Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Perd Hapley on February 03, 2013, 12:01:54 PM
-
If people don't understand firearms (much less the nomenclature), is it because we have 2 or 3 different uses for the word "caliber"?
And 2 different meanings for "magnum"?
And 2 or 3 different meanings for "rifle"? A 10/22 or a .357 lever gun is a "rifle" because it is a long gun that fires a single projectile through a rifled barrel. But then, it's not a rifle, because a long gun that fires such underpowered ammo is really a carbine. But a carbine is also a rifle in a rifle caliber that is shorter than other rifles.
And we keep insisting that guns aren't even guns, because a gun is an artillery piece.
I mean, I can get really annoyed that people misuse or misunderstand the terminology. But then I think about how I would explain the terminology to a novice. It's a mess. =|
-
I agree. It doesn't bother me too much when people misuse a term. It bothers me a lot more when someone kills an innocent, and the first response on a gun board (and twenty afterward) is " the killer didn't use a clip idiot...it was a magazine". A rose is a rose.
-
No, we do not agree. That is not what I am saying. Calling a rose a violet is still stupid.
-
It's you that is making your head hurt, not the vocabulary.
The same word has different meanings based on the context in which it is used. Just mention 45-70 calibre* to a Navy gunner and watch their eyes :O as they try to envision it.
Within context the words provide precision. The confusion comes from those who throw the words around without context.
A 10/22 or a .357 lever gun is a "rifle" because it is a long gun that fires a single projectile through a rifled barrel.
For someone not interested in going any farther into the nomenclature, describing a shoulder-fired firearm as a "rifle" is sufficient.
But then, it's not a rifle, because a long gun that fires such underpowered ammo is really a carbine.
Now you are beginning to teach the finer points of how shoulder-fired firearms are described. Hopefully the student wants to know about the finer point.
But a carbine is also a rifle in a rifle caliber that is shorter than other rifles.
Now you have introduced more precision - presuming you can show how to separate long-barreled shoulder-fired firearms using pistol calibers from shorter-barreled shoulder-fired firearms using rifle calibers. And that you have explained why a cartridge that uses a .30 caliber bullet is a rifle caliber while a cartridge that uses a .45 caliber bullet is a pistol caliber.
And we keep insisting that guns aren't even guns, because a gun is an artillery piece.
Wikipedia says artillery "- riginally applied to any group of infantry primarily armed with projectile weapons, artillery has over time become limited in meaning to refer only to those engines of war that operate by projection of munitions far beyond the effective range of personal weapons." So crw-served machine guns are artillery, too. As would be the firearms used by snipers/designated marksmen.
And the evil side also conflates the issue with both intentional and unintentional misuse of terms, even to the point of "large-capacity magazine clips" (of which I want several as they might speed up my reload times). But try explaining to an anti-gun rights person who really does not care about precision in the use of terms why that is wrong. BTW - could you, if you had an oppoortunity to correct the error, actually look at yourself in the mirror if you let legislation get passed that contained such a term? (My answer would be "No, but only because I am still rolling on the floor laughing and thus cannot stand up to see the mirror.")
stay safe.
* - "caliber" and "calibre" are not the same thing. If you do not know why, go look it up.
-
English riding alone has four diffrent base saddles, each with a distinctly diffrent purpose and distinct characteristics.
Then each of those saddles has multiple variations and types.
But they are all English saddles.
Point is a lot of diffrent activities, especially ones that involve distinct equitment and have a long history, have what may seem like exsessive and confusing termonolgy to someone who doesn't know what it means, but actually is used to discribe something very specifically.
The diffrence between a magizine and a clip IS a hugely diffrence when it comes to that actual object discribed and makes a big diffrence in actual usage.
Hell, the diffrent types of clips are technically very diffrent and specific.
Fuethermore, when we are forced to discuss the legality in question and laws pertaining to guns, those specific terms are very nessasary to be understood. Because that's the diffrence between banning magizines and clips.
-
If people don't understand firearms (much less the nomenclature), is it because we have 2 or 3 different uses for the word "caliber"?
And 2 different meanings for "magnum"?
And 2 or 3 different meanings for "rifle"? A 10/22 or a .357 lever gun is a "rifle" because it is a long gun that fires a single projectile through a rifled barrel. But then, it's not a rifle, because a long gun that fires such underpowered ammo is really a carbine. But a carbine is also a rifle in a rifle caliber that is shorter than other rifles.
And we keep insisting that guns aren't even guns, because a gun is an artillery piece.
The legacy of marketing decisions made long ago.
I try to be clear and unambiguous when I speak. It comes from needing to streamline communications in tech support situations.
And, yeah, language in common use is sloppy.
-
....And the evil side also conflates the issue with both intentional and unintentional misuse of terms, even to the point of "large-capacity magazine clips" (of which I want several as they might speed up my reload times). But try explaining to an anti-gun rights person who really does not care about precision in the use of terms why that is wrong. BTW - could you, if you had an oppoortunity to correct the error, actually look at yourself in the mirror if you let legislation get passed that contained such a term? (My answer would be "No, but only because I am still rolling on the floor laughing and thus cannot stand up to see the mirror.")
stay safe.
* - "caliber" and "calibre" are not the same thing. If you do not know why, go look it up.
ARGH! "Magazine-clips"!!!! :facepalm:
You know sometimes I like to get away from it all, so I get in my automobile car and just keep driving......
-
Knowing the terminology indicates understanding the terms and thus, the technology.
Go look at the old AWB, and the feature list.
A bunch of stuff got banned that changed nothing about the actual preformance of the weapon.
Regardless of weither the anti's understood what they actually did or not, these arguements continuously slow us down. You can argue up on block and down the other that pistol grips, flash suppressors, bayonet legs, barrel shrods and "the sholder thingy that goes up" do not inherently make the bullets that fly from the barrel more dangorous, but if your argueing with someone who doesn't know what any of that actually *does* it's not going to make a lick of diffrence.
-
English riding alone has four diffrent base saddles, each with a distinctly diffrent purpose and distinct characteristics.
Then each of those saddles has multiple variations and types.
But they are all English saddles.
Originally, Italian saddles IIRC :lol:
-
No big deal.
The Eskimos have at least 50 words for snow, and 70+ for sea ice. ;)
-
Knowing the terminology indicates understanding the terms and thus, the technology.
Go look at the old AWB, and the feature list.
A bunch of stuff got banned that changed nothing about the actual preformance of the weapon.
Regardless of weither the anti's understood what they actually did or not, these arguements continuously slow us down. You can argue up on block and down the other that pistol grips, flash suppressors, bayonet legs, barrel shrods and "the sholder thingy that goes up" do not inherently make the bullets that fly from the barrel more dangorous, but if your argueing with someone who doesn't know what any of that actually *does* it's not going to make a lick of diffrence.
The problem, though, is that we allow people who anything about the subject to write laws that affect all of us.
One example is a law recently proposed by Senator Blumenthal of Connecticut. Somewhere in there he wants to ban Teflon-coated bullets. I saw an op-ed piece he wrote on this bill in a newspaper. He says this bill is necessary to protect "the brave men and women who serve us" (note obligatory play for sympathy, which automatically counts as a logical fallacy I believe) from these deadly, "cop killer" bullets that can penetrate body armor. What the good Senator either doesn't know, or chooses to overlook, is that
- The bullets he's talking about were invented by a cop and two coroners, FOR cops
- The didn't penetrate because of the Teflon coating, they penetrated because they had a tungsten penetrator core
- They never caught on with police departments and the ONLY company that made them went out of business over ten years ago
I'm sure if one of his constituents tried to explain this to him, he wouldn't care. He was reportedly a gun-grabber the entire twenty years he was AG in Connecticut, and he's just continuing on the same path in the Senate.
-
Originally, Italian saddles IIRC :lol:
:lol:
Blah, blah, blah. For that you can list Western Saddles, variations and all those nutty ones that fall somewhere in the middle!
:p
-
Skidmark,
My head is quite untroubled. I understand the terminology fairly well, I think. That took several hours of reading about different types of guns, and their history. The non-enthusiast won't read that far, and doesn't know he needs to.
I laughed at the reporter that wrote about "a .38 caliber special revolver and a .357 caliber magnum revolver," but I can't fault him or her for trying. Us gun folks have chosen some confusing terminology.
As for caliber and calibre, you'd have to explain how there is any difference, aside from the usual spelling variance between the U.S. and the Commonwealth.
-
No, we do not agree. That is not what I am saying. Calling a rose a violet is still stupid.
Know your target audience. My point is - they don't care. I spend a fair amount of time browsing gun ads, and going to gun stores. There are a number of dealers who wrongly use the word clip, instead of magazine, when they talk about pistols.
I'm not going to get my panties (actually boxers) in a bunch over it. I understand they are talking about the part that holds the ammo.
-
Skidmark,
My head is quite untroubled. I understand the terminology fairly well, I think. That took several hours of reading about different types of guns, and their history. The non-enthusiast won't read that far, and doesn't know he needs to.
I laughed at the reporter that wrote about "a .38 caliber special revolver and a .357 caliber magnum revolver," but I can't fault him or her for trying. Us gun folks have chosen some confusing terminology.
As for caliber and calibre, you'd have to explain how there is any difference, aside from the usual spelling variance between the U.S. and the Commonwealth.
Fistful,
In any of those books and resources you refer to designate .38 Special or .375 revolvers in the manner you have as an example?
I think this is less an issue of confusing terminolgy and more someone who doesn't know what he's talking about and trying to sound like he does.
Reporters don't need to know specifics to report what kind of gun was used in a crime. They just need to just open a Jane's and copy verbatium the technical specs listed for the firearm in question. Instead they use as many words as they can because they fail to comprehend that these are simple and specific technical terms used to discribe a specific item, that can be looked up easily.
Understanding the terms is a whole nother kettle of fish and, yes, some of it is confusing, but there are enough basic terms that cover a whole lot of ground that can be used instead.
-
I am not to blame for someone else's intellectual laziness. If you want to engage in a literate discussion on a topic, it is your obligation to inform yourself on that topic, be it firearms, international relations, or anything else. If it's your job, as a "journalist", you have no excuse, certainly not because the material isn't of interest to you.
-
And here's an excellent example in the news this morning. Which is it? Automatic or semi-automatic? Misprint / poor proof reading, or did they (ignorantly) mean what they said? There should be no excuse for Kelly as he said he "fought with these weapons", but with news people, is it not knowing, or is it misrepresenting? Who knows?
However, he would not fully commit to backing an automatic-weapons ban, which, at this point, does not appear to have enough widespread support to become law.
Kelly said semi-automatic weapons are “just too dangerous to be on the streets” for criminals, terrorists and the mentally ill.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/03/nra-lapierre-capt-kelly-show-little-common-ground-in-possible-gun-control/#ixzz2JsBs0Aqf
-
And here's an excellent example in the news this morning. Which is it? Automatic or semi-automatic? Misprint / poor proof reading, or did they (ignorantly) mean what they said? There should be no excuse for Kelly as he said he "fought with these weapons", but with news people, is it not knowing, or is it misrepresenting? Who knows?
It is a good example, because "automatic" has routinely been used to mean "semi-automatic," as in "Automatic Colt Pistol" or the "Auto-5" shotgun. No wonder the uninitiated are confused.
English riding alone has four diffrent base saddles, each with a distinctly diffrent purpose and distinct characteristics.
Then each of those saddles has multiple variations and types.
But they are all English saddles.
I don't find that nearly as confusing to the novice as common firearms terms. We have different types of calibers, but they are all just different calibers. Unless they are cartridges or chamberings or gauges. Part of my contention is that firearms have an especially convoluted nomenclature, compared to other things. l really don't know if that's true, however.
-
Two things:
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
-- James D. Nicoll
. . . and . . .
(I'm sure you'll agree that this doesn't help. I've seen several of these labels on older brown packaging as well.)
-
Edit. oooops.
-
Part of my contention is that firearms have an especially convoluted nomenclature, compared to other things. l really don't know if that's true, however.
I don't think so, but then I'm just an old sailor who doesn't have a clew :lol:
:lol:
Blah, blah, blah. For that you can list Western Saddles, variations and all those nutty ones that fall somewhere in the middle!
:p
Oh, you mean Mexican saddles =D
No, really - what we call "english saddles" were originally "italian saddles."
I dunno what they call them in England - probably just "saddles" :facepalm:
-
Among anti-gun folks, there is an odd form of willful or feigned ignorance. At this point, many, if not most of the antis know the difference between semi and full auto and certainly know that box magazines are not "clips." They use this conflation of meanings with the truly ignorant, and I think as a means to try to derail the conversation. I don't know how many news comments sections are cluttered up with one sentence comments along the lines of "It's a MAGAZINE not a clip you n00b!"
Moreover, I also think the conflating of terms among many antis is a form of faux anti-intellectualism, where they feign having little or no knowledge of firearms. After all, the antis are trying to propagate the narrative that only a wacky, paranoid, gun nut would have a deep enough interest in firearms to understand all the details.
Others have mentioned that a lot of the anti-gun nomenclature also acts as a Shibboleth for the antis so that they know if they are talking to one of their own. I think there is something to this as well.
-
Please let them ban "large capacity magazine clips". It will be funner than the clowns in NYS suddenly finding out thewy forgot to exempt cops from the 7-round maximum.
Many states do not allow "legislative intent" to be considered when interpreting the law. The notion is that the legislature knew what it was talking about and what it was doing, so what's written, when reduced to plain language, is what they meant.
"Ready on the left. Ready on the right. The firing line is ready. You may commence firing your petards."
stay safe.
-
Others have mentioned that a lot of the anti-gun nomenclature also acts as a Shibboleth for the antis so that they know if they are talking to one of their own. I think there is something to this as well.
That doesn't work, since the anti-gun nomenclature is just misused words, spread liberally by establishment press organs.
-
I find that I often judge people by their word choice, be it in relation to firearms or anything else. And, I don't (always) mean that I judge their worth as a human being, but rather judge their knowledge of a subject based on their word choice. All too often, I hear people referring to police sidearms as "service revolver" still, even though I cannot recall the last time I saw an officer carrying a revolver as a duty weapon.
As to our blame for the sometimes confusing terminology, I cannot say that it is our fault, any more than I can blame any other field for the jargon used by those who work in that field or engage in that hobby. I for one know little about computers and computer terminology, but I don't fault people who do for using "tech jargon" when speaking of computers. That said, I'll also confess that I do use the term "auto" for a semi-automatic handgun from time to time, probably because I'm old enough to have been involved with law enforcement during the transition period, when a cop would be carrying either an "auto" or a "wheel gun" for duty use. Habits are hard to break.
-
That doesn't work, since the anti-gun nomenclature is just misused words, spread liberally by establishment press organs.
I'm not completely married to that particular theory, but you can be pretty sure that someone spouting those misused words have been inculcated to some degree with anti-gun propaganda.
-
Based on my accrued knowledge and wisdom from the viewing of various war and shoot-em-up movies and TV shows when young -- that being the only source of firearms terminology for me at the time -- I arrived at the ripe old age of [mumble] understanding believing that "magazine" was a modern alternative term for "clip."
It wasn't until I had spent some time among the gunny crowd that I realized Hollywood hadn't done me any favors.
-
I'm not completely married to that particular theory, but you can be pretty sure that someone spouting those misused words have been inculcated to some degree with anti-gun propaganda.
Which would be anyone who watches television or reads MSM news stories.
-
No honest man needs a gun magazine with more than ten pages. :angel:
-
No honest man needs a gun magazine with more than ten pages words in it than on a canned ham.. :angel:
FTFY.
-
no magazine should have more then 10 adds. >:D
-
Calibre: a word used by marketers to inflate the price of a watch. =D
-
Yea, gun terminology:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIlhiCQQ5Xg
-
???
Plants are the worst, IMHO. But the convoluted nature of their naming is complicated for the same reason that guns are: We've been dealing with this technology for 400 years. Some old names stick and we try and shoe-horn them into the modern world and then work around the old definitions.lants are the worst, IMHO. But the convoluted nature of their naming is complicated for the same reason that guns are: We've been dealing with this technology for 400 years. Some old names stick and we try and shoe-horn them into the modern world and then work around the old definitions.
A pistol being an "auto" is a good example. We went from wheelguns to semi-auto so just saying 'auto' made sense. Then we start introducing machine pistols into the mix (which haven't ever really been common) and the term no longer makes sense, so we invent "machine pistols" to describe them because they're like "machine guns". Machine guns, of course, being much more prominent than machine pistols, what with having evolved much earlier, or at least accepted en mass much earlier than machine pistols. Rifles, unlike pistols, had full-auto variants in much wider use earlier than machine pistols. The semi-automatic stuff came after the full-auto stuff with rifles. So an automatic rifle means a fully-automatic while an automatic pistol means a semi-automatic pistol. It's only when you introduce the "machine" adjective do you really, concretely, indicate what you're talking about. But, among common people that know the language "automatic" will generally get you where you want to go with either one. An automatic M-16 is full-auto and an automatic Colt .45 is semi-automatic. And the "auto" is import there in the latter example because "Colt 45" could be talking about a 1911, an old revolver, or a ghetto beer sold in 40oz bottles.A pistol being an "auto" is a good example. We went from wheelguns to semi-auto so just saying 'auto' made sense. Then we start introducing machine pistols into the mix (which haven't ever really been common) and the term no longer makes sense, so we invent "machine pistols" to describe them because they're like "machine guns". Machine guns, of course, being much more prominent than machine pistols, what with having evolved much earlier, or at least accepted en mass much earlier than machine pistols. Rifles, unlike pistols, had full-auto variants in much wider use earlier than machine pistols. The semi-automatic stuff came after the full-auto stuff with rifles. So an automatic rifle means a fully-automatic while an automatic pistol means a semi-automatic pistol. It's only when you introduce the "machine" adjective do you really, concretely, indicate what you're talking about. But, among common people that know the language "automatic" will generally get you where you want to go with either one. An automatic M-16 is full-auto and an automatic Colt .45 is semi-automatic. And the "auto" is import there in the latter example because "Colt 45" could be talking about a 1911, an old revolver, or a ghetto beer sold in 40oz bottles.
Over in the plant world you have Impatien which is generally meant to be Impatiens wallerinna, the shade loving kind. But, there's also Impatiens hawkeri, otherwise called a "New Guinea Impatien" that looks totally different on the leaves, tolerates more sun, but produces the same flower. They're basically the "same" in that they're in the same genus. That's an easy one to figure out. But then you've got Calibrachoa (genus name used for a specific species), which some people call Million Bells, or an Arbor Vitae which is sometimes refered to as Thuga after its genus name. Then there's Dracena which could refer to either an indoor houseplant that kinda looks like a tree or what we would generally call a "spike" which is just a large grass, and then you drop Cordlyine (aka False Dracena) into the mix and now you've got people calling something by its WRONG genus name, even though the damned thing looks like it should be in the Dracena genus, but at least they're putting "false" in front of it but the matter is further confused because Cordyline differs from Dracena individuous (spike) by color in that Cordyline is red but Dracena individuous is green, except for once in every 200 or so plants, which we generally let the planter people hoard so they can make special "red spike" planters. Then customers ask somebody on the floor for a red spike plant and they show them False Dracena, which isn't horrible, or they ask on the radio, and we explain that spikes sometimes come out red, but it's not the same plant at all because the one they were looking at was basically a mutant and won't do the same thing a Cordyline/False Dracena will.
Confusing, isn't it?
The big difference between how we run our little plant world and how the news runs its world is that we require employees to ask the freaking experts before they tell people what we don't have. They ask for Thuga and we'll tell the employee that's an Arb, aisle 5 in the nursery. They'll get it.
Why news agencies can't do this is beyond me. "Hey, they said the shooter had a 40mm Glock Service Revolver, does that make sense?" Should be a question that they could bubble up to somebody that had any clue about firearms. But they don't, and that tells me something about the journalism industry. Accuracy doesn't matter. They're just squirting out words.