Gun-related sayings that need to go away

Status
Not open for further replies.
"I carry a .45 because they don't make a .46"

That one popped into my head without even having to thing of any sayings. I. HATE. THAT. SAYING.

....and Ruger revolvers are built like tanks. Neither are indestructible but are over-built and conducive to longevity.

And both will kill you
 
If you tracked down a scholarly source other than some general said Yamamoto said that, I'd like to see it. Their war plan was to establish a zone of defense in the Pacific to defend their conquests in China and Indonesia. They thought that the USA would not fight reconquer their gains as we were a nation of feckless shopkeepers. They thought a conclusive naval attack or a later sea battle would bring us to the negotiation table.

Define 'cheat' as otherwise the statement is meaningless. Taking advantage is not what 'cheat' means in common context.
 
ATLDave said:
Gun people tend to fall in love with hoary old sayings. There's a lot of wisdom to be found in some old sayings, and a lot of nonsense to be found in other old sayings. What are some gun-related sayings that need to be taken out and shot? I'll put in a few:
  • Beware the man with one gun/rifle/pistol; he probably knows how to use it.
    • Not true now, if it ever was. People who are interested in guns are the ones who put in the time to learn how to use them. People who are interested in guns tend to acquire more than one, either for different purposes or simple interest. Having a bunch of guns doesn't make you competent, but having only one is a pretty good sign you haven't been "into" guns for very long, or have only a very causal level of interest.

    • For some, one firearm is all they can afford or care to own for one reason or another. Sgt Alvin York wasn't a gun collector but he hunted to feed his family and obviously was an excellent marksman.
  • A pistol is for fighting your way back to your long gun.
    • Nonsense in civilian gun world. If you can leave the situation, there's almost no circumstance under which it is prudent or wise to then voluntarily return with a long gun.
  • Slow is smooth, smooth is fast.
    • Nobody gets to be actually-fast at anything by trying to be slow. And that includes firearms stuff. Slow-motion practice may be good for ingraining certain pathways of motion, but you have to try to go fast to go faster. People who are already fast may perform best by focusing on feeling smooth, but increases in speed require trying to increase speed.
  • I disagree. You start with smooth. smoothness builds confidence and smooth becomes faster. Speed without smoothness and confidence is just clumsy

  • What other sayings need to go the way of the dodo?
Click to expand...

  • .
 
NIGHTLORD40K said:
I take issue with this one, only because anyone who has done armored vehicle maintenance can attest that Rugers are far more reliable and require far less service than a tank.:D
Click to expand...

When I was with 1st TOW company we were stationed with 1st Tank battalion. I recall that those M60 tanks took around 8 hours of maintenance for every hour of use.

Those poor tankers were ALWAYS working on those tanks.

Here's my saying that needs to go away,

I support the 2nd Amendment BUT
 
GEM said:
If you tracked down a scholarly source other than some general said Yamamoto said that, I'd like to see it. Their war plan was to establish a zone of defense in the Pacific to defend their conquests in China and Indonesia. They thought that the USA would not fight reconquer their gains as we were a nation of feckless shopkeepers. They thought a conclusive naval attack or a later sea battle would bring us to the negotiation table.

Define 'cheat' as otherwise the statement is meaningless. Taking advantage is not what 'cheat' means in common context.
Click to expand...
I think you're probably right about the Japanese strategy and belief. And until Midway, the Japanese Navy had not suffered a major defeat in so long that a major loss was almost unimaginable. I will take a quick look and see if I have the paper that I referenced.

By "cheat", I mean deceive, trick, and blind your enemy and step outside the common rules of fair play whenever it is to your advantage, if your life depends on it. Throw chicken poop, create distractions, bluff, or offer to show your adversary nude pictures of his wife.
 
doubleh said:
I think I'm too old to get my shorts all wadded up over most of these things along with firearm mistakes in movies and TV. I just blow them off and and go on.
Click to expand...
It's not a question of the configuration of one's shorts... it's about misleading information getting re-circulated within the firearms community to the detriment of people within that community. The worst of these sayings often get in the way of people making good decisions or making improvements or the like.

To take one of my initial 3 as an example, it's both amusing and frustrating watching some competitors in a game like USPSA stay very smooth - and very slow - for years without making any material improvements in their speed. Because they have been promised that if they stay slow and smooth well enough, the speed will eventually come naturally. If/when they finally get frustrated and decide to practice speed for a change, they often get different results in a short space of time. But they get deterred from doing this for months or years (or, worse, forever) because of an old saying that keeps going around.
 
460Shooter

HK's customer service model is "You suck and we hate you.":

I had to contact HK about a faulty part. They responded to my email within a minute (not exaggerating) and sent me the new part for free. I've talked to several other folks that have had the same experience. It was maybe true in the past but no longer IMO.
Click to expand...

I agree with your observation about HK customer service. Had some questions about a used P7 I bought years ago. They responded very quickly and with quite a bit more (and detailed), information than I was expecting!
 
fair play
Click to expand...

That's what I was getting it. What is 'fair play'? Should you pick up a toddler to use as a shield? I was in a major match. One of the stages had you hold a dummy baby and get it to safety while fighting off your opponents. In fact a picture of me doing this at Tom Given's Polite Society match as it was called then, was on the cover of his newsletter. However, one participant took the 'baby' and threw it quite a ways behind cover to get a two handed grip on his gun. The referee called him on that. Was he cheating?

That's different from sticking your finger in someone's eye or biting his ear when in a boxing match.

I would add to our discussion - Have plan to kill everyone in the room.

IIRC, that has been brought up in a shoot case as showing a nutso mind set. Being aware of your surroundings is a better way to say it.
 
ATLDave said:
It's not a question of the configuration of one's shorts... it's about misleading information getting re-circulated within the firearms community to the detriment of people within that community. The worst of these sayings often get in the way of people making good decisions or making improvements or the like.

To take one of my initial 3 as an example, it's both amusing and frustrating watching some competitors in a game like USPSA stay very smooth - and very slow - for years without making any material improvements in their speed. Because they have been promised that if they stay slow and smooth well enough, the speed will eventually come naturally. If/when they finally get frustrated and decide to practice speed for a change, they often get different results in a short space of time. But they get deterred from doing this for months or years (or, worse, forever) because of an old saying that keeps going around.
Click to expand...

If one is not intelligent enought to realise that what they are doing isn't improving and change perhaps they need some instruction from someone more enlightened to help them or find a different form of entertainment. I'm not going to lose any sleep about someone basing their actions on old sayings and just continuing to do so.
 
doubleh said:
If one is not intelligent enoughtto realise that what they are doing isn't improving and change perhaps they need some instruction from someone to help them or find a different form of entertainment. I'm not going to lose any sleep about someone basing their actions on old sayings.
Click to expand...

Do you assume that when people start a conversation that it reflects a lack of sleep? Or a problem with their underwear? If this topic is so uninteresting to you, why post in the thread?
 
ATLDave said:
It's not a question of the configuration of one's shorts... it's about misleading information getting re-circulated within the firearms community to the detriment of people within that community. The worst of these sayings often get in the way of people making good decisions or making improvements or the like.

To take one of my initial 3 as an example, it's both amusing and frustrating watching some competitors in a game like USPSA stay very smooth - and very slow - for years without making any material improvements in their speed. Because they have been promised that if they stay slow and smooth well enough, the speed will eventually come naturally. If/when they finally get frustrated and decide to practice speed for a change, they often get different results in a short space of time. But they get deterred from doing this for months or years (or, worse, forever) because of an old saying that keeps going around.
Click to expand...
But MOST of the posts coming through are ones to just shrug off and move on with your day. That's why I hit doubleh's like button. Example: "people who say clip instead of magazine are ignorant". Heard it so many times. Who cares. My grandpa was a ww2 vet and he still says "clip" to this day. Think I'm going to correct a veteran/elder/great guy? No. As doubleh said, blow it off and go on.

That said, I do see your point on the harmful gun sayings. Just most posted are more annoying sayings is all.
 
I posted because I don't really understand why people get stressed about sayings that have been around for years, are going to be around, and they can do noting about them. I pointing out that it's much easier to just live with something that you can do nothing about than get bent out of shape when you see or hear them. I don't use any of the things pointed out and that's all the influence I, or you, will ever have over the subjects.
 
Mn Fats said:
But MOST of the posts coming through are ones to just shrug off and move on with your day. That's why I hit doubleh's like button. Example: "people who say clip instead of magazine are ignorant". Heard it so many times. Who cares. My grandpa was a ww2 vet and he still says "clip" to this day. Think I'm going to correct a veteran/elder/great guy? No. As doubleh said, blow it off and go on.

That said, I do see your point on the harmful gun sayings. Just most posted are more annoying sayings is all.
Click to expand...
That's part of why this thread is about sayings - things that assert some truth/wisdom/argument - rather than terminology/usage/semantics. The latter can be important, but often is not. Sayings/axioms/maxims/aphorisms, etc., all make some claim about what "the truth" is. And, when that truth is wrong or misleading, that's a problem.

I'm with you about the "clip" gatekeepers.
 
doubleh said:
I don't use any of the things pointed out and that's all the influence I, or you, will ever have over the subjects.
Click to expand...

Maybe someone reading this thread has heard one of these sayings many times and uncritically accepted it as true.... but now is questioning whether there was any truth in the saying to begin with.

And I reject the notion that one cannot, through words and reason, influence other people.
 
ATLDave said:
That's part of why this thread is about sayings - things that assert some truth/wisdom/argument - rather than terminology/usage/semantics. The latter can be important, but often is not. Sayings/axioms/maxims/aphorisms, etc., all make some claim about what "the truth" is. And, when that truth is wrong or misleading, that's a problem.

I'm with you about the "clip" gatekeepers.
Click to expand...
Got ya. Ok, how about the oldest one in the book. "Guns kill people". I'm looking at my flintlock project right now. Let's see if it's true, "ok flintlock, go sick em". Hmm.. it didn't move.
 
460Shooter said:
How about this, "When people ask me why I carry a gun I tell them it's because a cop is too big to fit in my pocket." I've heard that one a lot. It's true but just seems overused.
Click to expand...
Or, another way of putting it is; "I carry a gun because a cop's too heavy." Regardless, some of the same folks that use that line, also use the line; "A gun is supposed to be comforting, not comfortable."
Well, if "comforting" matters, and "comfortable" doesn't matter, why not carry a cop? I mean, a cop is heavy sure, meaning carrying one would not be "comfortable," but would carrying a cop be "comforting?"
I suppose the argument about how large (or heavy) of a gun a person should carry could easily become absurd. But I say this: when it comes to carrying a gun, particularly a concealed gun, a person should carry the most gun they can comfortably carry. And that varies from person to person.:)
 
"It's the Indian, not the arrow."
My retort is that the Grand Masters don't need a custom gun to beat me, but they need the best they can get to try to beat each other.

"The bore diameter is .308"
No it isn't. That's the groove diameter of a nominal .30 rifle. My equivalent of "magazine" vs "clip," I guess.
 
I will throw mine in, "Gun Rights." Guns don't have rights and never will. Yes, I am using an absolute negative, real thin Ice, I know it. However, there will be no Black Swan here. Gun Owners have rights. Guns do not have rights.

I realize it sounds nitpicky. However, it is a mis-statement that weakens our political position, as gun owners. We put ourselves in a position that, against people who are arguing for, "the rights of people," we are arguing, "the rights of things."

Constructs do not have rights. Now, I do realize that some ethicists discuss this position in relation to evolving AI; however, that isn't where we are. We are discussing a relatively simple construct that possesses no ability to learn or distinguish in its operation. Guns do not have rights. We, as gun owners, have rights.


460Shooter said:
I can't stand any use of the terms "sheeple", "liberal", or any other derogatory term used in any stereotypical statements about antigun folks. Their perspective is flawed IMO in most cases but referring to them this way when we talk guns is degrading and not constructive.

"Revolvers are a better choice for carry because they're more reliable than autoloaders."

Well they seem to be less prone to failure due to their design, but it also seems when one goes down it becomes a club. Autoloaders may malfunction more easily, but when they do they can sometimes be quickly brought back to a functional condition by the user. You are taking s chance either way, so pick what's right for you.
Click to expand...

You bring up two things here. The first is more important. As many of you know, I went to a Utah Gun Exchange meet and greet before a March For Our Lives event. I tend to stand by the edges, that is just me. I got to talking to another few that were there. They are also shooters and active in the Gun Owners Rights activities; however, they felt . . . to use a word . . . slighted, by the use of the word "liberal" by several present (in their defense, no spokesperson from the Utah Gun Exchange ever used the word, it was a few of the guests). I also heard it several times.

Now these people, that I talked to, didn't stop off or burn their NRA card; but it grated. I understood their position. How a person feels about the best way to build a strong and resilient economy should not be a determinant in that person's welcome in the community of gun owners. . . of course, I could go on to expound on that point; but that point needs to be where it stops.

As far as revolvers vs autoloaders; Well, now we are back to a much more fun debate :eek:.
 
"No, there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass"

Serious Japanese war plans included establishing a stronghold on Midway Island to force the US Pacific Fleet to abandon Pearl Harbor and move to the West Coast. I don't think invading the mainland was a serious option. The story I read was that, in the 1960s, a Japanese officer participating in a joint US Navy-Japan Self Defense Force exercise was asked if Japan had serious plans to invade mainland US in WWII; he answered that, among other reasons, Japanese war planners knew American civilians owned millions of guns which would make an invasion very costly since guerrilla warfare was guaranteed. (seems like that one is perennial)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Popular gun-related sayings
2
Replies
42
Views
24K
BikerNut
B
M
  • Locked
Why do gun-related internet sites slow down this time of year?
2
Replies
26
Views
961
alan93
A
M
  • Locked
Gun Control Is Never Going Away
2 3 4
Replies
91
Views
4K
MagnumDweeb
M
F
  • Locked
Old Sayings
2 3
Replies
70
Views
3K
mnrivrat
mnrivrat
L
  • Locked
We Need To "Just Say No"
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Sam1911
S
Back
Top