Why did Steve Rogers stop using guns?












20















In Captain America: The First Avenger Steve Rogers is shown not only using firearms but also having an apparent familiarity and skill with them. However, in later installments of the MCU he doesn't appear to use them at all, and in the scene in The Avengers where he picked up a dropped weapon from one of Loki's fallen henchmen and fired on others of their number in order to stop them from getting to Tony, he seems to have lost his earlier proficiency with such weapons, although that may be due to the fact that he mostly used handguns and had no experience with automatic and/or semi-automatic weapons. So, why did Steve stop using guns? Is there any in or out of story reason given for it, or is it simply something that happened without it being acknowledged at all?










share|improve this question

























  • Tangentially related: As far as I can tell, Captain America is yet to shoot anyone on screen. He's fired a rifle stage-right defending the helicarrier in The Avengers, he hit a hydra soldier with a throwing knife in The First Avenger, but he's never actually had a confirmed hit with a gun. Despite being an ex-soldier, he seems to be the avenger that marvel are least keen on having use ballistic weapons

    – LogicianWithAHat
    Nov 15 '16 at 16:52
















20















In Captain America: The First Avenger Steve Rogers is shown not only using firearms but also having an apparent familiarity and skill with them. However, in later installments of the MCU he doesn't appear to use them at all, and in the scene in The Avengers where he picked up a dropped weapon from one of Loki's fallen henchmen and fired on others of their number in order to stop them from getting to Tony, he seems to have lost his earlier proficiency with such weapons, although that may be due to the fact that he mostly used handguns and had no experience with automatic and/or semi-automatic weapons. So, why did Steve stop using guns? Is there any in or out of story reason given for it, or is it simply something that happened without it being acknowledged at all?










share|improve this question

























  • Tangentially related: As far as I can tell, Captain America is yet to shoot anyone on screen. He's fired a rifle stage-right defending the helicarrier in The Avengers, he hit a hydra soldier with a throwing knife in The First Avenger, but he's never actually had a confirmed hit with a gun. Despite being an ex-soldier, he seems to be the avenger that marvel are least keen on having use ballistic weapons

    – LogicianWithAHat
    Nov 15 '16 at 16:52














20












20








20








In Captain America: The First Avenger Steve Rogers is shown not only using firearms but also having an apparent familiarity and skill with them. However, in later installments of the MCU he doesn't appear to use them at all, and in the scene in The Avengers where he picked up a dropped weapon from one of Loki's fallen henchmen and fired on others of their number in order to stop them from getting to Tony, he seems to have lost his earlier proficiency with such weapons, although that may be due to the fact that he mostly used handguns and had no experience with automatic and/or semi-automatic weapons. So, why did Steve stop using guns? Is there any in or out of story reason given for it, or is it simply something that happened without it being acknowledged at all?










share|improve this question
















In Captain America: The First Avenger Steve Rogers is shown not only using firearms but also having an apparent familiarity and skill with them. However, in later installments of the MCU he doesn't appear to use them at all, and in the scene in The Avengers where he picked up a dropped weapon from one of Loki's fallen henchmen and fired on others of their number in order to stop them from getting to Tony, he seems to have lost his earlier proficiency with such weapons, although that may be due to the fact that he mostly used handguns and had no experience with automatic and/or semi-automatic weapons. So, why did Steve stop using guns? Is there any in or out of story reason given for it, or is it simply something that happened without it being acknowledged at all?







marvel marvel-cinematic-universe avengers captain-america captain-america-the-first-avenger






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Mar 12 '17 at 20:47









Mithrandir

25.3k9133184




25.3k9133184










asked Sep 5 '16 at 8:10









AriannaArianna

2911210




2911210













  • Tangentially related: As far as I can tell, Captain America is yet to shoot anyone on screen. He's fired a rifle stage-right defending the helicarrier in The Avengers, he hit a hydra soldier with a throwing knife in The First Avenger, but he's never actually had a confirmed hit with a gun. Despite being an ex-soldier, he seems to be the avenger that marvel are least keen on having use ballistic weapons

    – LogicianWithAHat
    Nov 15 '16 at 16:52



















  • Tangentially related: As far as I can tell, Captain America is yet to shoot anyone on screen. He's fired a rifle stage-right defending the helicarrier in The Avengers, he hit a hydra soldier with a throwing knife in The First Avenger, but he's never actually had a confirmed hit with a gun. Despite being an ex-soldier, he seems to be the avenger that marvel are least keen on having use ballistic weapons

    – LogicianWithAHat
    Nov 15 '16 at 16:52

















Tangentially related: As far as I can tell, Captain America is yet to shoot anyone on screen. He's fired a rifle stage-right defending the helicarrier in The Avengers, he hit a hydra soldier with a throwing knife in The First Avenger, but he's never actually had a confirmed hit with a gun. Despite being an ex-soldier, he seems to be the avenger that marvel are least keen on having use ballistic weapons

– LogicianWithAHat
Nov 15 '16 at 16:52





Tangentially related: As far as I can tell, Captain America is yet to shoot anyone on screen. He's fired a rifle stage-right defending the helicarrier in The Avengers, he hit a hydra soldier with a throwing knife in The First Avenger, but he's never actually had a confirmed hit with a gun. Despite being an ex-soldier, he seems to be the avenger that marvel are least keen on having use ballistic weapons

– LogicianWithAHat
Nov 15 '16 at 16:52










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















13














There are many discussions about this very topic all over the internet, and there are many different theories behind this. I think one of the most logical theories I have heard, and one that would line up very well with the story line, is that in WWII, he was fighting a war, thus he was using a gun. After that he became a super hero. At that point he was fighting super villains, and would have to use a higher moral ground against them.



The most common theory, and the most seemingly accepted, however, is that in the Avengers movie, there were many civilians around, thus no guns. And obviously he wouldn't know how to use such advanced tech.



I do not believe there is any official answer.






share|improve this answer


























  • This was exactly what I was about to type.

    – Paulie_D
    Sep 5 '16 at 10:39






  • 3





    Civilians around I'll buy, "advanced tech", I won't. Guns haven't changed enough from WWII that lack of familiarity would be a hindrance.

    – Paul
    Sep 5 '16 at 13:55






  • 2





    @Paul: regarding “advanced tech”, I think that refers to the alien guns dropped by the Chitauri.

    – Paul D. Waite
    Nov 15 '16 at 15:50



















3














I can't find any explicit statement online. But, should I guess, I'd say the answer is simple and doesn't need any theory, discussions all over the internet, nor higher moral grounds.



Captain America is a comic character and movies about him are, well...about him. It happens in the comics that Cap uses weapon at the beginning of his career, stop using them over time, and as of today he doesn't use them much. Which is exactly what has been done in the movies, too, and this answers your question in terms of MCU.



So why, in the comics, he stopped using weapons? I can't find any interview of the time, so I have no out of universe answer, but in universe we see in Captain America #255 - The Living Legend receiving from F.D. Roosevelt a new, improved version of the shield, so effective as an offense weapon as it was as a defense weapon, that it ends up replacing his personal gun:



Picture, pleasesource: http://notahoaxnotadream.blogspot.com/2014/05/captain-america-255.html



Still in universe, and this applies both to the movies and to the comic, it must be noted that dropping the gun is somehow a logical choice in the context of a super hero world. A gun has limited ammo and it's not a tool for close range combat. Cap has been gifted from the serum of extreme levels of strenght, agility, reflexes, speed, intelligence, the capacity of easily dodging buckets of bullets, and the capacity to throw a shield ignoring laws of physics.



He's optimised for close combat fight, and if he needs to take down enemies at range he can use the shield in a single throw to take down 20 people, save a cat on a tree, help a granny cross a street, and finally having the shield bounce back exactly in his hands with an hot dog on it.



All while in the same moment beating down a dozens or so of other enemies and dodging hundreds of bullets traveling well above the speed of sound.



And this in the time it would take him to shot two, may be three times from his gun. Why keep using the gun, then?






share|improve this answer

































    1














    I totally agree with the theory proposed by Bruce.



    However, there is another explanation that I find relevant too. In The First Avenger, Captain is shown more as a soldier who is fighting overseas and defending his nation. Being a soldier it was very obvious for Captain to use the guns since they specially trained to use it (In WWII especially). While in The Avengers and later movies, rather being a soldier he is more like a hero. Because of this, his morals might have changed.



    He would have to stay above his enemy's morals and that's what Captain is doing. Hence, killing someone now might not fit his heroic morals.



    Asking about the tech knowledge, I don't Captain would be having any difficulty in learning any of those things. He is a fast learner after all and also his physical strength are more than relevant.



    enter image description here






    share|improve this answer

































      -3














      Couldn't it also be argued that in time he became more familiar with using his sheild as a weapon? Perhaps in WW2 he was not as confident in its ability, which after time, he grew to prefer and then use exclusively.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Kevin Vagen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.
















      • 2





        This is a nice argument but reads like a suggestion rather than an answer to the question. I suggest you edit it to make it more like an answer and add in any supporting evidence if you have any.

        – TheLethalCarrot
        yesterday











      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "186"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f139655%2fwhy-did-steve-rogers-stop-using-guns%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      13














      There are many discussions about this very topic all over the internet, and there are many different theories behind this. I think one of the most logical theories I have heard, and one that would line up very well with the story line, is that in WWII, he was fighting a war, thus he was using a gun. After that he became a super hero. At that point he was fighting super villains, and would have to use a higher moral ground against them.



      The most common theory, and the most seemingly accepted, however, is that in the Avengers movie, there were many civilians around, thus no guns. And obviously he wouldn't know how to use such advanced tech.



      I do not believe there is any official answer.






      share|improve this answer


























      • This was exactly what I was about to type.

        – Paulie_D
        Sep 5 '16 at 10:39






      • 3





        Civilians around I'll buy, "advanced tech", I won't. Guns haven't changed enough from WWII that lack of familiarity would be a hindrance.

        – Paul
        Sep 5 '16 at 13:55






      • 2





        @Paul: regarding “advanced tech”, I think that refers to the alien guns dropped by the Chitauri.

        – Paul D. Waite
        Nov 15 '16 at 15:50
















      13














      There are many discussions about this very topic all over the internet, and there are many different theories behind this. I think one of the most logical theories I have heard, and one that would line up very well with the story line, is that in WWII, he was fighting a war, thus he was using a gun. After that he became a super hero. At that point he was fighting super villains, and would have to use a higher moral ground against them.



      The most common theory, and the most seemingly accepted, however, is that in the Avengers movie, there were many civilians around, thus no guns. And obviously he wouldn't know how to use such advanced tech.



      I do not believe there is any official answer.






      share|improve this answer


























      • This was exactly what I was about to type.

        – Paulie_D
        Sep 5 '16 at 10:39






      • 3





        Civilians around I'll buy, "advanced tech", I won't. Guns haven't changed enough from WWII that lack of familiarity would be a hindrance.

        – Paul
        Sep 5 '16 at 13:55






      • 2





        @Paul: regarding “advanced tech”, I think that refers to the alien guns dropped by the Chitauri.

        – Paul D. Waite
        Nov 15 '16 at 15:50














      13












      13








      13







      There are many discussions about this very topic all over the internet, and there are many different theories behind this. I think one of the most logical theories I have heard, and one that would line up very well with the story line, is that in WWII, he was fighting a war, thus he was using a gun. After that he became a super hero. At that point he was fighting super villains, and would have to use a higher moral ground against them.



      The most common theory, and the most seemingly accepted, however, is that in the Avengers movie, there were many civilians around, thus no guns. And obviously he wouldn't know how to use such advanced tech.



      I do not believe there is any official answer.






      share|improve this answer















      There are many discussions about this very topic all over the internet, and there are many different theories behind this. I think one of the most logical theories I have heard, and one that would line up very well with the story line, is that in WWII, he was fighting a war, thus he was using a gun. After that he became a super hero. At that point he was fighting super villains, and would have to use a higher moral ground against them.



      The most common theory, and the most seemingly accepted, however, is that in the Avengers movie, there were many civilians around, thus no guns. And obviously he wouldn't know how to use such advanced tech.



      I do not believe there is any official answer.







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited 9 hours ago









      FuzzyBoots

      92.9k12290443




      92.9k12290443










      answered Sep 5 '16 at 10:39









      BruceBruce

      52727




      52727













      • This was exactly what I was about to type.

        – Paulie_D
        Sep 5 '16 at 10:39






      • 3





        Civilians around I'll buy, "advanced tech", I won't. Guns haven't changed enough from WWII that lack of familiarity would be a hindrance.

        – Paul
        Sep 5 '16 at 13:55






      • 2





        @Paul: regarding “advanced tech”, I think that refers to the alien guns dropped by the Chitauri.

        – Paul D. Waite
        Nov 15 '16 at 15:50



















      • This was exactly what I was about to type.

        – Paulie_D
        Sep 5 '16 at 10:39






      • 3





        Civilians around I'll buy, "advanced tech", I won't. Guns haven't changed enough from WWII that lack of familiarity would be a hindrance.

        – Paul
        Sep 5 '16 at 13:55






      • 2





        @Paul: regarding “advanced tech”, I think that refers to the alien guns dropped by the Chitauri.

        – Paul D. Waite
        Nov 15 '16 at 15:50

















      This was exactly what I was about to type.

      – Paulie_D
      Sep 5 '16 at 10:39





      This was exactly what I was about to type.

      – Paulie_D
      Sep 5 '16 at 10:39




      3




      3





      Civilians around I'll buy, "advanced tech", I won't. Guns haven't changed enough from WWII that lack of familiarity would be a hindrance.

      – Paul
      Sep 5 '16 at 13:55





      Civilians around I'll buy, "advanced tech", I won't. Guns haven't changed enough from WWII that lack of familiarity would be a hindrance.

      – Paul
      Sep 5 '16 at 13:55




      2




      2





      @Paul: regarding “advanced tech”, I think that refers to the alien guns dropped by the Chitauri.

      – Paul D. Waite
      Nov 15 '16 at 15:50





      @Paul: regarding “advanced tech”, I think that refers to the alien guns dropped by the Chitauri.

      – Paul D. Waite
      Nov 15 '16 at 15:50













      3














      I can't find any explicit statement online. But, should I guess, I'd say the answer is simple and doesn't need any theory, discussions all over the internet, nor higher moral grounds.



      Captain America is a comic character and movies about him are, well...about him. It happens in the comics that Cap uses weapon at the beginning of his career, stop using them over time, and as of today he doesn't use them much. Which is exactly what has been done in the movies, too, and this answers your question in terms of MCU.



      So why, in the comics, he stopped using weapons? I can't find any interview of the time, so I have no out of universe answer, but in universe we see in Captain America #255 - The Living Legend receiving from F.D. Roosevelt a new, improved version of the shield, so effective as an offense weapon as it was as a defense weapon, that it ends up replacing his personal gun:



      Picture, pleasesource: http://notahoaxnotadream.blogspot.com/2014/05/captain-america-255.html



      Still in universe, and this applies both to the movies and to the comic, it must be noted that dropping the gun is somehow a logical choice in the context of a super hero world. A gun has limited ammo and it's not a tool for close range combat. Cap has been gifted from the serum of extreme levels of strenght, agility, reflexes, speed, intelligence, the capacity of easily dodging buckets of bullets, and the capacity to throw a shield ignoring laws of physics.



      He's optimised for close combat fight, and if he needs to take down enemies at range he can use the shield in a single throw to take down 20 people, save a cat on a tree, help a granny cross a street, and finally having the shield bounce back exactly in his hands with an hot dog on it.



      All while in the same moment beating down a dozens or so of other enemies and dodging hundreds of bullets traveling well above the speed of sound.



      And this in the time it would take him to shot two, may be three times from his gun. Why keep using the gun, then?






      share|improve this answer






























        3














        I can't find any explicit statement online. But, should I guess, I'd say the answer is simple and doesn't need any theory, discussions all over the internet, nor higher moral grounds.



        Captain America is a comic character and movies about him are, well...about him. It happens in the comics that Cap uses weapon at the beginning of his career, stop using them over time, and as of today he doesn't use them much. Which is exactly what has been done in the movies, too, and this answers your question in terms of MCU.



        So why, in the comics, he stopped using weapons? I can't find any interview of the time, so I have no out of universe answer, but in universe we see in Captain America #255 - The Living Legend receiving from F.D. Roosevelt a new, improved version of the shield, so effective as an offense weapon as it was as a defense weapon, that it ends up replacing his personal gun:



        Picture, pleasesource: http://notahoaxnotadream.blogspot.com/2014/05/captain-america-255.html



        Still in universe, and this applies both to the movies and to the comic, it must be noted that dropping the gun is somehow a logical choice in the context of a super hero world. A gun has limited ammo and it's not a tool for close range combat. Cap has been gifted from the serum of extreme levels of strenght, agility, reflexes, speed, intelligence, the capacity of easily dodging buckets of bullets, and the capacity to throw a shield ignoring laws of physics.



        He's optimised for close combat fight, and if he needs to take down enemies at range he can use the shield in a single throw to take down 20 people, save a cat on a tree, help a granny cross a street, and finally having the shield bounce back exactly in his hands with an hot dog on it.



        All while in the same moment beating down a dozens or so of other enemies and dodging hundreds of bullets traveling well above the speed of sound.



        And this in the time it would take him to shot two, may be three times from his gun. Why keep using the gun, then?






        share|improve this answer




























          3












          3








          3







          I can't find any explicit statement online. But, should I guess, I'd say the answer is simple and doesn't need any theory, discussions all over the internet, nor higher moral grounds.



          Captain America is a comic character and movies about him are, well...about him. It happens in the comics that Cap uses weapon at the beginning of his career, stop using them over time, and as of today he doesn't use them much. Which is exactly what has been done in the movies, too, and this answers your question in terms of MCU.



          So why, in the comics, he stopped using weapons? I can't find any interview of the time, so I have no out of universe answer, but in universe we see in Captain America #255 - The Living Legend receiving from F.D. Roosevelt a new, improved version of the shield, so effective as an offense weapon as it was as a defense weapon, that it ends up replacing his personal gun:



          Picture, pleasesource: http://notahoaxnotadream.blogspot.com/2014/05/captain-america-255.html



          Still in universe, and this applies both to the movies and to the comic, it must be noted that dropping the gun is somehow a logical choice in the context of a super hero world. A gun has limited ammo and it's not a tool for close range combat. Cap has been gifted from the serum of extreme levels of strenght, agility, reflexes, speed, intelligence, the capacity of easily dodging buckets of bullets, and the capacity to throw a shield ignoring laws of physics.



          He's optimised for close combat fight, and if he needs to take down enemies at range he can use the shield in a single throw to take down 20 people, save a cat on a tree, help a granny cross a street, and finally having the shield bounce back exactly in his hands with an hot dog on it.



          All while in the same moment beating down a dozens or so of other enemies and dodging hundreds of bullets traveling well above the speed of sound.



          And this in the time it would take him to shot two, may be three times from his gun. Why keep using the gun, then?






          share|improve this answer















          I can't find any explicit statement online. But, should I guess, I'd say the answer is simple and doesn't need any theory, discussions all over the internet, nor higher moral grounds.



          Captain America is a comic character and movies about him are, well...about him. It happens in the comics that Cap uses weapon at the beginning of his career, stop using them over time, and as of today he doesn't use them much. Which is exactly what has been done in the movies, too, and this answers your question in terms of MCU.



          So why, in the comics, he stopped using weapons? I can't find any interview of the time, so I have no out of universe answer, but in universe we see in Captain America #255 - The Living Legend receiving from F.D. Roosevelt a new, improved version of the shield, so effective as an offense weapon as it was as a defense weapon, that it ends up replacing his personal gun:



          Picture, pleasesource: http://notahoaxnotadream.blogspot.com/2014/05/captain-america-255.html



          Still in universe, and this applies both to the movies and to the comic, it must be noted that dropping the gun is somehow a logical choice in the context of a super hero world. A gun has limited ammo and it's not a tool for close range combat. Cap has been gifted from the serum of extreme levels of strenght, agility, reflexes, speed, intelligence, the capacity of easily dodging buckets of bullets, and the capacity to throw a shield ignoring laws of physics.



          He's optimised for close combat fight, and if he needs to take down enemies at range he can use the shield in a single throw to take down 20 people, save a cat on a tree, help a granny cross a street, and finally having the shield bounce back exactly in his hands with an hot dog on it.



          All while in the same moment beating down a dozens or so of other enemies and dodging hundreds of bullets traveling well above the speed of sound.



          And this in the time it would take him to shot two, may be three times from his gun. Why keep using the gun, then?







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 10 hours ago

























          answered 19 hours ago









          motoDrizztmotoDrizzt

          1,513719




          1,513719























              1














              I totally agree with the theory proposed by Bruce.



              However, there is another explanation that I find relevant too. In The First Avenger, Captain is shown more as a soldier who is fighting overseas and defending his nation. Being a soldier it was very obvious for Captain to use the guns since they specially trained to use it (In WWII especially). While in The Avengers and later movies, rather being a soldier he is more like a hero. Because of this, his morals might have changed.



              He would have to stay above his enemy's morals and that's what Captain is doing. Hence, killing someone now might not fit his heroic morals.



              Asking about the tech knowledge, I don't Captain would be having any difficulty in learning any of those things. He is a fast learner after all and also his physical strength are more than relevant.



              enter image description here






              share|improve this answer






























                1














                I totally agree with the theory proposed by Bruce.



                However, there is another explanation that I find relevant too. In The First Avenger, Captain is shown more as a soldier who is fighting overseas and defending his nation. Being a soldier it was very obvious for Captain to use the guns since they specially trained to use it (In WWII especially). While in The Avengers and later movies, rather being a soldier he is more like a hero. Because of this, his morals might have changed.



                He would have to stay above his enemy's morals and that's what Captain is doing. Hence, killing someone now might not fit his heroic morals.



                Asking about the tech knowledge, I don't Captain would be having any difficulty in learning any of those things. He is a fast learner after all and also his physical strength are more than relevant.



                enter image description here






                share|improve this answer




























                  1












                  1








                  1







                  I totally agree with the theory proposed by Bruce.



                  However, there is another explanation that I find relevant too. In The First Avenger, Captain is shown more as a soldier who is fighting overseas and defending his nation. Being a soldier it was very obvious for Captain to use the guns since they specially trained to use it (In WWII especially). While in The Avengers and later movies, rather being a soldier he is more like a hero. Because of this, his morals might have changed.



                  He would have to stay above his enemy's morals and that's what Captain is doing. Hence, killing someone now might not fit his heroic morals.



                  Asking about the tech knowledge, I don't Captain would be having any difficulty in learning any of those things. He is a fast learner after all and also his physical strength are more than relevant.



                  enter image description here






                  share|improve this answer















                  I totally agree with the theory proposed by Bruce.



                  However, there is another explanation that I find relevant too. In The First Avenger, Captain is shown more as a soldier who is fighting overseas and defending his nation. Being a soldier it was very obvious for Captain to use the guns since they specially trained to use it (In WWII especially). While in The Avengers and later movies, rather being a soldier he is more like a hero. Because of this, his morals might have changed.



                  He would have to stay above his enemy's morals and that's what Captain is doing. Hence, killing someone now might not fit his heroic morals.



                  Asking about the tech knowledge, I don't Captain would be having any difficulty in learning any of those things. He is a fast learner after all and also his physical strength are more than relevant.



                  enter image description here







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited Nov 15 '16 at 15:52

























                  answered Nov 15 '16 at 15:46









                  SaharshSaharsh

                  562619




                  562619























                      -3














                      Couldn't it also be argued that in time he became more familiar with using his sheild as a weapon? Perhaps in WW2 he was not as confident in its ability, which after time, he grew to prefer and then use exclusively.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Kevin Vagen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.
















                      • 2





                        This is a nice argument but reads like a suggestion rather than an answer to the question. I suggest you edit it to make it more like an answer and add in any supporting evidence if you have any.

                        – TheLethalCarrot
                        yesterday
















                      -3














                      Couldn't it also be argued that in time he became more familiar with using his sheild as a weapon? Perhaps in WW2 he was not as confident in its ability, which after time, he grew to prefer and then use exclusively.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Kevin Vagen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.
















                      • 2





                        This is a nice argument but reads like a suggestion rather than an answer to the question. I suggest you edit it to make it more like an answer and add in any supporting evidence if you have any.

                        – TheLethalCarrot
                        yesterday














                      -3












                      -3








                      -3







                      Couldn't it also be argued that in time he became more familiar with using his sheild as a weapon? Perhaps in WW2 he was not as confident in its ability, which after time, he grew to prefer and then use exclusively.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Kevin Vagen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.










                      Couldn't it also be argued that in time he became more familiar with using his sheild as a weapon? Perhaps in WW2 he was not as confident in its ability, which after time, he grew to prefer and then use exclusively.







                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Kevin Vagen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer






                      New contributor




                      Kevin Vagen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      answered yesterday









                      Kevin VagenKevin Vagen

                      1




                      1




                      New contributor




                      Kevin Vagen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





                      New contributor





                      Kevin Vagen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      Kevin Vagen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.








                      • 2





                        This is a nice argument but reads like a suggestion rather than an answer to the question. I suggest you edit it to make it more like an answer and add in any supporting evidence if you have any.

                        – TheLethalCarrot
                        yesterday














                      • 2





                        This is a nice argument but reads like a suggestion rather than an answer to the question. I suggest you edit it to make it more like an answer and add in any supporting evidence if you have any.

                        – TheLethalCarrot
                        yesterday








                      2




                      2





                      This is a nice argument but reads like a suggestion rather than an answer to the question. I suggest you edit it to make it more like an answer and add in any supporting evidence if you have any.

                      – TheLethalCarrot
                      yesterday





                      This is a nice argument but reads like a suggestion rather than an answer to the question. I suggest you edit it to make it more like an answer and add in any supporting evidence if you have any.

                      – TheLethalCarrot
                      yesterday


















                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f139655%2fwhy-did-steve-rogers-stop-using-guns%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      How to label and detect the document text images

                      Vallis Paradisi

                      Tabula Rosettana