Works for me. But that won’t happen in our lifetimes.
Relating it to the OP though there is a substantive difference. Calling a fossil a missing link is mislabeling the entire object of the reporting. The OP is more like say the fossil was found in a layer of laterite when it was really found in a layer of saprolite.
The important bit is the fossil - much like the important part of recent news stories is the gun doing the killing not the minutiae.
Gun owner, for the record.
This pitting is hilarious.
I’d love for the OP to come down to any of the shooting ranges I frequent and pedantically try to correct the staff on their incorrect use of “clip” vs “magazine”.
Of all the uses of gun terminology to correct, this is about the least interesting or important.
Yeah, I thought about that as soon as I wrote it, but I think the broader message is reporters writing about things they don’t understand.
So, I’m still good with my “contribution”.
Look on the bright side. You’ll be dead soon.
Now there’s an ironclad analogy if I ever saw one.
Wiki also notes, in bold print, that the weapon was introduced as the Colt Automatic Pistol, Model 1911.
If I’m talking to someone who knows anything about weapons, I’ll call mine “the various models” in .45ACP.
If we’re talking about the latest mass-shooting and weapons used therein, and somebody says just maybe this is the time to consider banning automatic weapons or assault weapons, etc., and you jump on that based on a nitpick about what is an “automatic” or a “semiautomatic” weapon, and what is an “assault” weapon, that makes you the only asshole in the room; and the clip/magazine distinction goes way beyond that.
Since you asked (and I can’t believe nobody answered), for your edification:
And for the record:
An intact male bovine is a Bull.
A female bovine who has given birth is a Cow.
A castrated male bovine who has not reached sexual maturity is a Steer.
A female bovine under two years of age is a Heifer.
A male bovine that has been castrated after reaching sexual maturity is a Stag.
And a dead bovine is Beef and it’s what’s for dinner.
Let’s try to keep them straight, OK?
While I agree that “Clip/Magazine” is a trivial pedantic issue, not knowing the difference between an automatic and semi-automatic weapon is a big damned deal when talking about the rationale for banning certain guns.
And banning ‘assault weapons’ because a murderer used a weapon that looked military is like banning red cars because the car used in a multiple homicide was red, or banning Kool-Aid because Jim Jones used it as the flavor for his poison cocktail.
There ARE certain aspects of weapons that can make them more deadly, and you can have a reasonable debate about that. Magazine size is a good example. You could also make rational regulatory choices over rate of fire or accuracy or caliber.
But inventing a category called an ‘Assault Weapon’ based on what the damned thing LOOKS like is beyond stupid. Having a pistol grip or a flash suppressor does not make a weapon more dangerous. No one has been bayoneted in a mass killing, so making the decision to ban something based on whether it has a bayonet lug is idiotic.
A Ruger Mini-14 looks like a standard rifle and is very common with ranchers and farmers as a general-purpose rifle, and it was never part of the assault weapons ban. But it shoots the same rounds as an AR-15/M-16, it has the same kind of magazine system, and in the context of something like a school shooting, it is just as deadly. So by what rationale would you ban an AR-15 but not a Mini-14?
Military weapons look like they do not because it makes them more dangerous to civilians. They look like that for practical reasons. They have plastic stocks to make them lighter - important when you’re humping them through the boonies 8 hours a day, but not so much when you’re carrying it from the trunk of a car to a school. They have flash suppressors to avoid giving away the shooter’s position at night in combat. They are designed to be reliable when dirty (well, maybe not the M-16…).
NOTHING about any of that makes them more deadly to civilians. In fact, the WWII-era M1 Garand was in many ways a deadlier rifle than the M-16, but it looks like a regular old rifle.
The ‘clip/magazine’ thing may be pedantic, but it’s indicative of the generally abysmal understanding of guns that most reporters seem to have. On the other hand, in my experience most reporters have an abysmal understanding of just about anything. J-School is not there to turn out rocket scientists or to make sure that reporters have a deep and broad understanding of the subjects they cover, and your average J-School student is probably not the sharpest knife in the drawer. And when it comes to television, where the premium is on looks and glibness, you’re even more likely to get airheads covering the news.
A better example of their general stupidity was that home-made helium ‘flying saucer’ that supposedly had a child inside it. I spent an entire morning in slack-jawed amazement watching the coverage of that. The thing was obviously way too small to carry much of a payload, and it was made of flimsy mylar and the way it was wrinkled made it very clear it was carrying very little payload of any sort, yet not a single network expressed any skepticism over the claims of a child being inside. It was an entire industry of people being unable to process the simple physics they learned in grade school and reach an obvious conclusion.
So I don’t expect anything better from the gun debate. Or any other technical issue they might cover. They’re in over their heads the minute you get past “If it bleeds it leads” and knowing how to sit so that your jacket collar doesn’t ride up on camera. Why we listen to them pontificate about anything at all is a mystery.
To mimic the OP:
It’s Flavor-Aid that Jim Jones used, not Kool-Aid!!!
Lord, I want to copy and paste this across every comment section in every article about guns in every publication in the US.
Thanks.
The one thing I think we can all agree with, is that Sam Stone is paid by the word.
I would like to cut and paste Sam Stone’s post in every comment section of every magazine that whines about things they don’t understand other than “It’s scary!”
On this matter I’m a Keynesian. We’re all dead in the long run.
Wait… where does the spun tibanna gas get injected then…?
Into the spine, right next to the bind-in cards for gift subscriptions.
If we start using the terms correctly, then promise us you’ll be ok if we limit the rounds to 10? No? Ok, then we’ll continue to talk about these magazine clips that shoot firearms