The “clip vs magazine” crisis
posted at 10:01 am on February 2, 2013 by Jazz Shaw
The current gun debate has brought an old, familiar bugaboo back into the limelight, and it’s one most of you have probably seen. It comes in the form of critics rising up and taking umbrage with commentators substituting the word “clip” for “magazine” when talking about weapons technology. I’ve lost count of the number of tweets, blog posts and articles which decry the error and seek to dismiss the arguments being made. This avenue of attack is based on the speaker or author’s failure to understand the fundamental mechanics of weaponry, leading to the assumption that the rest of their argument must therefore be specious.
The first thing to point out is that these critics are absolutely correct on the technical merits. A clip and a magazine are two different animals, and most younger gun buyers today – particularly civilian, sport shooters – are unlikely to have ever seen a clip. You can find a nice review of the difference between them here, but a shorter answer will suffice. A magazine feeds rounds into the chamber of the weapon, is generally spring loaded, and is part of the firing / reloading process for the gun. A clip traditionally held rounds in a set configuration, generally by the base, and facilitated loading into the magazine.
Unfortunately, over a long period of casual use, the two words have begun to merge. It’s an easy mistake to make. I’ve made it myself. Heck… so has Wayne LaPierre for that matter. That doesn’t make it right, but it falls into a pattern which has been plaguing logophiles for ages… the sad fact is that words evolve over time, often to their detriment. And when they are used incorrectly for a long enough period by enough people, the “new definition” takes root and it’s pretty much impossible to exterminate.
There are tons of examples to be found. One of my “favorite” (as in pet peeve) entries in the category is hoi polloi. The original meaning of the phrase was “the common people,” referring to the great unwashed masses. It was actually a derogatory term. But it’s a fancy sounding phrase, and confused writers began using it to refer to the upper crust, elite. That was done so often that modern reference works now actually refer to both as correct usage. The word was turned on its head.
Further fun – or tragic, depending on your point of view – examples abound. Did you know that “awful” originally meant, “‘full of awe’ i.e. something wonderful, delightful, amazing?” The word Manufacture was first used to reference things made by hand with artisan craftsmanship. Counterfeit was a compliment, meaning “a perfect copy” and a “punk” once meant a prostitute or harlot. Whether we like it or not, words evolve. And “clip” has slowly but surely begun muscling its way into the language as a casual alternate meaning for a magazine.
That doesn’t mean you’re wrong to try to correct people, but there’s a downside to it as well. When we fall back on sniping over technical tap dances out of the dictionary over differences in terminology which have little practical effect on the subject at hand, it seems to weaken the argument. There are so many stronger, valid criticisms to be made of the pitch being given by gun grabbers, and resorting to the, “nanny nanny boo boo, you don’t know what a magazine is” argument just makes it look as if the speaker has run out of valid objections. And please keep in mind that I don’t say this from a position of somebody defending David Gregory here. Any review of all my columns on Second Amendment issues will show that I’ve been right up there with the strongest defenders of gun owners’ rights you’re likely to find, and I remain so to this day. I’m also something of a nitpicker myself when it comes to a love of words. But this argument, as satisfying as some may find it to use, really doesn’t seem to be helping anything.
Related Posts:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
No worries. Our DC GOP geniuses in leadership will find a way to give Barry the lead again.
hawkeye54 on May 9, 2013 at 6:49 PM
Obama fatigue has set in already. For dems that is. I was tired of him just knowing who and what he was back in early 2008. Welcome to the funk libs.
DanMan on May 9, 2013 at 6:49 PM
Yeah, but who else do they have?
hawkeye54 on May 9, 2013 at 6:55 PM
Obama’s response: “Let me be clear — Quack! Quack!”
KS Rex on May 9, 2013 at 6:55 PM
What else can they “win”?
Del Dolemonte on May 9, 2013 at 6:56 PM
You missed spelled it: limp d!ck.
except when Reggie comes calling.
I want to watch the one spin out of control. Literally.
AllahsNippleHair on May 9, 2013 at 6:57 PM
Several months late on that. Where were they last November?
GarandFan on May 9, 2013 at 6:59 PM
I don’t really have Obama fatigue right now. My frustration is with the Senate Gangbangers.
Wigglesworth on May 9, 2013 at 6:59 PM
How’s those student loan fees going? Higher rates and higher cost to go to school now that the Govt’s got the “business”? That worked out as well as RobertObamaCare, didn’t it?
Rovin on May 9, 2013 at 6:59 PM
They both suck.
And remember 42% didn’t even know ObamaCare is the law of the land as of last week.
1-20-17
PappyD61 on May 9, 2013 at 7:00 PM
Lame Duck Liar. The Benghazi Bullsh*tter. The Teleprompter Reader In Chief.
One
Big
Ass
Mistake
America
Basilsbest on May 9, 2013 at 7:01 PM
Does this just reveal how close the GOP and the rat-eared wonder are in policy?
davidk on May 9, 2013 at 7:01 PM
Joe Scarborough … check your registation
J_Crater on May 9, 2013 at 7:03 PM
Quack! Quack! Thump! Quack! Quack! Thump!
davidk on May 9, 2013 at 7:03 PM
Another worthless poll.
Bottom line is make a difference voters are the Food Stampers and other benefit receivers and they all swing Democrat…
albill on May 9, 2013 at 7:06 PM
Not bad for a leaderless party demonized by the media non stop. Now just imagine if the GOP had a spine!
Jack_Burton on May 9, 2013 at 7:08 PM
Circling the wagons for The One. But since he’s a lame duck, it okay to begin to consider disagreeing with Obama as Dems start to position themselves for 2016.
JimLennon on May 9, 2013 at 7:10 PM
Gun Protectors—1
Gun Grabbers —-0
canopfor on May 9, 2013 at 7:18 PM
Bravo Can!
Rovin on May 9, 2013 at 7:30 PM
They do have a spine. Just look how hard they are pushing “immigration” reform against the will of the people.
/
Mimzey on May 9, 2013 at 7:33 PM
I’d like to hear Johnny Carsons response as to just what kind of lame duck he is, as in ” he is so lame even Sheila Jackson Lee won’t greet him when he speaks to congress.”
tim c on May 9, 2013 at 7:50 PM
A two day old tuna sandwich could be tied with or ahead of ObamThe guy has accomplished about as much
scalleywag on May 9, 2013 at 8:03 PM
canopfor on May 9, 2013 at 7:18 PM
Bravo Can!
Rovin on May 9, 2013 at 7:30 PM
Rovin:———-:O
canopfor on May 9, 2013 at 8:11 PM
Tell a lie often enough, loud enough… They are just trying to write the narrative hoping that if enough people believe it, it will become the truth.
deepdiver on May 9, 2013 at 8:22 PM
and now even David Frum is criticizing the schumer/rubio thing?
immigration reform must really suck bad
oh well, Mario…here’s a clue…when Frum is off the reservation, time for you to have an ‘awakening’..and quick
http://minx.cc/?post=339838
r keller on May 9, 2013 at 8:24 PM
Lame fluck is more like it.
A bigger charlatanic thug the land never had.
Schadenfreude on May 9, 2013 at 9:31 PM
Calling him a Lame Duck isn’t right. He’s no Duck.
trigon on May 10, 2013 at 12:54 AM
Why would anyone compare the GOP’s to Obama’s on anything at this point?
Obama’s not going to be an election opponent for anyone in the GOP ever going forward.
It’s as meaningless as it would have been to compare Obama’s number’s to Bush’s numbers in 2008. Bush wasn’t running.
To quote Hillary, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”
VekTor on May 10, 2013 at 5:34 PM
Should have been “GOP’s numbers to Obama’s numbers“
VekTor on May 10, 2013 at 5:35 PM
There is excise tax on all alcoholic beverages, but beer, wine, and distilled liquor are all licensed and tracked separately.
gryphon202 on May 12, 2013 at 8:34 PM