answersLogoWhite

0

It kills a greater amount of people faster and more efficiently especially in wars.

Machine guns are far LESS efficient for killing. They are capable of more terror, they hold down larger groups of people and they can destroy larger pieces of equipment.

A sniper with a single shot rifle is the most efficient.

The affect on the world though is altogether different. The idea of the Knight in armor on a horse was far less feared and now merely an easy target. The whole concept of warfare had to be rethought.

Early machine guns were very large and operated for only a short time. These machines, while feared, were not anywhere near as dangerous as todays guns. The horse drawn Gatling gun could shoot in a fairly small area for a few minutes. These guns could create terror (the sound is wildly terrifying) but the odds of the bullet making it to you was fairly small.

Today's machine guns can send out such fast fire that you can effectively create a fence that nothing goes through while the gun is in operation. Even planes are no match for ten bullets or more each second leaving a gun. The accumulative affect is that whatever goes through this line is going to have serious issues.

Warfare then has adapted to be far more violent and dangerous then before the invention of this weapon.

Bull. Terror yes but soldiers dont care about that what we want is accuasy.

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

What else can I help you with?