PDA

View Full Version : Words matter.. Let's use them correctly.


DrDavid
01-03-2013, 12:31 PM
It's not an Assault Rifle; it's a Centerfire (or rimfire) semi-automatic rifle. An Assault Rifle is a type of rifle that are extra-taxed. Most people do not own one; and they are very expensive to purchase. They're also fully-automatic.

It's not a high-capacity magazine; it's the STANDARD capacity magazine. There are also LOW capacity magazines (10 rounds), and HIGH capacity drums that can hold up to 100 rounds. A 30 round magazine is the standard capacity for AR type rifles. 17-round is STANDARD for Glocks, XD's, etc..

Edited my mistake re: ban vs. tax.

taperxz
01-03-2013, 12:35 PM
It's not an Assault Rifle; it's a Center-Fired (or rim-fired) semi-automatic rifle. An Assault Rifle is a type of rifle that has already been banned. They're also fully-automatic.

It's not a high-capacity magazine; it's the STANDARD capacity magazine. There are also LOW capacity magazines (10 rounds), and HIGH capacity drums that can hold up to 100 rounds. A 30 round magazine is the standard capacity for AR type rifles. 17-round is STANDARD for Glocks, XD's, etc..

Correction, they are not "banned" they are taxed, and in some states only the royalty are allowed to be taxed for them. In some states its not that hard.

PsychGuy274
01-03-2013, 12:44 PM
> "Words matter, use them correctly"
> Center-Fired
> Rim-Fired

DrDavid
01-03-2013, 12:45 PM
> "Words matter, use them correctly"
> Center-Fired
> Rim-Fired

Fixed.. centerfire or rimfire

myk
01-03-2013, 12:56 PM
Send this post to MSNBC and all of the other FUD spreading media outlets; they're the ones calling everything from a semi-auto weapon to a Nerf dart gun an "assault rifle."

LoneYote
01-03-2013, 1:06 PM
While I agree that labels matter... and to us the label is fit... Assault(anything) is short enough to convey an image and loaded enough to make it negative.

"Portable intermediate caliber semi-automatic direct gas impingement center-fired rifle with ergonomic features" is something that makes perfect sense to us but the uneducated glaze over after the second word... for sure by the third. There is another thread with suggested language that is much bemoaned. "Why can't we just call it what it is?" the question is do you think technical jargon or precision definitions are going to win people over?

PsychGuy274
01-03-2013, 2:02 PM
Fixed.. centerfire or rimfire

lol :D

hoffmang
01-06-2013, 7:30 PM
For mass media purposes, just say AR-15. Embrace it. Love it. It's a safe term and its a truth we have no need to avoid.

It also helps that the AR-15 is the best selling rifle in America.

-Gene

IPSICK
01-06-2013, 8:00 PM
Aren't they targeting "assault weapons" not "assault rifles"? ;)

Let's not get caught in the nomenclature battle. AR-15, AK-47, etc... Call them what they are.

rexbo47
01-06-2013, 8:23 PM
They aren't "assault weapons" either, except by legislative fiat.

We need to stop surrendering the language.

AngelDecoys
01-07-2013, 11:41 AM
Words matter and phrases are used by design for an emotional connection. I prefer modern musket.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2riOiBaZrg&feature=youtu.be

q2riOiBaZrg

bwiese
01-07-2013, 11:53 AM
DrDave,

I somewhat disagree - certainly in various contexts.

We risk confusion over CA law - with people going to jail - by using terminology that differs from the law.

If people start calling over-10 mags as 'standard capacity' sure as hell some people will buy them illegally because they sound legit/innocuous. And so on.

For better or worse - at least in CA fight - we need to use some of the terms that are congruent with terms in law/regulation, otherwise we've foisted confusion on our own folks (esp folks just coming into the field).

We just don't need more gun owners with felony convictions. That's a big part of the reason CGF was founded, in fact.

Wiz-of-Awd
01-07-2013, 11:58 AM
Send this post to MSNBC and all of the other FUD spreading media outlets; they're the ones calling everything from a semi-auto weapon to a Nerf dart gun an "assault rifle."

Yeah, but they aren't stupid and already know all of this...
They work for the "other guy" you see, and are working against you and me.

A.W.D.

DrDavid
01-07-2013, 12:29 PM
I somewhat disagree - certainly in various contexts.

We risk confusion over CA law - with people going to jail - by using terminology that differs from the law.

If people start calling over-10 mags as 'standard capacity' sure as hell some people will buy them illegally because they sound legit/innocuous. And so on.


So, what's the solution? We "win" California, but lose Federally? We "win" Federally, but lose California?

17 round mags ARE standard capacity. There's 10-round magazines which are low capacity, for CA. Honestly, I think we need to use the same words everywhere.. The media plays games with words; and apparently we're too worried to play back.

Tubbie
01-07-2013, 12:38 PM
Staying in trend with the current media, I now use the term 'assault' with everything. Someone got ran over by an 'assault' car on so and so street, for example. It's interesting seeing the expression on people's faces followed by "Why do you say assault?" as which I said, "See how ridiculously that sounds?"

dieselpower
01-07-2013, 12:43 PM
If you want to stop using a term and help ourselves out of a hole...

STOP USING THE TERM 10/30 OR 10/20 OR 10/xx.

They are 10 rd magazines PERIOD. End of story. The size, length or width of the body means nothing and promotes the notion it can be a 30 rd magazine or 20 round magazine again.

My glock came with a 10rd magazine from the factory... it didnt come with a 10/15 or 10/17

I purchased a magazine kit and built a 10rd magazine... I didnt build a 10/30.

I purchased a Magpul 10rd magazine. It matters NOT that the body is the same one used on a 30rd magazine or a 20 round magazine.

I wrote a very lengthy post on this last year and people fight it...why I have no idea.

10/30 is the same as calling an AR15 with a Magazine Lock an Rifle/Assault Weapon.

MOA1
01-07-2013, 1:10 PM
Words matter and phrases are used by design for an emotional connection. I prefer modern musket.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2riOiBaZrg&feature=youtu.be

q2riOiBaZrg


Great video.

MOA1
01-07-2013, 1:21 PM
If you want to stop using a term and help ourselves out of a hole...

STOP USING THE TERM 10/30 OR 10/20 OR 10/xx.

They are 10 rd magazines PERIOD. End of story. The size, length or width of the body means nothing and promotes the notion it can be a 30 rd magazine or 20 round magazine again.

My glock came with a 10rd magazine from the factory... it didnt come with a 10/15 or 10/17

I purchased a magazine kit and built a 10rd magazine... I didnt build a 10/30.

I purchased a Magpul 10rd magazine. It matters NOT that the body is the same one used on a 30rd magazine or a 20 round magazine.

I wrote a very lengthy post on this last year and people fight it...why I have no idea.

10/30 is the same as calling an AR15 with a Magazine Lock an Rifle/Assault Weapon.

It might be because they don't fall in line and accept these encroachments of our rights as easily as you do. The way you present yourself says to me, you're just fine with the restrictions on your guns. You are just fine being hobbled with low capacity magazines, others are not.

You said you had no idea, I'm trying to help you see. I have no desire to have a debate with you about your opinions.

Why do law enforcement have standard capacity magazines and you do not? Are you a criminal? Or just being treated like one.

You are either a good guy or you are not, there is no in between.

These arguments are way passed the point of ridiculous. The 2A is quite clear to me, what is not clear is why we only have a small fraction of those rights left. Also what is not clear is why anyone would want to further reduce the 2A.

I should rather state that, it IS quite clear the reason why the 2A is being further attacked, just that the ones doing it are not being honest about their motives. They will continue to dance until the music stops.

IPSICK
01-07-2013, 1:31 PM
DrDave,

I somewhat disagree - certainly in various contexts.

We risk confusion over CA law - with people going to jail - by using terminology that differs from the law.

If people start calling over-10 mags as 'standard capacity' sure as hell some people will buy them illegally because they sound legit/innocuous. And so on.

For better or worse - at least in CA fight - we need to use some of the terms that are congruent with terms in law/regulation, otherwise we've foisted confusion on our own folks (esp folks just coming into the field).

We just don't need more gun owners with felony convictions. That's a big part of the reason CGF was founded, in fact.

bwiese,

I'll have to disagree with a portion of this. I agree that we should do our best to help gunowners avoid prison, but not necessarily at the cost of the terminology war. I realize it is semantics, but surrendering nomenclature does still hurt a bit.

I prefer to preface Assault Weapons as what legislation has defined as Assault Weapons or Hi-Cap mags as what the media or legislation has defined as such. Many ARs are mostly used for sporting purposes but not solely used as such. 30-rounds is the standard capacity for most ARs outside of CA.

I realize you understand these semantics and there are those that don't, but isn't that a problem if common gunowners don't understand the irrational war of words we face?

IPSICK
01-07-2013, 1:34 PM
If you want to stop using a term and help ourselves out of a hole...

STOP USING THE TERM 10/30 OR 10/20 OR 10/xx.

...

You're addressing this at the wrong vector. The problem isn't usage of the terms but existence of these terms.

CBruce
01-07-2013, 1:46 PM
Aren't they targeting "assault weapons" not "assault rifles"? ;)

Let's not get caught in the nomenclature battle. AR-15, AK-47, etc... Call them what they are.

It seems pretty clear from this latest round of legislation that so-called "assault weapons" are no longer merely the ones that look like Assault Rifles. They're trying to roll all magazine-fed, semi-autos and even some pump-action into that category. Rifles, handguns, shotguns. At least they've keyed in on a function rather than a purely cosmetic feature.

"Assault weapon" can mean literally whatever they want it to. And at this point, as the term is pretty strongly associated with weapons used to commit mass murder, they can continue to hammer away on banning "assault weapons" all the while adding more and more types of firearms to the category. No one will be the wiser, because most peole dont' care. They just don't want to hear about 20 children being killed by one.

bergmen
01-07-2013, 1:54 PM
And don't forget this is a salt rifle (the space makes all the difference):

http://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u580/Bergmen/Firearms%20and%20Shooting/Rifles/SaltWeapon_zps8dab20a3.jpg

Dan

IPSICK
01-07-2013, 1:57 PM
It seems pretty clear from this latest round of legislation that so-called "assault weapons" are no longer merely the ones that look like Assault Rifles. They're trying to roll all magazine-fed, semi-autos and even some pump-action into that category. Rifles, handguns, shotguns. At least they've keyed in on a function rather than a purely cosmetic feature.

"Assault weapon" can mean literally whatever they want it to. And at this point, as the term is pretty strongly associated with weapons used to commit mass murder, they can continue to hammer away on banning "assault weapons" all the while adding more and more types of firearms to the category. No one will be the wiser, because most peole dont' care. They just don't want to hear about 20 children being killed by one.

Bingo! This is the heart of the problem. They'll continue to add to the list of "Assault Weapons" as much as they see fit.

Btw, they are still basing this on cosmetics. It's just they only need it base on one cosmetic feature and not two.

kaligaran
01-07-2013, 4:49 PM
It might be because they don't fall in line and accept these encroachments of our rights as easily as you do. The way you present yourself says to me, you're just fine with the restrictions on your guns. You are just fine being hobbled with low capacity magazines, others are not.


I didn't read it that way at all. Just because you are making sure you operate within the law when it comes to magazines, doesn't mean that you agree or support said laws.

It sounded to me that dieselpower is just making sure he is not committing a felony with his property and that he's a law abiding gun owner.

No matter how ridiculous the law may be, we still have to abide by them or risk a whole lot more.
Clearly it's something we should educate others about and support our state/federal 2A supporting organizations (among other things) to challenge.

I agree the 10/20 and 10/30 terminology is confusing to those that don't really understand or know the laws.

choprzrul
01-07-2013, 6:21 PM
...and they aren't 'Anti's' or 'Anti Gun' or 'Pro Gun Control'.

They are AntiCivilRights-JimCrowLawsLoving-Bigoted-Loyalist-InanimateObjectFearing-StatisticsIgnoring-TerminologyChallenged-FreedomHaters.

Did I cover it all?

.

wjc
01-07-2013, 7:45 PM
It's not an Assault Rifle; it's a Centerfire (or rimfire) semi-automatic rifle. An Assault Rifle is a type of rifle that are extra-taxed. Most people do not own one; and they are very expensive to purchase. They're also fully-automatic.

It's not a high-capacity magazine; it's the STANDARD capacity magazine. There are also LOW capacity magazines (10 rounds), and HIGH capacity drums that can hold up to 100 rounds. A 30 round magazine is the standard capacity for AR type rifles. 17-round is STANDARD for Glocks, XD's, etc..

Edited my mistake re: ban vs. tax.

pedantic point.

They are not fully automatic.

They are "select fire"...

Semi-automatic single shot (one trigger pull = one shot) or full automatic which could also include 3 shot burst depending on the model. I believe the M16A2 is burst. the M16A3 is full, and the M16A4 is burst or full depending on the sub-model (RSN901/RSN905).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle#M16A2