I'm not sure any weapon has been tested. But I believe if one were to shoot a gun in space, the absence of friction would cause the bullet to travel non-stop continuosly until it maybe hits a celestial body or is pulled by a gravitational force Planet, satellite, etc. Update: That is, if you manage to get the gun fired in the first place: " A gun cartridge holds the bullet or metal tip and the gunpowder (yup, they still use that stuff). The latter requires a spark, a nifty chemical reaction that involves oxygen, which tends to be sorely lacking in space. However, forward-thinking manufacturers have packed an oxidizer within the bullet casing. Whether that's sufficient for an explosive launch is up for much debate." http://ask.yahoo.com/20060726.html

Since there is no gravity in outer space, everything known about ballistics on earth is null and void. Only weapons known to exist to function in outer space are killer lasars.

i dont believe a regular gun could be fired in space. since guns use chemical reactions to operate that require a flame, and there is no oxygen in space, i dont think it would work. in theory, however, a bullet would continue its same speed until hitting something or reaching somethings gravitational pull enough to effect it.

I'm sure one nation or another has tried everything we do on Earth in Space at one time or another in their programs.

It is a science for itself, space ballistic. 1) "Space-based kinetic weapons waste too much energy, conventional strike options are more efficient Space-Based Laser Weapons Insufficient to Counter Threat of Laser Anti-Satellite Weapons Past Efforts to Develop Force-Projection Space Weapons Failed because Conventional Weapons Offered Same Capability Conventionally-Armed Ballistic Missiles are Least Risky Long-Range Strike Option Force-projection Space Weapons are neither Politically nor Technologically Feasible Force-Projection Space Weapons would be 10 Times more Expensive than Comparable Conventional Systems Space-Based Force-Projection Weapons less Reliable than Ground-Based Options U.S. Conventional Weapons already Capable of Accomplishing Long Range Strike Goals " Source and further information: http://www.spacedebate.org/argument/1801/ 2) "Conventional weapons delivered from space against terrestrial targets inherit the lethality and utility of their fundamental design. But because delivering them to targets from space is more expensive logistically, only those that are precise and accurate and, therefore, of small mass are likely to be interesting for orbital basing." Source and further information: http://rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1209/MR1209.ch3.pdf 3) "A ballistic missile is a missile that follows a sub-orbital ballistic flightpath with the objective of delivering a warhead to a predetermined target. The missile is never guided during the relatively brief initial powered phase of flight and its course is subsequently governed by the laws of orbital mechanics and ballistics. To date, ballistic missiles have been propelled during powered flight by chemical rocket engines of various types." Source and further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_missile Further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_weapons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitrii_Evgenievich_Okhotsimsky http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_gun

+6. I was thinking more along the lines of "astronauts" carrying up an AK-47 for testing. Presumably, any outer-space traveling crew will have to be suitably armed. Unlikely as it is that they would work, I'm sure they still thought about testing it.

The person shooting it will be sent backward and never stop until he met something with enough mass to attract him and make him orbit the object. The bullet would keep on going forever until again something with enough mass will pull it toward the object because of gravity.

Yes they have. The effects of weightlessness and lack of friction make the ballistics of weapons in space entirely different from those of weapons on earth. To all intents and purposes, the projectile's trajectory is infinite unless acted upon by some outside force, gravity, for example. ANY hit anywhere on an individual would result in fatality. Recoil would move the firer away from the direction of fire. There's lots more, but I can't remember it all.

The Iraqis fired a few rounds at Uranus, Honey;)