I get tired of people getting so uppity about clip v magazine
- Thread starter Ash_J_Williams
- Start date
- Status
For joy! Another thread about terminology.
Words have meanings. Some words are more precise than others, and sometimes there are better and worse ways to say the same thing.
If you use imprecise terminology and I misunderstand you, it's your fault. And if you use imprecise terminology and I decide that you probably don't know what you're talking about, that's also your fault.
Anyway, the Chinese say, "The first step toward wisdom is calling things by their right names."
So I'm with Double Naught Spy on this:Well said, DNS.
Words have meanings. Some words are more precise than others, and sometimes there are better and worse ways to say the same thing.
If you use imprecise terminology and I misunderstand you, it's your fault. And if you use imprecise terminology and I decide that you probably don't know what you're talking about, that's also your fault.
Anyway, the Chinese say, "The first step toward wisdom is calling things by their right names."
So I'm with Double Naught Spy on this:
Double Naught Spy said:
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!
:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:
You can have tactical missiles (if used as part of an overall strategy to take out key enemy components - that is "tactical"). You can have tactical advantage. You can have tactical fire suppression. You can have tactical maneuvers. You can have a tactical plan.
But you simply can NOT have a tactical flash light, or sling, or bag, or even (gasp) a tactical rifle! That just doesn't jive with the definition of the use of the word.
(I know you were being sarcastic, btw..)
"Goes and bangs head on my tactical sink"
NM Mountainman
Member
"...if you use imprecise terminology and I decide that you probably don't know what you're talking about, that's also your fault."
No, it's your fault. It's completely your responsibility. (I prefer to use the term "responsibility" rather than "fault".) Why? Because you are the one who decided to use that criterion for determining whether or not a person is knowledgeable.
When I was a high school and college teacher, I (along with most of my colleagues) sometimes suffered under the delusion (or myth) that the student was responsible for the grade he/she received for an assignment, test, or course. But such a conclusion is ridiculous (even though it is sometimes useful for motivating a student.) It was I (or sometimes a committee of teachers) who decided what the assignment(s) and test questions would be (and how they would be weighted) and the conditions under which the assignments (or test questions) were completed. It was I (or other teachers) who decided what criteria I would use to grade the test questions and assignments. And it was the teachers who decided what level of performance was to be given the grade of "A", "B", or whatever. I and other teachers were completely responsible for every grade which our students received.
When a student complains about his grade, a teacher will sometimes reply that the student is responsible ( because of how hard he works and how high a standard he sets for his work) for the grade he receives. A teacher who says that is being dishonest, illogical, or confused.
The student is largely responsible for how well he learns the material and how well he performs on a test or on an assignment. The teacher is responsible for deciding whether to call the student's performance level an "A" or a "C" or an "F" Any one who has ever received a grade of "A" for a college test (which was graded on "the curve") on which he got 60% of the questions right knows that the professor just decided to call a 60% an "A".
But I get your point, and I acknowledge its importance. There are some contexts where the use of certain terminology in a certain way is defined to be "correct" and precise. And in those contexts, the correct use of terminology can be important or sometimes crucial. (Communication in the medical profession is one example of such a context.)
No, it's your fault. It's completely your responsibility. (I prefer to use the term "responsibility" rather than "fault".) Why? Because you are the one who decided to use that criterion for determining whether or not a person is knowledgeable.
When I was a high school and college teacher, I (along with most of my colleagues) sometimes suffered under the delusion (or myth) that the student was responsible for the grade he/she received for an assignment, test, or course. But such a conclusion is ridiculous (even though it is sometimes useful for motivating a student.) It was I (or sometimes a committee of teachers) who decided what the assignment(s) and test questions would be (and how they would be weighted) and the conditions under which the assignments (or test questions) were completed. It was I (or other teachers) who decided what criteria I would use to grade the test questions and assignments. And it was the teachers who decided what level of performance was to be given the grade of "A", "B", or whatever. I and other teachers were completely responsible for every grade which our students received.
When a student complains about his grade, a teacher will sometimes reply that the student is responsible ( because of how hard he works and how high a standard he sets for his work) for the grade he receives. A teacher who says that is being dishonest, illogical, or confused.
The student is largely responsible for how well he learns the material and how well he performs on a test or on an assignment. The teacher is responsible for deciding whether to call the student's performance level an "A" or a "C" or an "F" Any one who has ever received a grade of "A" for a college test (which was graded on "the curve") on which he got 60% of the questions right knows that the professor just decided to call a 60% an "A".
But I get your point, and I acknowledge its importance. There are some contexts where the use of certain terminology in a certain way is defined to be "correct" and precise. And in those contexts, the correct use of terminology can be important or sometimes crucial. (Communication in the medical profession is one example of such a context.)
To most non gun people who believe they are gun people, Tacticle means it's Black. The same gun in another finish is not considered Tactical by these tacticians. It could be a flintlock but if it's a black painted one it's tactical. Even better with a light hanging off it. Now that would be a sight, a black powder rifle with a surefire on it in black. Geez that may actually be Tactical.
It's like "awsome".
It's like "awsome".
LibShooter
Member
Sure you can. Remington calls these "Tactical Shotguns." They make them. They sell them. They get to call them whatever they want to. This is how language evolves.
Once "tactical" may have meant something like, "to be used in a particular way on the battlefield." Thanks to Remington and Mall Ninjas it's coming to mean "pistol-gripped, Picatinnied and painted black or cammo."
"Clip" is evolving in the same way.
SharpsDressedMan
member
All of us that know the difference between a clip and a magazine really do feel so proud. Our parents SHOULD be proud of us, too, and put those bumper stickers on their cars: "My child knows the difference between a clip and magazine!" 
Phooey!NM Mountainman said:
You're the one trying to communicate something -- an idea, information, an image. It's up to you to make your point and be clear about it. It's not my job to try to decipher what you're trying to convey.
jmstevens2
Member
medalguy
Member
Wow I was going to post something, but I see we already have what, five pages, all posted today. I think it's been adequately covered by now.
jmstevens2
Member
Yea, I'm a bit surprised it hasn't been warned by a mod yet.
browningguy
Member
Most likely is that peope who really get their nose up about it are just trying to make themselves feel superior. It really doesn't matter what you call them, and has been previously pointed out some of the best known firearms writers of the past 100 years have used/misused the terms.
When you are in a fight and someone asks you to throw them a spare clip, just throw them a clip, or a magazine if that's all you have, don't worry about lecturing on terminology.
Never mind, I forgot that 99.8% of the people on the internet have never been in a gunfight.
When you are in a fight and someone asks you to throw them a spare clip, just throw them a clip, or a magazine if that's all you have, don't worry about lecturing on terminology.
Never mind, I forgot that 99.8% of the people on the internet have never been in a gunfight.
jmstevens2
Member
Ya think it is that low?
jmstevens2
Member
DUDE! Is that the full auto pistol?
The problem is that even very knowledgeable people sometimes use incorrect terminology or slang. The guy may say "clip" in place of magazine because he isn't really concerned about the difference even though he's very knowledgeable about firearms. Askins was provided as an example earlier in the thread--certainly a knowledgeable person when it came to firearms, but known to use the term "clip", on occasion, when it was clear he actually meant "magazine".
There was a third cartridge sold around the WWI timeframe that differed from both the Schofield and the .45 LC. It would chamber and fire in a .45LC chamber but Keith indicates he never tried it in a Schofield to see if it would function there as well.
Here's some more information on the topic including a picture of the short version of the .45 Colt that is not a .45Schofield/S&W cartridge.
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/taylor/45_short_colt.htm
There's value in explaining the meaning and origins of firearm terms (clip/magazine, .45 Colt/.45 Long Colt), but too often issues like these become convenient ways to rationalize the excoriation of those new to the firearms scene even when their meaning is perfectly clear. Sort of a hazing ritual.
I've seen it get so bad on some forums that people react in knee-jerk fashion to the use of the word clip. To the point that newbies would even be chastised for using the term correctly because the forum members (the initiates) couldn't be bothered to read carefully enough to determine if the usage was correct or not in their haste to proceed to the "beating". In cases like that the educational value is much reduced and the issue becomes nothing other than a stick that folks can wield to smack the latest newbie.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
I don't correct people unless they're trying to be pedantic about it, but I do agree that the words do have correct meanings and slang meanings. Sure, I know what someone means if they call a magazine a "clip" (or worse, a "banana clip"), or call a handgun a "piece" or a "gat", or ask for pistol "shells", or describe someone as "packing heat", and yes, you'll find a lot of those terms in unabridged Webster's. Heck, I know of pilots who informally refer to jet fuel as "gas", and I don't correct them either.
But if I'm writing about it in a public forum, I do like to use the terms correctly myself, even though slang and informal terms are perfectly acceptable in informal speech in our culture. I just think it comes across better. And yes, slang terms do occasionally find their way into standard formal speech, but "clip" for magazine (and "gat" for gun, and "shells" for pistol or rifle cartridges) aren't there yet. Personally, I hope they don't, but that's just me.
NM Mountainman
Member
Quote from jmstevens2: "Actually, the Marines have Drill Instructors. The Army has Drill Sergeants."
I knew that. Thanks for reminding me. Actually, my father was a 1st Lt. when he trained Rangers for the US Army. That's why I referred to him as an instructor. My use of the term "DI" was incorrect.
Quote from fiddletown: "Phooey! You're the one trying to communicate something -- an idea, information, an image. It's up to you to make your point and be clear about it. It's not my job to try to decipher what you're trying to convey."
It's a common misconception that the responsibility for success or failure of an attempt at communication between humans lies completely with the speaker (writer). Those of us who have completed advanced studies in the field of communication and meta-communication have learned that communication only succeeds when the speaker and listener (writer and reader) both do their part well.
In spite of my excellent explanation, you failed to get my point. Therefore, you are not knowledgeable in the field of human communication, and it's completely your fault ;-)
If you still don't get it, ask your wife to explain it to you ;-) Lighten up!
I knew that. Thanks for reminding me. Actually, my father was a 1st Lt. when he trained Rangers for the US Army. That's why I referred to him as an instructor. My use of the term "DI" was incorrect.
Quote from fiddletown: "Phooey! You're the one trying to communicate something -- an idea, information, an image. It's up to you to make your point and be clear about it. It's not my job to try to decipher what you're trying to convey."
It's a common misconception that the responsibility for success or failure of an attempt at communication between humans lies completely with the speaker (writer). Those of us who have completed advanced studies in the field of communication and meta-communication have learned that communication only succeeds when the speaker and listener (writer and reader) both do their part well.
In spite of my excellent explanation, you failed to get my point. Therefore, you are not knowledgeable in the field of human communication, and it's completely your fault ;-)
If you still don't get it, ask your wife to explain it to you ;-) Lighten up!
Last edited:
...
jmstevens2
Member
Actually, that is what they are, just not their title. We often focus on semantics. I do think proper terminology reduces confusion, however being reasonably intelligent, we usually get the point.
Some just love to argue, especially in the anonymity of the internet.
A lot of the Viet Nam guys I knew always referred to 30 round magazines as "banana clips", not right, but we understood. I still respect those guys. Some of us did a lot of the same stuff they did, but they got treated much worse than we did. Like I said, those guys have my respect. And I am an 11B30 with a few pretties, still those guys are legends.
Not to change the subject.
Some just love to argue, especially in the anonymity of the internet.
A lot of the Viet Nam guys I knew always referred to 30 round magazines as "banana clips", not right, but we understood. I still respect those guys. Some of us did a lot of the same stuff they did, but they got treated much worse than we did. Like I said, those guys have my respect. And I am an 11B30 with a few pretties, still those guys are legends.
Not to change the subject.
Sport45
Member
My newest Ruger is a 12 caliber .45 Colt with 6-round internal rotating magazine that actuates with the trigger pull.
Is that the proper way to describe my Redhawk?
Is that the proper way to describe my Redhawk?
Gordon_Freeman
Member
If I hear someone say "clip" when talking about a magazine I immediately think that they don't know much about firearms.
jcwit
member
And meaning you do?
This has been cussed and discussed over and over and is completely silly and will come to no end.
And the beat goes on and the beat goes on.
In a few weeks we'll do it all over again! For what purpose?
- Status
Similar threads
