I get tired of people getting so uppity about clip v magazine

[Onmilo]

A clip is a clip and a magazine is a magazine.
A similar issue us a "Machinist" calling an end mill a shell mill and a shell mill a face mill.
All three tools will remove steel but all three have completely different applications.

While a lot of misinformed people routinely call magazines, "clips", I can't ever recall anyone calling a clip a magazine!

 

[Ash_J_Williams]

Calling a magazine a "clip" is like calling a revolver a "pistol" -- technically incorrect, but synonymous to the uninitiated. If you don't care about sounding ignorant to some firearm enthusiasts, call them whatever you want.

By the way, the Free Online Dictionary defines pistol as "A firearm designed to be held and fired with one hand." This definition would include a revolver, but it doesn't mean it's correct.

As I've already mentioned, you can find a number of authors, gun experts, who use clip and magazine synonymously. I doubt those people sound ignorant to firearm enthusiasts, and if they do, I doubt they're the ignorant ones in that situation. I used to be careful of calling a revolver a pistol until I saw the dictionary definition. I'll trust Webster over some guys at a shop, the same people who have occasionally given me information that, had I not given it a Google before trying it, might have blown up my weapon or killed me.

 

[ball3006]

A magazine sits next to the royal throne in the bathroom. A clip holds the sack of potato chips closed. To add to the conversation, how about weapon/gun????chris3

 

[Ash_J_Williams]

I did not toss that out there in jest. It's a serious observation. Is that racist term a correct one? No. Neither is calling a magazine a clip.

I hate that people will use that racist phrase because I know exactly where it comes from. Not only is it hateful and derogatory on more than one level, it deliberately creates confusion. But the cavalier attitude towards the usage of proper terminology and labeling it snobbery lets phrases like this creep in.

If we are discussing firearms and you ask about the clip of my 10/22, I will explain it's a magazine regardless of what the marketing types (who also tell me that drinking beer makes me more attractive to women) or some government bureaucrat calls it.

Same with a co-worker. If he tells me we have to go work on an airplane, tail #N555NA, I'm looking for an airplane, not a helicopter. If a pilot calls ahead for gas, he shouldn't be surprised when the fuel truck shows up with Avgas instead of JP (jet fuel).

I don't pretend to know all the correct terms for everything out there, but learning to use them properly goes a long way towards clear communications and will save time and lives when seconds count.

The stubbornness runs two ways in this issue- those who insist on correcting those who do not use the proper use of terms and those who refuse to use them.

Keep in mind this- The use of improper terms sounds unprofessional. Who do you think will do better in a job interview or in advancing their career- One who clearly communicates using the correct terminology, or one who is mis-understood from using a word incorrectly because "it's common usage"?

I won't discuss anything with a bigot. Thanks.

 

[Ash_J_Williams]

I put a banana clip in my assault rifle...which of course means I used a standard sized magazine in my semi auto sporting rifle. No difference since they mean the same thing don't they?

I think those of us in the firearms community need to make sure we use the correct and accurate terminology so we don't let the liberal media and anti-gun politicians re-define what firearms are all about.

I think the difference there is that NO ONE who appreciates firearms and wants to keep them as free as possible calls a sporting rifle an "assault rifle." That's reserved for the media and the anti sect.

I'd rather argue about the mis-use of the word "Tactical" in everything gun-related than "clip" vs. "magazine". I always call it magazine, but let it slide when a buddy says "clip".

Saw a "Tactical Handgun Bag" yesterday on Midway's front page. (It was a typical range bag with lots o' pockets for holding hearing protection, magazines, ammo, etc)

Referring to every aftermarket gadget and gizmo as "Tactical" gets under my skin in a very big way.

Tactical is a marketing word, and judging from some of the guys at the range and ALL the guys at another forum I post on, it works.

I hope that this graphic will be received as a learning tool and nothing else:

582972[/ATTACH]"]

Do you honestly believe anyone here needs an education? Do you think that anyone participating in this discussion doesn't know the difference?

If you're part of the group, they are enthusiasts. If you're not, they're nerds, geeks, fanatics or worse. Nobody likes the Comic Book Guy on The Simpsons.

I work with a guy who really knows Star Wars stuff. When I don't know the difference between Count Dooku and Darth Grievous I sound ignorant to him. I can live with that. However, there's no concerted effort to limit the right to keep and watch Star Wars movies.

We're better off inviting people into the fold. Using words like "magazine" and "pistol" to make us separate and feed a sense of superiority is not a good thing.

A real Star Wars fan, I hope, would try their best to pretend those two characters in particular don't exist.

Since we're about being correct, can you "particular" people find a way of correcting others that doesn't come off as snide, arrogant, officious, condescending, or otherwise insulting? If not, perhaps it's best to just quietly feel superior.................

On a forum, that's a tall order.

 

[JustinJ]

Arguements of semantics generally accomplish nothing and are usually nothing but poorly disguised ad hominem attacks. People generally only care about technical definitions when they can be used to attack others who disagree with them. Sort of like when people refer to every AR platform gun out there as an AR15 but then hoot and howl about use of "assault rifle". If an AR variant was made in the last 50 years and doesn't say "Colt" on the side its not an AR15. But really, who cares?

 

[Vonderek]

7 pages of replies. It's a dead horse issue. Some people enjoy learning while others despise correction. It's worthwhile to correct a new shooter on terminology but if he/she reacts negatively to correction just move on. I'm just glad both my doctor and pharmacist know the difference between chloestyramines and statins.

 

[JustinJ]

I'm just glad both my doctor and pharmacist know the difference between chloestyramines and statins.

Correct medicinal terminology is necessary to protect lives. Common language, on the other hand, changes and evolves.

 

[dusty14u]

Oooh lawdy, pleeze doan beat ol dusty fer bein no uppity gun nut. Ize juss set quiet like in dis here corner. Iffn massah say magazine or massah say clip doan makes me no nevermine to ol dusty. Jess doan beats ol dusty no moe.

 

[Vonderek]

Correct medicinal terminology is necessary to protect lives. Common language, on the other hand, changes and evolves.

Firearms terminology is not common language...it is specialized. Everyone knows what a "Kleenex" is because everyone uses tissues and the brand has become synonymous with the object. If news reporters continue to refer to Glocks as "service revolvers" does that also evolve into the common language and become acceptable? But like I said earlier, you can use whatever firearms terminology you wish. It makes no difference to me if you say "clip" or "magazine". My point in my previous post is that it's a waste of time to endlessly debate (which I seem to have been drawn into doing) correct nomenclature with people who are firmly entrenched in their viewpoints.

 

[CountGlockula]

"Magazines are for guns; clips are for the hair."

 

[SSN Vet]

or how about people who lambaste journalist for using the term AK 47 to describe a semi-automatic Kalashnikov type action rifle....

and then post a thread about wanting to buy/build/modify their AK....

I'm all for proper terminology (I used to author tech. manuals and operating procedures)... but I'm convinced that half of these rants over semantics are from self declared internet experts hell bent on proving to the world how smart they think they are....

Yawn!

 

[gathert]

Its like calling a suppresser a silencer. Its wrong and they should be educated if possible.

 

[scythefwd]

nevermind

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Its wrong and they should be educated if possible.

ATF National Firearms Act Handbook (ATF E-Publication 5320.8
Revised: April 2009) calls sound supressors "silencers" as does the wording of the 1934 National Firearms Act. The ATF Form 4 on my son's sound supressor identifies type of NFA firearm as "silencer". The ATF Handbook uses "silencer" over 120 times and "suppressor" only twice in 220 pages.

Plus those Brits: they call an automotive muffler a silencer.

First we march on Washington and educate the BATF, then we set sail for England. Or maybe just accept that noise reducers for firearms or engines are called mufflers, silencers and supressors. And the legal term for a sound suppressor in federal law is "silencer".

 

[JohnBT]

"It's worthwhile to correct a new shooter on terminology "

Worthwhile to whom? You? Did they ask for your opinion? Do you even correct strangers you run into at the range or gun store?

The mags I have clip into the guns. Mags, clips, I don't care, the name does not affect whether or not it works.

John

 

[Inebriated]

If I were a mod, I would have locked this pages ago. I don't get why this continues on. Most people want to be correct. Others apparently don't since it "doesn't cause confusion." The stubborn won't change.

 

[jmstevens2]

Arguements of semantics generally accomplish nothing and are usually nothing but poorly disguised ad hominem attacks. People generally only care about technical definitions when they can be used to attack others who disagree with them. Sort of like when people refer to every AR platform gun out there as an AR15 but then hoot and howl about use of "assault rifle". If an AR variant was made in the last 50 years and doesn't say "Colt" on the side its not an AR15. But really, who cares?

Don't you mean by Armalite?

 

[mokin]

Nice graphic Ash.

 

[ball3006]

This thread should run awhile because we are having fun butchering the english language...I get tired of folks throwing out the "racist" remark. I am an old fat white guy that grew up in the south, therefore.........chris3

 

[JustinJ]

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinJ
Arguements of semantics generally accomplish nothing and are usually nothing but poorly disguised ad hominem attacks. People generally only care about technical definitions when they can be used to attack others who disagree with them. Sort of like when people refer to every AR platform gun out there as an AR15 but then hoot and howl about use of "assault rifle". If an AR variant was made in the last 50 years and doesn't say "Colt" on the side its not an AR15. But really, who cares?

Don't you mean by Armalite?

No i don't. Armalite sold the AR15 trademark to Colt in 1959. The original AR15, of Armalite, was actually select fire.

 

[Sam1911]

If it makes you happy to use the term you think is correct, do so, and be happy.

If it makes you happy to look down at folks who don't use the term you think is correct, do so, and be happy.

If it makes you happy to use the term other folks think is INcorrect, because you believe it is actually correct after all, do so, and be happy.

If it makes you happy to look down on folks who look down on folks who use a term that other folks think is incorrect because they think it is actually correct, or vice-versa, do so, and be happy.

If you want to argue about it to the point of calling each other nasty names, GO SOMEWHERE ELSE, and be happy!