just an attempt to belittle how folks make those choices.
The post wasn't about belittling anyone, but I suppose if you must view it that way, it might be accurate to say that it belittles the people who make up and/or spread false stories. The people who are taken in and believe lies they are told, often by respected persons, aren't to blame.
I am not saying, nor have I said, nor do I believe that people who are taken in by false stories told (or retold), often by respected persons (such as the author in this story who is responsible for verifying facts before writing an article) who know better or should know better, are to blame. That's very clear. If you want to continue arguing that I am blaming them for being victims, that's up to you, but you're not arguing against me because that's not my position. That's simply you making stuff up.
Yep, of course you're correct....it's stupid to buy a weapon based on an embellished war story.
I didn't say it was stupid, I said it was not an ideal way to choose a gun.
Or because of what your hero used on Saturday morning westerns. Or because grandpa said it's was the greatest gun John Moses Browning ever invented. Don't buy any gun just because you like the way it looks and how it fits into your hands, or because it's cool. Only buy a gun that has a practical purpose and after you fully research it's history. We all know that only then, will you end up with the gun that is perfect, for you. If Grandpa embellished his time in war and the weapons he used....shame on him and shame on you for believing it.
This is being ridiculous. It's fine to buy a gun because you saw it in the movies and liked it. It's fine to buy a gun because you just like the way it looks. It's fine to buy guns that aren't practical. It's fine to buy a gun without knowing anything about its history. I think I've done all of those things at one time or another. I haven't ever bought a gun based on made up war stories, but that's probably more to do with good fortune on my part when I was first getting into guns, before I started really learning about them.
Anyway, in ALL of the cases I listed, you are getting what you want, you are getting what you think you are getting (a gun you like, the gun you saw in the movies/on TV, a gun that looks good to you). What I'm talking about is buying a gun when you think you are getting one thing (e.g. a gun that was frequently used against the Moros in the Philippine Insurrection) and are actually getting another thing (a gun that was not used in the Philippine Insurrection at all and that almost certainly wasn't ever used against a Moro). Buying a gun based on thinking a made up story is fact, certainly isn't ideal--and people shouldn't make up stories or propagate them to mislead people in forming their preferences or in making their gun purchases.
Sorry, ain't trying to be a jerk, but I see the same bravado inferring that how you make your choices, are better than how others do.
The word is "implying" and no, that's not the point at all. I'm saying that it's not ideal for people to make up stories about guns and it's unfortunate when other people are taken in and form preferences/make purchasing decisions based on that fiction instead of on fact.
I'm NOT saying people have to make
the choices I have.
I'm NOT saying people have to make choices the
ways I have. I'm just saying that we should be careful not to convince people to make choices based on misinformation.
I'm saying that we should not create misinformation, we should not propagate misinformation, and when we see/hear misinformation, we should try to prevent it from spreading. Again, not in the context of popping someone's bubble when they're showing you their favorite gun or a new acquisition, but in the general context of busting myths-an activity ideally suited for online forums.
What difference does it make, other than trying to impress us all with your superior knowledge.
I already answered this and I don't think my answer was at all unclear.
"...providing actual information to “bust some myths” as it were , is useful. NOT in the context of popping someone’s balloon when they are showing off or enjoying a firearm, but rather in the interest of exchanging useful and interesting factual information about firearms—which is what this forum is all about, after all."
You are trying very hard to make this about me and about the unfortunate people who are taken in by those who make up stories about guns. That's not what it's about at all. Reread the OP and you will see that the only person put into a negative light was the author who was propagating incorrect information even though he is responsible for insuring that what he presents for publication is factual and even though he could have easily checked his facts.
I could care less if a guy chooses to buy a Mare's Leg because he watched "Dead or Alive" when he was a kid. If my buddy hunts with a ought-six because his dad did, who cares if I think a 6.5 is better?
Same here, and I agree.
We don't want the government telling us what we can and should buy, but in the next breath, we think we need to take that stand. I just don't get it.
This is unmitigated BS. I'm absolutely not telling anyone
what they should and shouldn't choose. That was clear from my initial post and I've stated it explicitly since then.
This is a pretty ironic assertion on your part. What I'm trying to do is help insure that people get to make their
own choices instead of being misled into making purchases based on made up stories or myths. I'm not trying to restrict people's choices, I actually want people to make their own choices instead of being pushed in one direction or another by made up stories and myths.
"Frequent" being a relative term, could mean almost anything.
Sorry, no. It couldn't for example, mean that it likely never happened. It also couldn't mean that it might have happened once but no one can prove it. It would be a tremendous stretch for it to mean that it might have happened a couple of times in the last few days of fighting that lasted about a decade and a half.
And no, it's about as far as a phrase like "Raining cats and dogs." as it can be. Idioms (like "Raining cats and dogs") are specifically about meanings that can't be deduced solely from looking at the definitions of the words involved while the non-idiomatic use of words is specifically about the meaning conveyed by their definitions.