References to cartridges as "bullets"


PDA






infuriatednoodle
May 1, 2011, 12:06 AM
This maybe just me, but does it annoy anyone else when people refer to the whole cartridge or a spent casing as a BULLET? :banghead:

Or even calling a magazine a clip.

EDIT: I do not rage over when people use the wrong word, it doesn't bother me like some of you think, I am just simply asking if it is just slightly annoying

If you enjoyed reading about "References to cartridges as "bullets"" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
ColtPythonElite
May 1, 2011, 12:07 AM
No.............

hermannr
May 1, 2011, 12:16 AM
yes...

bhk
May 1, 2011, 12:23 AM
It actually hurts!

Dulvarian
May 1, 2011, 12:24 AM
I prefer projectile to refer to the bullet. Far less ambiguous for those not well versed. Of course, one shooter friend of mine started referring to spent casings as 'ejectiles' after the last unpleasant range trip we shared. He thinks it is hilarious.

Guardrail
May 1, 2011, 12:24 AM
No. I doubt the world will end if someone calls a cartridge a bullet. Now when they call a weapon a gun...

mljdeckard
May 1, 2011, 12:30 AM
The same people who it rubs me the wrong way when they call magazines clips. (Mostly anti-gunners. I really don't care what shooters call them.)

armoredman
May 1, 2011, 12:34 AM
Consider it a training opportunity...

Gato MontÚs
May 1, 2011, 12:37 AM
The way I see it is the bullet in the cartridge is the main feature, if you will. Sure, you need the case and the primer and powder, but when it's all said and done the projectile is what's important, especially if the intention is to shoot something.

So is it incorrect to call a cartridge a bullet, yes. But still not as bad as calling a magazine a clip, in my book anyway.

clancy12
May 1, 2011, 12:37 AM
Yes. And when people call revolvers pistols and when when people misspell words in their posts, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

newfalguy101
May 1, 2011, 12:43 AM
yes, but, not enough to make a fuss over it...

DoubleTapDrew
May 1, 2011, 12:46 AM
Not as much as when a movie shows a "bullet" flying towards it's target and it's the whole cartridge, case and all.

Dulvarian
May 1, 2011, 12:49 AM
The title sequence for "Chuck" comes to mind on that one. Some James Bond intros may have as well.

longdayjake
May 1, 2011, 12:51 AM
Mark Twain once described the shimmering of light on the Mississippi River as a river-boat captain would see it. A river-boat captain would watch the ripples to attempt to spot hazards or sand bars in the river. After a while all the river-boat captain would see on a river were potentially dangerous hazards in the ripples. Everyone else could look at the shimmering of the ripples and see something beautiful and inspiring. The captain could no longer see beauty on the water.

The point is, there are other ways of looking at guns and ammo than through your trained and educated eyes. All of them have worth of some kind. There is nothing wrong with educating people but don't get annoyed because someone sees it different.

longdayjake
May 1, 2011, 12:53 AM
And when people call revolvers pistols

Wait, a revolver isn't a pistol? Hmm... I think you may be splitting hairs. So what if the chamber isn't integrated in the barrel.

jdh
May 1, 2011, 01:10 AM
What you don't load your glock clips full of bullets?

PedalBiker
May 1, 2011, 01:10 AM
We have two versions of the game of "Clue". The older one is correct, but the newer one has the "revolver" card with a photo of a 1911 style auto, and the metal playing piece is also an automatic.

The old game has a revolver on both the card and the playing piece.

I prefer ignorance to antipathy.

Deus Machina
May 1, 2011, 01:11 AM
Wait, a revolver isn't a pistol? Hmm... I think you may be splitting hairs. So what if the chamber isn't integrated in the barrel.

Nope, a pistol feeds from a magazine. :)

"Handgun" describes them both.

Ribbing aside, it bothers me a little, in the same way that clips vs. magazines, 'gat', and the like do.

Nothing to get bent out of shape about, though.

JEB
May 1, 2011, 01:16 AM
Of course, one shooter friend of mine started referring to spent casings as 'ejectiles'

that is great! im gonna have to use that one sometime!

and yes the "bullet" thing does bug me. one friend of mine who reloads always refers to the projectiles themselves as "bullet tips." i really have to grit my teeth on that one...

Manco
May 1, 2011, 01:17 AM
It only bothers me when there should be a distinction between the two in the context of the discussion. I don't mind when, for example, somebody says that they're "out of bullets" because it's true--they happen to be out of cartridges as well, but they're still out of bullets. :)

Wait, a revolver isn't a pistol? Hmm... I think you may be splitting hairs. So what if the chamber isn't integrated in the barrel.

Historically, revolvers were considered pistols, and I haven't seen any "official" reason for this to have changed. I guess people got so accustomed to the word "revolver" and needed a nice, short, catchy-sounding term for every other type of handgun, so they came to believe that must be what "pistol" means. That's the process of language evolution, I guess, but the fact is that to some people revolvers are still pistols, although I try to avoid confusion when using the word. Note that THR sort of acknowledges the historical (and current, as far as I'm concerned) definition of "pistol" by using the term "autoloaders" in the forum of that name instead of simply "pistols." It seems that dictionaries tend to use the more modern definition, though. In addition, some people define "pistol" specifically as semi-automatic handguns (even though the word is much older than this type of firearm), as opposed to revolvers, muzzleloaders, single-shot and multi-barrel derringers (one or two r's ;)), etc.

longdayjake
May 1, 2011, 01:19 AM
Nope, a pistol feeds from a magazine.

Are you sure? What about single shot muzzle loaded handguns?

Old krow
May 1, 2011, 01:28 AM
It bothers me about as much as someone calling a Jalapeno a vegetable. :what:

AZ_Rebel
May 1, 2011, 01:30 AM
Nope, a pistol feeds from a magazine.

Since Sam Colt himself referred to his products as "Revolving Pistols" I would be interested to know where you got this interpretation. :D

Manco
May 1, 2011, 01:35 AM
Since Sam Colt himself referred to his products as "Revolving Pistols" I would be interested to know where you got this interpretation. :D

A revolver's cylinder is in fact a type of magazine. :)

Too bad it actually rotates rather than revolves.... :uhoh: I guess he meant that the "charge holes" revolved. That was before the "chambers" were filled with bullets...I mean cartridges. ;)

cbrgator
May 1, 2011, 01:37 AM
The "bullet" thing is not that bad for me. Although, if I don't know someone and I hear them say bullet when the clear reference was to the entire cartridge, I automatically assume they don't know what they are talking about.

On the other hand, when I hear someone say clip instead of magazine, it's like nails on a chalkboard. Don't know why I care so much, but I really cannot stand it. I always correct people and they are shocked there is a difference. I beg them not to say it anymore and I inform them that anybody who knows anything about guns will assume they are an idiot if they say it.

kozak6
May 1, 2011, 01:38 AM
If someone doesn't know better, it's no big deal.

If someone really should know better, like most posters here, I find it mildly amusing.

longdayjake
May 1, 2011, 01:38 AM
It bothers me about as much as someone calling a Jalapeno a vegetable.

What is a jalapeno?

Deus Machina
May 1, 2011, 01:40 AM
Fine, fine! :D

Let's just mark that up to language evolution and current distinction, shall we? To me, a 'pistol' is essentially any handgun but a revolver.

And I am, technically, not completely wrong. :neener:

longdayjake
May 1, 2011, 01:43 AM
And I am, technically, not completely wrong.

Well, I guess if you are going to base your conclusion on this statment:

To me, a 'pistol' is essentially any handgun but a revolver.



I wish the world worked that way for me. :neener:

ms6852
May 1, 2011, 02:21 AM
So I guess there is no such thing is dueling pistols...just banjos.:neener::what::neener:

Friendly, Don't Fire!
May 1, 2011, 02:23 AM
I typically refer to it as the "pill" when I am discussing the individual reloading component of the bullet itself.

Gato MontÚs
May 1, 2011, 02:26 AM
I've actually had a man correct me on the revolver vs pistol nomenclature at the range. I called the model 10 my friend was shooting a sweet pistol, to which this guy took offense and tried to correct me. Tell me, how does a term exist before the item it describes is invented?

Manco
May 1, 2011, 02:29 AM
On the other hand, when I hear someone say clip instead of magazine, it's like nails on a chalkboard. Don't know why I care so much, but I really cannot stand it.

It bothers me a lot more, too, but I know exactly why--whereas terms such as bullet, round, and cartridge are commonly used to refer to ammunition in general or the supply thereof, and in particular bullets are at least a component of cartridges, the terms "magazine" and "clip" refer to very different things in English, not just firearms jargon.

Magazines are containers or compartments that enclose (except for some sort of opening) supplies, while clips are, well, like paperclips or hair clips--minimal devices that grip a part of a number of items at once. In the sense that they both keep things together, they can serve similar functions, but nobody in their right mind would confuse a clip with a box, and that's fairly analogous to clips versus magazines.

That's really as specific as we need to get. Sometimes clips are used to feed ammunition into magazines (whether integral or detachable) or are even placed inside magazines while still holding ammunition such as with the M1 Garand, but this does not define either term. Other types of clips can even be used to hold detachable magazines together, but a clip is always a clip and a magazine is always a magazine, no matter how they're used in conjunction with firearms. I say this because people always try to get fancy with definitions (e.g. a "magazine" must be spring-loaded and must feed directly into the chamber), which inevitably leads to confusion (and it's incorrect anyway).

I think this whole confusing mess started with the similar function of detachable magazines and the M1 Garand's en bloc clips. To me, it's so simple--to load an M1, you insert the clip holding ammo into the rifle's integral magazine, while on an M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle, for example, you attach a detachable magazine containing ammo. Somewhere along the way, perhaps because "clip" is a shorter, easier word to use (although "mag" is just as convenient), people started calling detachable magazines "clips" even though they are clearly NOT clips--they are boxes that enclose supplies, you know, magazines! :banghead: This just makes NO sense, which the linguist in me finds quite offensive, to tell you the truth (language evolution in this case be damned!). :cuss:

While I don't bother correcting people for what has become a common and widely accepted :barf: usage of terminology, every so often I do like to vent about it in these threads. ;)

Gato MontÚs
May 1, 2011, 02:38 AM
Plus let's be honest, what is the first image that pops into your head when someone is calling magazines clips? Maybe the willfully ignorant youth who throws around terms like "clip" and "gat" to try to sound cool. Whose interest in firearms goes only as far as to try to seem gangsta and for the power and means of destruction they provide; a very childish view of firearms.

That's how it is for me anyway.

Manco
May 1, 2011, 02:48 AM
What is a jalapeno?

It holds the plant's seeds and attracts animals to help distribute them with edible flesh (in this case mostly birds because they aren't irritated by the capsaicin, or humans because we're weird and enjoy some forms of pain), so it's a fruit like an apple or tomato. But that's not important right now.... ;)

Oyeboten
May 1, 2011, 03:00 AM
My Model of 1917 S&W Pistol - the Revolving Magazine is charged with Ammunition using a 'Clip'.

And, it is fun to mention it in this context, too.


Technically, the Cartridige Case is part of the Firearm, even if a transient part.


Good mention on the Japapeno ( being a Fruit ).


Tomatoes, Squashes/Zuccinni/Cucumbers, Avacados, similarly of course.

Overall, generally, if it proceeds from a Flower, and is in effect, a mature and exteriorized Ovary of a Plant, containing 'Seeds' - it is a Fruit.

If is a Plant Body-component otherwise, or if it is Leaves or a Root, it is a Vegetable.




People calling 'Stocks' Grips...is one which I regret also, especially as it is so easy to understand what is a Grip, and, what is a Stock, and to be able to tell them apart.

4thPointOfContact
May 1, 2011, 03:08 AM
It bothers me about as much as someone calling a Jalapeno a vegetable.

I was always bothered by people calling a tomato a vegetable. It's a fruit, dang it! It may be used like a vegetable, but it's still a fruit.

Manco
May 1, 2011, 03:14 AM
My Model of 1917 S&W Pistol - the Revolving Magazine is charged with Ammunition using a 'Clip'.

That's perfectly correct, proper, valid, and all that good stuff, although the magazine in this case (i.e. the cylinder) actually rotates rather than revolves. :) That said, I believe that linguistically the distinction between rotation and revolution is a more recent (and positive) development, probably due to physics, and that "revolve" was frequently used to describe both types of motion in the past (and may still be by some, which I guess isn't necessarily incorrect, especially in the context of firearms, where this is traditional).

cbrgator
May 1, 2011, 03:19 AM
Plus let's be honest, what is the first image that pops into your head when someone is calling magazines clips? Maybe the willfully ignorant youth who throws around terms like "clip" and "gat" to try to sound cool. Whose interest in firearms goes only as far as to try to seem gangsta and for the power and means of destruction they provide; a very childish view of firearms.
Actually I just see them as plain ignorant, not necessarily trying to sound like cool kid. Someone who likely got their gun education from TV shows and movies. You know... those incredibly accurate Hollywood depictions - Like in the shootout scenes where the clips never run out of bullets. :rolleyes:

Shadow 7D
May 1, 2011, 03:34 AM
I thought he was talking about journalist
hell I'm happy when they hold up something close to the actual ammo (nothing like some 40 MM MK19 grenades still lock into a belt being held up as an example of 'pistol' ammo...)

Honestly, if one of the talking head started spouting that he feeds his 1911 Kibbles and Bits I wouldn't be the least bit surprised. Personally I just be glad he has a gun, even if he does confuse it with mans best friend.

So bullets ammo cartridges, Until you are discussing exact parts, or functions or components, it doesn't really matter and even the OP would understand.

jim157
May 1, 2011, 03:51 AM
Old krow has it down cold

olderguns2
May 1, 2011, 08:39 AM
I,ve been around guns for over 40 years , and I know the terms BUT if there is someone who,s really anal about it, I can,t help pushing their button
Like one guy at my old range, he would get so mad he would just turn red in the face if someone did not use the right words,
so of course when I was shooting close to him I had to say loudly to my wife ( let me get the bullets & load up the clips then we,ll start:evil:

highlander 5
May 1, 2011, 08:56 AM
To me the bullet is the projectile that leaves the cartridge when fired,cartridge is 1 loaded round and the empties are cases. As far as the term pistol,I've used the term to describe a revolver,semi auto and/or single shot as in a T/C Contender or Encore. Of all my rifles and handguns I have only 3 that use a clip 2 625s and a 610,everything else uses a magazine or is a single shot.

The Lone Haranguer
May 1, 2011, 09:00 AM
Only when there is a long, slow-motion closeup of an entire cartridge flying through the air on its way to the target. :D Likewise, I don't get bent out of shape when someone confuses a clip with a magazine.

M-Cameron
May 1, 2011, 09:52 AM
bullets, cartridge.......clip, magazine.........i dont really care......just so long as i know what you are talking about....

im not that much of a snob where im going to get on your case for using the wrong terminology....because i probably do the same thing on occasion myself.

parsimonious_instead
May 1, 2011, 10:01 AM
I think this whole confusing mess started with the similar function of detachable magazines and the M1 Garand's en bloc clips. To me, it's so simple--to load an M1, you insert the clip holding ammo into the rifle's integral magazine, while on an M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle, for example, you attach a detachable magazine containing ammo. Somewhere along the way, perhaps because "clip" is a shorter, easier word to use (although "mag" is just as convenient), people started calling detachable magazines "clips" even though they are clearly NOT clips--they are boxes that enclose supplies, you know, magazines!

Perhaps this "confusion" was aided by certain rifles that had a protruding, fixed compartment under the receiver that resembled a detachable magazine, that was "fed" by "stripper clips?"

eye5600
May 1, 2011, 10:37 AM
All you people who take great exception to what you perceive to be the misuse of words might ask yourselves if you know all the inside lingo in other sports. Every term used in golf? Everything detail of skiing? Every part of a sailboat?

No one knows everything.

I do take exception to folks who take it upon themselves to write gun laws without learning even the basics.

dirtyjim
May 1, 2011, 10:44 AM
when some smart aleck starts having a fit because me or someone else doesn't use the exact proper term i kindly remind them that my girlfriend is younger and better looking than theirs and that makes me the winner and i can call carbines rifles, revolvers pistols, mags clips, bullets cartridges and all other sorts of things that annoy shooting nazi's

mrbro
May 1, 2011, 10:49 AM
Nothing said by the uninformed gets to me, its not their fault that they do not know the correct term. What does get to me is bullets as "boolits", "tips", or "heads" by those that should know better.

longdayjake
May 1, 2011, 10:54 AM
It holds the plant's seeds and attracts animals to help distribute them with edible flesh (in this case mostly birds because they aren't irritated by the capsaicin, or humans because we're weird and enjoy some forms of pain), so it's a fruit like an apple or tomato. But that's not important right now....

I'm sorry but your logic is flawed. If your statement were true then peas and string beans would be fruit.

Back to being gun related; my favorite thing that anti-gunners are saying right now are "assault clips."

dirtyjim
May 1, 2011, 10:56 AM
What does get to me is bullets as "boolits"
the term "boolits" was coined by the cast bullet shooters and it annoys them when the uninformed use it to describe jacketed bullets.
most of the people using the term boolits know exactly what they are talking about

dmazur
May 1, 2011, 11:01 AM
Many years ago, a forestry professor was trying to show us the importance of using Latin names for trees. There was an incident, apparently, of a landowner ordering the removal of a nice stand of jack pine so he could plant bull pine. Both are slang names for Pinus ponderosa (Ponderosa Pine). The young pines may have a different bark appearance, but essentially he reset his harvest rotation clock out of confusion.

I believe it would be better if we could try to use a common language on the shooting forums. Perhaps we can never change local custom, or the habits of our friends, but it is probably better if we don't confuse ourselves as part of asking and answering questions.

My personal ???? term is "tips". None of the misuses bother me, but this one is just simply baffling. :)

CraigC
May 1, 2011, 11:14 AM
Yes, it is irritating. As is the whole clip vs. magazine debacle. What is gaining on that short list of irritating use of incorrect terms is cailber vs. cartridge/chambering. Still having a hard time with accuracy vs. precision.


And when people call revolvers pistols and when when people misspell words in their posts, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.
The term pistol is far older than revolvers and automatics. Indeed, Sam Colt referred to his 1836 creation as a "revolving pistol". Not sure what the preceeding flintlock revolvers were referred to as. No doubt the term pistol was used to describe them as well.


Nothing said by the uninformed gets to me, its not their fault that they do not know the correct term.
Isn't it? Ignorance is usually the fault (and responsibility) of the ignorant.

16shells
May 1, 2011, 11:31 AM
It is easy to forget, but the nomenclature of firearms is complex. On top of that, we have all been subjected to hearing incorrect usage on television and movies for decades.
By the way, why are they called shotgun "shells" and not shotgun "cartridges"?

deadin
May 1, 2011, 11:57 AM
I feel just a little bit sad for those that let little, unimportant things like nomenclature get under their skin. Life is too short to worry about what somebody else calls something. (And just a little bit "snobby".):rolleyes:

buck460XVR
May 1, 2011, 12:20 PM
Mark Twain once described the shimmering of light on the Mississippi River as a river-boat captain would see it. A river-boat captain would watch the ripples to attempt to spot hazards or sand bars in the river. After a while all the river-boat captain would see on a river were potentially dangerous hazards in the ripples. Everyone else could look at the shimmering of the ripples and see something beautiful and inspiring. The captain could no longer see beauty on the water.

The point is, there are other ways of looking at guns and ammo than through your trained and educated eyes. All of them have worth of some kind. There is nothing wrong with educating people but don't get annoyed because someone sees it different.


Very well said Jake. We as gun owners need to embrace what we have in common, not tear apart our community because of grammar and subjective terminology. If such small things in life bother some so much, I wonder how they deal with major issues.

CraigC
May 1, 2011, 12:25 PM
I feel just a little bit sad for those that let little, unimportant things like nomenclature get under their skin. Life is too short to worry about what somebody else calls something. (And just a little bit "snobby".)
And I feel a little sad for those for whom details are unimportant and think discussions about those details is "snobby".

deadin
May 1, 2011, 12:42 PM
Details are unimportant UNLESS you want to sound knowledgeable about the subject, then they become paramount. Getting all upset because a neophyte uses the wrong term and then generating a 55+ response thread about it seems to me to be "preaching to the choir" and little "strutting" by many responders. Just respectfully correct the user and don't try to hold them up to ridicule because of their unintentional gaffe.

Friendly, Don't Fire!
May 1, 2011, 12:46 PM
i,ve been around guns for over 40 years , and i know the terms but if there is someone who,s really anal about it, i can,t help pushing their button
like one guy at my old range, he would get so mad he would just turn red in the face if someone did not use the right words,
so of course when i was shooting close to him i had to say loudly to my wife ( let me get the bullets & load up the clips then we,ll start:evil:
rolfmao!

fractal7
May 1, 2011, 12:55 PM
Bullets vs. cartridges doesn't bother me very much unless its in the context of reloading because then it legitimately gets confusing if we are referring to the projectile or the finished product.

And the clip/magazine only bothers me when its someone who is pretending like they know what they're talking about and then uses "clip", "assault clip" for example. Genuine slip ups or just not knowing the difference isn't that big of a deal.

jdh
May 1, 2011, 01:09 PM
All you people who take great exception to what you perceive to be the misuse of words might ask yourselves if you know all the inside lingo in other sports. Every term used in golf? Everything detail of skiing? Every part of a sailboat?

Right, but we don't go down to the golf stadium and throw down niblick, mashie, or jigger to look cool and try to fool them into believing we know what we are doing on their turf.

Nushif
May 1, 2011, 01:12 PM
Isn't it? Ignorance is usually the fault (and responsibility) of the ignorant.

That's a mighty ... mighty slippery slope. Ignorance while the "fault" of the person is by no means a measure of judgement which is what you are very strongly implying. Because I'm sure a scholar of toy trains could make you look like an imbecile when you're out with your daughter buying toy trains. Someone who's spent their entire lives walking the wilderness in New Hampshire may very well be annoyed at you running into them in your "laymaniness" when you do nature walks and someone who's spent their entire life studying rhetoric probably does cry when they read half this forum.

Let's hope they're not as harsh in their judgement as we are.

Oh yeah ... moar data ...

Right, but we don't go down to the golf stadium and throw down niblick, mashie, or jigger to look cool and try to fool them into believing we know what we are doing on their turf.

No, but we may log on to their forum and say:

"Hey, new Golfer here.
I just bought my first set of clubs, but I'm missing the one with the big head. Which one of those should I get?"

And we have the reasonable expectation to get a reply like this:

"Those are actually called a driver, and at your skill level the lowest priced name brand one you can find is probably enough."

Instead of this:

"It's called a Driver and by the way you need to seriously learnt he lingo before you even touch foot on the course."

CraigC
May 1, 2011, 01:43 PM
Getting all upset because a neophyte uses the wrong term
Who is "all upset"? We're having a friendly discussion among peers, a "guild" of shooters if you will. In which it is quite common to have discussions like this where we talk about the uninitiated. Nobody is passing judgement or working up a hangman's knot. Nor has there been any talk of publicly humiliating someone for not knowing proper terminology. All in good fun, maybe YOU should try not to take it so seriously???


Details are unimportant UNLESS you want to sound knowledgeable about the subject...
Hogwash! Details are everything and it has nothing to do with showing off or otherwise impressing others. Details are what keep us up at night. If you really think details are "unimportant", you're probably not a very serious shooter.

Old krow
May 1, 2011, 01:48 PM
I'm sorry but your logic is flawed. If your statement were true then peas and string beans would be fruit.

It's not flawed at all. Look it up. A Jalapeno is a fruit. Botanically a Pea and String Bean are also a fruit since the pods contains a seed.

The point was, we're all wrong about something. As long as they aren't trying to take it away from me it doesn't really bother me.

M-Cameron
May 1, 2011, 01:54 PM
Hogwash! Details are everything and it has nothing to do with showing off or otherwise impressing others. Details are what keep us up at night. If you really think details are "unimportant", you're probably not a very serious shooter.

if we go shooting together...and i forget the ammo in the car, and i ask you "hey, can you get the bullets from the car?" .....are you going to know what i am asking for....or are you going to stand there confused.......

.....if you come back with the ammo......then details are not "everything"

deadin
May 1, 2011, 01:59 PM
If you really think details are "unimportant", you're probably not a very serious shooter.

Ad hominem if I ever saw one.:banghead:

By the way, I will put my experience and general firearm knowledge up against anyone, and, in some areas, I may even show some pretty detailed proficiency.

altitude_19
May 1, 2011, 02:05 PM
For some reason, a Sailor demanding I refer to a wall as a bulkhead comes to mind. Even though he knew EXACTLY what I was talking about from the get go. Details aren't necessarily unimportant, but somebody who worries EXCLUSIVELY about minute details doesn't have enough to worry about, in my experience. I'm what you call a "big picture" kind of guy.

CraigC
May 1, 2011, 02:07 PM
...and dont even begin to question how serious of a shooter i am.
And now the posturing begins. Lighten up. I wasn't directing that at you anyway. But if we go shooting together and you ask me for "bullets", I may come back with ammo but I will give you a hard time about it.

Do we not sit here, sometimes for hours on end and debate about the finer DETAILS of guns and shooting? Please, we froth at the mouth to discuss details that would be completely unknown or unimportant to the uninitiated. Like the difference between the grip angle on a 1911 vs. a Glock. Differences between different types of bluing, different woods, wood vs. synthetic, polymer vs. steel, sights vs. optics, fixed vs adjustable sights, 9mm vs. .45ACP, .38 vs. .357, etc., etc., ad nauseum. The higher your interest in ANYTHING, the more you get into the finer details. Details, details, details. :rolleyes:

M-Cameron
May 1, 2011, 02:12 PM
And now the posturing begins. Lighten up. I wasn't directing that at you anyway. But if we go shooting together and you ask me for "bullets", I may come back with ammo but I will give you a hard time about it.

why?.....if you knew what i asked for, and you were able to get it without confusion or incident.....why bother giving someone a hard time....other than to act like a snob with an inflated ego.


Do we not sit here, sometimes for hours on end and debate about the finer DETAILS of guns and shooting? Please, we froth at the mouth to discuss details that would be completely unknown or unimportant to the uninitiated. Like the difference between the grip angle on a 1911 vs. a Glock. Differences between different types of bluing, different woods, wood vs. synthetic, polymer vs. steel, sights vs. optics, fixed vs adjustable sights, 9mm vs. .45ACP, .38 vs. .357, etc., etc., ad nauseum. Details, details, details

technical details are one thing.........nomenclature is another....

CraigC
May 1, 2011, 02:26 PM
why?.....if you knew what i asked for, and you were able to get it without confusion or incident.....why bother giving someone a hard time....other than to act like a snob with an inflated ego.
Because that's what friends do and I only go shooting with friends!!! If your friends call you a snob for giving them a hard time about something, you need new friends. If you call your friends a snob for giving you a hard time about something, they need new friends. L-I-G-H-T-E-N U-P-!-!-!


technical details are one thing.........nomenclature is another....
Details are details. Lord have mercy, I've never seen so much defensiveness.

M-Cameron
May 1, 2011, 02:38 PM
Because that's what friends do and I only go shooting with friends!!! If your friends call you a snob for giving them a hard time about something, you need new friends. If you call your friends a snob for giving you a hard time about something, they need new friends. L-I-G-H-T-E-N U-P-!-!-!


you see, you tell me to lighten up.....yet you are the one giving me crap for calling them "bullets"..........i dont see what you are getting at.

CraigC
May 1, 2011, 02:47 PM
I give up.

deadin
May 1, 2011, 03:16 PM
Do we not sit here, sometimes for hours on end and debate about the finer DETAILS of guns and shooting? Please, we froth at the mouth to discuss details that would be completely unknown or unimportant to the uninitiated

True, but what bugs me is that nothing new has come up in these discussions/debates for years. Just rehashing the same old remarks.

Old krow
May 1, 2011, 03:17 PM
When we hear something like this from someone else, new shooter, non-shooter, friends, or relatives and we decide to correct them, who does that correction benefit? Is it because we're helping learn or are we doing to show our own detailed knowledge about it?

Do we not sit here, sometimes for hours on end and debate about the finer DETAILS of guns and shooting

Yes we do. We are enthusiast and by correcting each other we learn from each other. This is acceptable, albeit painful sometimes, because we aspire to learn as much as we can about this fine sport. Details are important to us. Not everyone has the same level of interest that we do. The scope of the OP's post wasn't necessarily directed to the gun community. It wasn't necessarily directed toward someone pretending to know what they were talking while using the incorrect terminology. It was left open to anyone that used the terminology incorrectly.

Ryanxia
May 1, 2011, 05:08 PM
It annoys me when people say bullet instead of ammo or cartridge. Kyle on Top Shot season 2 said it once and I wanted to slap him :)

Magazine =/= Clip (unless you're talking about an M1 Garand in which case IDC lol)

DCR
May 1, 2011, 09:09 PM
Attention to petty nonessential details is a sign of a petty mind. Correcting someone on such details only proves it.

Lighten up and focus on the important stuff - guns and shooting.

HOOfan_1
May 1, 2011, 09:39 PM
but what are the tweezers called which one would use to pick fly crap out of the pepper?

bhk
May 2, 2011, 09:35 AM
I am an NRA Certified Pistol Instructor. Guess I can't teach revolver shooting. Poor revolver shooters are out of luck because the NRA doesn't have a certification for revolver instructors.. They have to learn all by themselves.

Grey_Mana
May 2, 2011, 09:50 AM
Metonymy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metonymy

dirtyjim
May 2, 2011, 11:49 AM
I took my semi-auto assault rifle with a 16" barrel to the range and
loaded the clip full o boolits.
that sentence should drive somebody nuts

Sam1911
May 2, 2011, 12:01 PM
I give up.

That is the best advice of all.

If you enjoyed reading about "References to cartridges as "bullets"" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!