Banned because there is no particular reason a gun of some kind cannot fire over the horizon. I just don't think that sort of blasting power exists at the moment.
banned for it does, it just isn't really worthwhile to build
Banned for, it doesnt. A bullet could never travel such a distance, 'over the horizon' like you say. Even if you used a powerful gun, the bullet would explode inside the barell, due to high pressure. Bullets have a limit in pressure they can withstand, you know.
Also, the force of gravity will always prevail. Thus, as soon as the bullet leaves the gun barrel, it will start going down, unable to resist the force of gravity. Thats why guns shoot in a curve, launching the bullet a little upwards, making it take a curved trajectory. However, that is still not enough, because no matter the bullet's velocity, gravity will always prevail, pulling down the bullet.
"Blasting power" What are you talking about?
Such Blasting power exists, and a lot more than what a gun can produce. Basically, any kind of explosive produces 'blasting power', like you say. A gun that would make the bullet explode inside the gun barrel can easily be created, but what is the point?
.45 is good. But there are many other models I would prefer. I personally like the Israeli Jericho in .45.
I didnt say that the M1911 is the best choice. Maybe the worst, but certainly not the best.
I get it. I just think that some of the questions they answer are funny because they're not myth. I'm sure you get what I mean.
Yes, I get what you mean. However, I like learning things while watching the show, and I'm sure many people feel the same way.
Also, their criteria for what is a "Myth", is anything that is being said and talked about, on the internet, in movies, popular sayings, etc, but has never been confirmed plausible by a reliable source.
Example: The expression "A punch that will knock your socks off", or something like that. Meaning that if you punch a person really hard, it may knock off their socks, because the blow is really powerful.
I admit that is pretty stupid, but this is stuff that people also request, and/or talk about on the internet.
My point being, that you're right, some of the myths they put to the test are lame/funny/ridiculous, but you shouldnt take the word "Myth" literally.
Well, I find them entertaining and they do have some really good episodes. There are some experiments they do which are flawed to the point of producing questionable results. Although it's probably inevitable, I wouldn't mind hearing them admit that once in a while. Like I said, still entertaining. I would still say it's educational.
But they do admit it when their results are inconclusive. They have said many times, things like: "Plausible, although would be very hard to put to practice" or "This is probably Busted. The chances of that happening are astronomical." or even said 1 time: "Our results are inconclusive. We will call it busted for now, but may have to do some further tests in the future."
I've watched nearly all of their episodes, including the latest ones. I may have missed like 2 or 3 of them. I'm sure you'd have noticed them admitting questionable results a few times, if you'd watched a lot of their episodes.
And yes, it is educational most times.
Well, at the moment I'm on the internet. So, practicality is gonna take a hit.
What is that supposed to mean? 
Actually, there are a variety of naval artillery guns (none in service) which are capable of doing that. But with small arms, you are very correct.
Yes, and naval artillery guns fire .45 bullets. They also use 9mm and .38 
"We were inhuman beings....butchers on a field of corpses....corrupt and depraved....only a sum of viscera, blood, and bone - Creatures without soul."
