Bill_Rights
Member
For several reasons, I think it is important for us gun owners, sellers, users and lovers to use technical terms properly, especially in this time of renewed activity by the anti-2A and gun-grabber folks.
One reason I think this, and perhaps the main reason, is that a classic tactic of the Left is to define, redefine or co-opt the meaning of words, thereby controlling the "terms" of a debate, literally.
As evidence of this, I see several sellers of firearms on GunBroker.Com using the term "clip" relating to products that clearly only use hand-stuffed magazines. This is evidence of a) the news media and politicians bombarding us with the word "clip" and then b) some of us succumbing to their suggestive leading and starting to use the term "clip" instead of "magazine", where we would not have used the word "clip" a year ago. Why do we modify our thinking and speech like this? Dare I say, some of us are sheeple?
Contrarily, I think it is important to use words accurately, precisely and properly. The reason for this is to insist upon reality. Some say, 'in politics, perception is reality'. That may be, to some extent. But when we get to the fundamental right to self defense, we have departed the realm of politics and an are in the realm of pre-political rights. These are variously called natural rights, human rights, natural law and inalienable rights, among others. Allowing politicians to politicize pre-political matters is deadly. More serious than a heart attack. Allowing them to change reality by redefining real words is a form of them claiming authority to regulate, control, ban, confiscate, etc. That is, by allowing reality to be changed by virtue of them changing the meaning of words is tacit ceding, by us, of the authority, to them, to control reality. Specifically to throw the cloak of their power over matters they clearly have no warrant to claim.
If the Left can control the meaning of words in this relatively trivial matter (clip vs mag), they will be able to do so in much more weighty matters. Some will be able to give innumerable other examples of redefinition of words, such as the word "marriage". This points up the fact that the Left also does the inverse: They change the thing itself but refer to it by an old/wrong/misleading word, especially a word that sounds good.
For the record (and please add/correct as necessary), here are the definitions:
(We have a little bit of a THR discussion on this going on currently.)
magazine: A holder of cartridges adjacent to the action of a firearm so as to provide ammunition for mechanically automatic loading into the firing chamber. (In this sense, a manually-powered bolt- or lever-action is automatic.) This could include internal magazines, drop box magazines, revolver cylinders, tubular magazines and several other form factors.
clip: A holder of cartridges for rapid insertion into a magazine, and also for storage, alignment, transport, sorting and so forth of cartridges.
ambiguities: Since some drop box magazines (DBMs) snap into the receiver/action, they make a clicking sound as they lock ("clip") into place.
One reason I think this, and perhaps the main reason, is that a classic tactic of the Left is to define, redefine or co-opt the meaning of words, thereby controlling the "terms" of a debate, literally.
As evidence of this, I see several sellers of firearms on GunBroker.Com using the term "clip" relating to products that clearly only use hand-stuffed magazines. This is evidence of a) the news media and politicians bombarding us with the word "clip" and then b) some of us succumbing to their suggestive leading and starting to use the term "clip" instead of "magazine", where we would not have used the word "clip" a year ago. Why do we modify our thinking and speech like this? Dare I say, some of us are sheeple?
Contrarily, I think it is important to use words accurately, precisely and properly. The reason for this is to insist upon reality. Some say, 'in politics, perception is reality'. That may be, to some extent. But when we get to the fundamental right to self defense, we have departed the realm of politics and an are in the realm of pre-political rights. These are variously called natural rights, human rights, natural law and inalienable rights, among others. Allowing politicians to politicize pre-political matters is deadly. More serious than a heart attack. Allowing them to change reality by redefining real words is a form of them claiming authority to regulate, control, ban, confiscate, etc. That is, by allowing reality to be changed by virtue of them changing the meaning of words is tacit ceding, by us, of the authority, to them, to control reality. Specifically to throw the cloak of their power over matters they clearly have no warrant to claim.
If the Left can control the meaning of words in this relatively trivial matter (clip vs mag), they will be able to do so in much more weighty matters. Some will be able to give innumerable other examples of redefinition of words, such as the word "marriage". This points up the fact that the Left also does the inverse: They change the thing itself but refer to it by an old/wrong/misleading word, especially a word that sounds good.
For the record (and please add/correct as necessary), here are the definitions:
(We have a little bit of a THR discussion on this going on currently.)
magazine: A holder of cartridges adjacent to the action of a firearm so as to provide ammunition for mechanically automatic loading into the firing chamber. (In this sense, a manually-powered bolt- or lever-action is automatic.) This could include internal magazines, drop box magazines, revolver cylinders, tubular magazines and several other form factors.
clip: A holder of cartridges for rapid insertion into a magazine, and also for storage, alignment, transport, sorting and so forth of cartridges.
ambiguities: Since some drop box magazines (DBMs) snap into the receiver/action, they make a clicking sound as they lock ("clip") into place.
Last edited:
