What firearms "terminology" makes you grit your teeth?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe clips can be different from magazines and the same as magazines. Maybe Webster is gullible. Maybe Webster is wrong about clips and magazines just like it is about precision and accuracy. Maybe all the hullabaloo about the difference is just BS. Maybe Savage does know what is what, and clips not always being different from magazines is what is what. Could we tolerate that? I know I could. What do I care what you call it?
magazines have springs and clips do not. simple.
 
Do cop killer bullets work on hippies also, of just cops?
I am not sure that has ever been tried . I suspect most of us here have read about them and know what a load of ..... that name is.
I suspect this post is off topic too.
 
What firearms "terminology" makes you grit your teeth?
These days the only (minor) annoyance with firearms terminology that I experience occurs when an OP starts up a Thread about an "XYZ" without providing, somewhere in that initial post, a brief definition of what the "XYZ" acronym references.

Last year (year before?) I recall someone launching into a Thread about PCCs. ??? It took awhile for me to determine that PCC stands for "Pistol Caliber Carbine".

Now, I usually glance at the first couple of posts and if no explanation is provided for the new acronym, I just move along. :)
 
In case you are wondering how this term was appropriated- In the UK, "gear" is called "kit".

One of my daughters married a Brit and lives in the UK. Lots of things are considered part of some "kit". You get used to it if you know the source.

My pet peeve is calling cartridges calibers.

I have several guns in 45 caliber but they are different cartridges. I have 45 Colt, 45 ACP, and 460 S&W Magnum guns. All 45 caliber yet different cartridges.

Same for 38 Special and 357 Magnum. Same caliber, 38, yet different cartridges.

While some guns will accept different cartridges, they do not accept different calibers.
 
Last edited:
None that I can think of really get me bent out of shape, but on the other side of the coin.... I miss the term “mall ninja” it’s fallen out of flavor for some reason.

I bet there’s a good many new people around here who don’t even know who gecko45 was. That’s sad to, I was provided many a good laugh when him and other mall ninjas were so popular.
 
I love the word and usage..... "clip". Being we do right much sheet metal forming here at the shop. "Clip" has it's roots or etymology in the forming process back in the mid to late 1800's. Then repeating firearms started using formed/bent/stamped gauge metal "magazines" utilizing the process..... so,when I hear the word am thinking,how dang smart those early repeating firearms manufacturers were,just sayin. Carry on.
 
Regarding my original post about “kit”.
I have a gun cleaning kit.
I have a shoe shine kit.
I have a motorcycle tool kit.

But I do not have a “piece of kit” that goes with anything gun related and does not fit into a container or pouch with other things to make a “kit”.

Also, anyone that uses the term or phrase “piece of kit” that wasn’t in the military and served with whatever country’s forces that use that term should be slapped on sight.:barf:

Just thought I’d clarify. :thumbup:;):D
 
Despite the many references to it in this thread, I have never heard a cartridge called a caliber or vice-versa either on these forums or anywhere else. Now mixing up advise with advice and lose with loose, well that happens all the time. Caliber with cartridge, not so much.
 
I have. I deal with Brits daily in my line of work, and it’s common usage. Moreso in the warehousing and inventory side of work, where we kit up assemblages of bolts and gaskets for issue to installers, or electrical bulks, or whatever needs to be assembled in a kit-type format.

Also, I’ve not heard “a piece of kit”, rather “a bit of kit”.

I was never in the military, and do use the phrase, rarely. I would not appreciate being slapped...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Out of curiosity, how do you describe the full set of actions/controls involved in handling a particular firearm (safety, magazine release, slide release, slide lock...)? I picked up "manual of arms" at one point and it has stuck with me for whatever reason, but I don't think I've ever seen it used as an official technical term. Can't say I've ever used "running the gun", but I've probably seen that more than "manual of arms."

Manual of Arms is a term that has been used since the days of matchlocks.
 
A "kit gun" used to be a thing, and oddly enough, not assembled from a kit.

Grip angle.

That's a red herring. The grip angle of a certain "perfect" pistol is fine. It's not even that sharp, just completely irrelevant. Bringing it up means that the thread is going weird or bad and that I'm wrong about my own personal preferences.
 
Our local paper, once quite right of center and publisher of numerous gun rags, has been working hard to be "correct", using terms like "unexpended bullet casings", "expended cartridge casings", and such. Still not always getting it. Wife and I get a chuckle. An example, "Student caught with unexpended .22 caliber casings".
 
Despite the many references to it in this thread, I have never heard a cartridge called a caliber or vice-versa either on these forums or anywhere else. Now mixing up advise with advice and lose with loose, well that happens all the time. Caliber with cartridge, not so much.

I see it at least once a week. What caliber should my next XXX be?
 
I see it at least once a week. What caliber should my next XXX be?
How is that mixing caliber up with cartridge? Should the next XXX be 9 mm .45, .40, 10 mm. Those can all be considered calibers or more generically, diameters. In other words how big should the bullet be that my next gun shoots. Now should it be .38 Sp, 9mm, .357 Magnum, that is a cartridge question to be asked after caliber has been determined. Two different things. But it is possible to ask either of them without the implication of mixing them up. In fairness, it is also possible to mix them up. I just don’t see that in the example you posed.
 
Manual of Arms is a term that has been used since the days of matchlocks.
That doesn’t make it sensible. Method of operation makes a lot more sense if you are talking about the procedures. Operating manual makes more sense if you are talking about where it is all written down. Using the same term for both is silly.
 
Manual of Arms is a term that has been used since the days of matchlocks.
I was under the impression that manual of arms was those commands of when and where to manipulate our rifles in drill and ceremony in the military. As I remember, there were only about 5 or 6 commands, so it was pretty easy for most of us. For those having difficulty. extra attention was given. "WHAT SIDE WAS THAT, PYLE"!!! Remember that? That's what I remember as Manual of Arms. Publications about our weapons were called field manuals and technical manuals. Or maybe I'm not remembering correctly. I do remember my right from my left, so that's good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top