ShooterMcGavin
Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2007
- Messages
- 629
EXACTLY my point. I am mainly annoyed that a 15 round mag (for whatever gun) is called "high capacity" only because there is another mag that is limited to 10 rounds.
I am so sick of the term "high capacity"!
- Thread starter ShooterMcGavin
- Start date
- Status
This thread has given me something to really be angry and upset about! Now I'll be up all night worrying about the proper use of the term high capacity!
At the next gun show I'm going to start ranting on about the proper use of the term high capacity. I also started writing my angry ranting treatise on the subject and will distribute it to all the gun stores, shooting ranges, gun shows, and my congressman. I'm with you on this! The world doesn't need problems like this and I WILL STAMP THIS PROBLEM OUT!!
Although, right now it will have to wait. The doctor says its time for my medication and bed time.
At the next gun show I'm going to start ranting on about the proper use of the term high capacity. I also started writing my angry ranting treatise on the subject and will distribute it to all the gun stores, shooting ranges, gun shows, and my congressman. I'm with you on this! The world doesn't need problems like this and I WILL STAMP THIS PROBLEM OUT!!
Although, right now it will have to wait. The doctor says its time for my medication and bed time.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
You think it's not serious but I promise you, it is. The last ban was implemented on exactly that premise, that somehow the normal capacity of a gun was too much, so the term "high capacity" was coined to artificially place limits on it.
If you're OK with allowing them to set the rules and definitions, don't be surprised with the outcome.
It should be taken seriously when politicians are using the term high capacity but the angry face, title of the thread, and people he is complaining to makes me think the original poster takes it way too seriously. There are more important problems in the world to get angry about than gun owners using improper english.
Coming off like your upset and angry over improper english in a gun forum tends to make gun owners look like they are easily angered ranting lunatics. Also, does anyone really think just because the poster doesn't like the improper use of the term high capacity that its going to stop being used improperly? If its such a serious problem, his complaint would be better directed at politicians or taken up by the NRA.
I've waisted enough time with this thread and it can fade to oblivion like all the rest. Threads fading to oblivion also makes the original posters complaining here pointless.
Last edited:
bigione
Member
To add to the list. I hate the media stories refering to high velocity rifles since I can't find anyone selling a low velocity rifle.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
If we agree that the politicians should not use the word, then we should not use it either.
If we use the term ourselves we are in no position to complain when the media or politicians do.
When we as shooters start using terms like "assault weapons", "High Capacity Magazines" etc all we do is enforce the belief that these guns and magazines are somehow "different" and need to be called out in special ways. They are not, so we should not encourage that thinking.
That's why it matters.
Yes, it's a small thing, but small things can come back to bite you. Ask Jim Zumbo
inSight-NEO
Member
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2008
- Messages
- 842
This I understand as the terms "standard" or "high capacity" take on different meanings when speaking of various makes/models of projectile weaponry. Now, if some gun owners tend to blur the line between these two phrases, I can let that slide.
Now, as far as many politicians are concerned, "high capacity" is a great phrase upon which to hang their often grossly misguided and misinformed agendas. This, I have a true problem with.
Lou McGopher
Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2009
- Messages
- 507
Standard capacity: 650 rds.
Mr. Creosote
Member
So my .45 came with a 7 round mag. I bought some 8 roung mags. Can I call them high capicity????
84B20
Member
Careful, the law doesn't go into affect until 2010, February, I think.
fastbolt
Member
Well, some folks do seem to get a bit wrapped up around the axle when certain words and phrases are used ...
Granted, words mean things, and they can be used to influence the thoughts of others. History shows that words can obviously have a powerful effect on people.
The whole 'high capacity' magazine thing, though?
I remember when we were first told we were going to stop carrying issued and personally-owned revolvers and have to carry 9mm pistols. This was back around '89/90, before the whole 'high capacity feeding device' legislation occurred here in CA.
The S&W 9mm pistols we were being issued were casually referred to as 'high capacity' 9mm pistols by the firearms training staff and the folks receiving them ... even though this was several years before the federal ban and the state high capacity feeding device legislation. The standard capacity of the magazines was considered to be high capacity.
Why did we consider the S&W 59 and Browning HP 35 pistols to be 'high capacity'? Well, probably because they held more rounds than the revolvers, Colt Government Models & Commanders, S&W 39/X39's and the occasional Walther P38 that a lot of cops owned and carried.
Remember the 20-rd factory magazines for the S&W 9mm pistols, made for both the 59 & 69 series? They were simply referred to as extended capacity magazines, or more simply as "20-rd magazines" ... because they held more rounds than the standard high capacity magazines.
Some of the folks who carried a Browning HP 35 as plainclothes or off-duty weapons often said they liked the Browning for its 'high capacity magazine' back then, too. Again, years before anyone even thought about limiting the capacity of magazines.
In the world of 6-shot revolvers and 7-9rd 9mm pistol magazines, the Browning and S&W 59 Series pistols were 'high capacity'.
Oh yeah, I forgot about the 'high capacity' 10-rd extended magazines for the 1911's ...
I thought there were something like 6 states with their own legislation identifying and controlling high capacity magazines, feeding devices, etc. That being the case, their legislation sets the legal definition for those states.
Everything else becomes an exercise in semantics.
Granted, words mean things, and they can be used to influence the thoughts of others. History shows that words can obviously have a powerful effect on people.
The whole 'high capacity' magazine thing, though?
I remember when we were first told we were going to stop carrying issued and personally-owned revolvers and have to carry 9mm pistols. This was back around '89/90, before the whole 'high capacity feeding device' legislation occurred here in CA.
The S&W 9mm pistols we were being issued were casually referred to as 'high capacity' 9mm pistols by the firearms training staff and the folks receiving them ... even though this was several years before the federal ban and the state high capacity feeding device legislation. The standard capacity of the magazines was considered to be high capacity.
Why did we consider the S&W 59 and Browning HP 35 pistols to be 'high capacity'? Well, probably because they held more rounds than the revolvers, Colt Government Models & Commanders, S&W 39/X39's and the occasional Walther P38 that a lot of cops owned and carried.
Remember the 20-rd factory magazines for the S&W 9mm pistols, made for both the 59 & 69 series? They were simply referred to as extended capacity magazines, or more simply as "20-rd magazines" ... because they held more rounds than the standard high capacity magazines.
Some of the folks who carried a Browning HP 35 as plainclothes or off-duty weapons often said they liked the Browning for its 'high capacity magazine' back then, too.
Again, years before anyone even thought about limiting the capacity of magazines.In the world of 6-shot revolvers and 7-9rd 9mm pistol magazines, the Browning and S&W 59 Series pistols were 'high capacity'.
Oh yeah, I forgot about the 'high capacity' 10-rd extended magazines for the 1911's ...
I thought there were something like 6 states with their own legislation identifying and controlling high capacity magazines, feeding devices, etc. That being the case, their legislation sets the legal definition for those states.
Everything else becomes an exercise in semantics.
VT Deer Hunter
Member
I dont like it either but i dont think much of it.
mljdeckard
Member
Yes and no.
I do actually own high-capacity magazines. My SKS came with a fixed 10-rd magazine, and I modified it to take a 20-rd magazine. That is not standard. The M-16 was originally designed to use a 20-rd magazine, and was later upped to 30. I have a standard 1911, which was designed to take a 7-rd mag, I use 8-rd mags. And I have a Para 1911 that takes 14-rd mags. I don't see how anyone can call that standard capacity.
But yes, It is gibberish to place any arbitrary standards on what is 'too many' rounds. Most of these antis who want capacity limits have no inkling that the early saddle rifles chambered in pistol cartridges could hold as many as *gasp* 18 rounds. They have this idea that it is a recent development, this idea that you want a gun to hold as many shots as possible so you don't have to reload as often. I remember many years ago, Dennis Miller joking on SNL; "This week, California's fifteen round magazine limit was approved by every sixteenth person. Like, nine rounds is ok, but when you hit ten, magically it is an unacceptable number. Like, if a psycho shooter has to reload every ten rounds, it would be easier to stop him than if he had 20 or 30.
I do actually own high-capacity magazines. My SKS came with a fixed 10-rd magazine, and I modified it to take a 20-rd magazine. That is not standard. The M-16 was originally designed to use a 20-rd magazine, and was later upped to 30. I have a standard 1911, which was designed to take a 7-rd mag, I use 8-rd mags. And I have a Para 1911 that takes 14-rd mags. I don't see how anyone can call that standard capacity.
But yes, It is gibberish to place any arbitrary standards on what is 'too many' rounds. Most of these antis who want capacity limits have no inkling that the early saddle rifles chambered in pistol cartridges could hold as many as *gasp* 18 rounds. They have this idea that it is a recent development, this idea that you want a gun to hold as many shots as possible so you don't have to reload as often. I remember many years ago, Dennis Miller joking on SNL; "This week, California's fifteen round magazine limit was approved by every sixteenth person. Like, nine rounds is ok, but when you hit ten, magically it is an unacceptable number. Like, if a psycho shooter has to reload every ten rounds, it would be easier to stop him than if he had 20 or 30.
You will have better luck if you start a new thread in the correct forum, like say here:
http://www.thehighroad.org/forumdisplay.php?f=33 rather than dragging up an somewhat unrelated 2 year old thread.
No worries, we all start somewhere. Welcome and enjoy!
P5 Guy
Member
There are three size magazines. Reduced Capacity, Full Capacity and Extended Capacity.
ATBackPackin
Member
I know this is an old thread but it is still pertinent. Personally I use three terms to describe magazines:
1) Standard capacity mags = The magazine sold with gun without outside influence on the manufacturer.
2) Reduced capacity mags = Anything with less capacity than original.
3) Extended capacity mags = Anything with more capacity than original.
I don't like the term "high capacity". It was a term introduced by the anti's because it sounds more sinister than extended capacity. It also doesn't necessarily describe it accurately. How can a 12 round mag and a 100 round mag both be called "high capacity"? So I use the three terms I described above. Do I correct others? Sometimes. If it is someone who is concerned about saying it the correct way. Others want it to sound more sinister and nothing I could say would change that.
This is just one man's opinion.
1) Standard capacity mags = The magazine sold with gun without outside influence on the manufacturer.
2) Reduced capacity mags = Anything with less capacity than original.
3) Extended capacity mags = Anything with more capacity than original.
I don't like the term "high capacity". It was a term introduced by the anti's because it sounds more sinister than extended capacity. It also doesn't necessarily describe it accurately. How can a 12 round mag and a 100 round mag both be called "high capacity"? So I use the three terms I described above. Do I correct others? Sometimes. If it is someone who is concerned about saying it the correct way. Others want it to sound more sinister and nothing I could say would change that.
This is just one man's opinion.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
