.

They were desperate though.

 

That's right, I had forgotten but the Mythbusters also made a stone ball for it. Ultimately it split apart, but I think they got a few surprisingly good shots out of it before loading it up with excessive powder (the way they ended every show featuring explosives). Again though, it took a hell of a lot of work and I think they ended up cheating on the ball somehow.

I guess the point is that more advanced weaponry will always defeat the cruder stuff, and better faster manufacturing of it counts as well. This has been the reason behind the arms race for as long as there's been one (since the development of the first wooden club probably).

 

In JadeX's original post they made mention that the guns available are machine guns on large vessels such as airships or tanks. Although simple guns are relatively easy to make, the lack the power and rapid fire of more advanced weapons. The use of machine guns seems would require an experienced gunsmith. Also, most of the time one wants to make a gun that wont blow up in their face when fired more than a few times.
Another point to take into consideration would be that the use of machine guns would be unfeasible if difficulty in obtaining gunpowder was the restriction on using guns. Machine guns use quite a bit of ammunition and therefore would take a lot of gunpowder to fire, even for a short time.

 

I would think machine guns, as well as ammunition belts for them, would require good modern manufacturing facilities. I suppose Victorian-era Industrial Revolution style techniques would suffice for Steampunk machine guns.

 

It wouldn't be, and that's why they're the ones with almost all the guns. I think you misunderstood; that nation is the one with the guns, it's the other nations which - for the most part - do not.

 

I just reread the OP; the other nation has a technological development analogous to the late 1800's? I suppose there are others at various levels of development.

 

I'd make the 1800 types morally superior and earth lovers. They know their neighbours have guns but refuse to do what's necessary to mine the materials to build guns of their own. Over the years, because of this refusal, they've fallen far behind in technology. Those with guns have morals but aren't earth lovers. They do anything to advance technology.