• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

"high capacity magazines"

Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
1,789
Likes
48
Location
NH
We get annoyed when someone describes a semi-automatic rifle as an "assault rifle" so why do most people think it is ok to call a regular capacity magazine "high capacity"?

When you call them "high capacity" you are just going along with the gun banners definition.

Why not just refer to low capacity magazines as one of the following:

Neutered Magazines
Low Capacity Magazines
Need to carry more backup Magazines
Romney Magazines
Hard to sell Magazines
Post-ban Magazines

any other suggestions?
 
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 7, 2007
Messages
543
Likes
4
Location
Douglas, MA
If it's an 8 rounder, call it an 8 round mag.

If it's a 10 rounder, call it a 10 round mag.

If it's a 15 rounder, ...

If it's a 30 rounder, ...

This "high capacity, low capacity" is Bull Cookies. An arbitrary number invented so that anything more is "scary".
 

jkelly

Shooting at the big range in heaven
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
2,060
Likes
91
We get annoyed when someone describes a semi-automatic rifle as an "assault rifle" so why do most people think it is ok to call a regular capacity magazine "high capacity"?---MarkM
I think that we find it annoying when some describe a semi-automatic as an “assault rifle” because it is both factually incorrect and often used to obfuscate the gun control issue by antis and lead the uninformed into believing that semi-automatic firearms are indeed typical of what our armed forces use.

And while calling a “greater then 10 round” magazine a high capacity magazine can be used in a some what similar fashion by antis, it is often used to delineate between “less then or equal to 10 round” magazines and “greater then 10 round” magazines. As you can see from the quoted portions in the above sentence using the terms “High Cap” and “Low Cap” are just more efficient.


Respectfully,

jkelly
 

Scrivener

Banned
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
10,156
Likes
514
"High capacity" is also incorrect as a matter of language. There is nothing "high" about them.

The correct term is "LARGE capacity."
 
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,532
Likes
87
Location
North Reading, MA
If you smoke em up, they are "high"...[wink]

The term I can't stand is "high-powered"... The media seems to just toss that term around like ruffies in a college party. "high-powered" rifle..."high-powered" pistol..."high-powered" ferbies. it's ridiculous
 
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
9,468
Likes
658
Location
Lost in the MGLs
"High capacity" is also incorrect as a matter of language. There is nothing "high" about them.

Um... what? Then should we also have 'Large' temperature, 'Large' Cholesterol, and 'Large' society?

Scrivener said:
The correct term is "LARGE capacity."

The correct legal term is "LARGE capacity." There's nothing linguistically wrong with the term "high capacity".
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
18,198
Likes
9,155
"High capacity" is also incorrect as a matter of language. There is nothing "high" about them.

The correct term is "LARGE capacity."

Or in more elaborate terms... "large capacity feeding devices".

Myself... I like to call them "banana clips".



[banana] [banana] [banana]
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
4,247
Likes
480
Location
New Vermont
The media will always attempt to place you in a bad light when there is an angle for a divisive issue. Yellow Jour...Mainstream media would not work without the 'Us vs. Them' premise that it is now considered valid journalism.

Car has leather seats? = Luxury vehicle.
You received a parking ticket? = Issues with the city.
You are a stanch supporter of an issue? = Angry protester/supporter.
Own more than 3 guns? = Cache of weapons. (4 guns = arsenal)

It goes on and on.

In short this is the state of reporting:
familyguytriciatakanawaby8.jpg
, back to you Tom.
 

jcr

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Messages
1,249
Likes
66
Location
Reading, MA
The big false fear of large capacity magazines is that it indicates how many people will be killed.

I wish someone would make a video of a person shooting, aimed fire (say 1 round/sec) and demonstrate the difference between shooting 30 rounds via 3x 10 rnds vs 3x 15 rnds and probably 5x 6 rnds.

Not fast-as-you-can shooting (which further confuses with full automatic), nor even competition magazine changes. The mass murders seem to shoot methodically, so this would be more realistic.

When no one is shooting back, mag changes are not an issue. IIRC, the LIRR shooter was tackled only when he had to start re-filling a magazine.
 

RKG

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
3,812
Likes
638
Location
Boston
From an historical perspective, I'm afraid, the one to blame is John Browning. When he set out to design the P35 (which he thought would cure the deficiencies of the link system employed in his 1910/1911 design), he included the then new concept of a double stack magazine, yielding a capacity of 13-14 rounds (versus 7) in a magazine of the same height.

By this time, Browning and Colt has parted ways, and Browning was working with Fabrique Nationale in Liege, Belgium, where French is the spoken language. The moniker given to the new pistol, "High Power," is actually a corrupted translation of the French description of the "large capacity" of the pistol's magazine (something like -- I'm not at home -- "grand puissance").
 

KMaurer

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
8,654
Likes
341
Location
Litchfield, NH
Since in most cases the firearm was originally designed for a magazine that's now referred to as a "large capacity", it would seem more etymologically correct to refer to them as "standard capacity" and to the modified magazines acceptable to nanny-state legislators as "low capacity" or some other term (e.g., neutered, castrated, spayed, amputated) designating their modified, non-standard nature.

Ken
 

Scrivener

Banned
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
10,156
Likes
514
Since in most cases the firearm was originally designed for a magazine that's now referred to as a "large capacity", it would seem more etymologically correct to refer to them as "standard capacity" and to the modified magazines acceptable to nanny-state legislators as "low capacity" or some other term (e.g., neutered, castrated, spayed, amputated) designating their modified, non-standard nature.

It would.

However, the statutes use the phrase "large capacity," so not using that term may create MORE confusion.
 
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
9,468
Likes
658
Location
Lost in the MGLs
Right.

Just as a gallon jug is so-called because of the volume it takes up........[flame]

"capacity" is the ability of a given quantitative property of an object to reach a certain potential. It is a meta-property. In other words, it is a property of a property. As such, it can refer to a physical property, but it does not, and cannot, itself have any physical properties. Capacity can no more have a volume than it can have a head of hair. As you have pointed out, 'Large' and 'Small' are a scale of physical volume. Therefore, they are adjectives that cannot be applied to the meta-property of capacity. 'large magazine' is linguistically correct. 'large capacity magazine' is not.

On the other hand, 'High' and 'Low' are an arbitrary scale with reference to a prototypical magnitude. As such, they can be applied to non-physical, even meta, properties. So 'high capacity magazine' is perfectly correct linguistically. To be complete, 'high magazine' is linguistically nonsensical because there is no concept of magnitude of magazine-ness.

Sorry, but whoever wrote the firearms laws was most definitely ignorant of linguistics.
 

drumenigma

NES Member
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Dec 26, 2007
Messages
3,666
Likes
1,619
Location
Purgatory
"capacity" is the ability of a given quantitative property of an object to reach a certain potential. It is a meta-property. In other words, it is a property of a property. As such, it can refer to a physical property, but it does not, and cannot, itself have any physical properties. Capacity can no more have a volume than it can have a head of hair. As you have pointed out, 'Large' and 'Small' are a scale of physical volume. Therefore, they are adjectives that cannot be applied to the meta-property of capacity. 'large magazine' is linguistically correct. 'large capacity magazine' is not.

On the other hand, 'High' and 'Low' are an arbitrary scale with reference to a prototypical magnitude. As such, they can be applied to non-physical, even meta, properties. So 'high capacity magazine' is perfectly correct linguistically. To be complete, 'high magazine' is linguistically nonsensical because there is no concept of magnitude of magazine-ness.

Sorry, but whoever wrote the firearms laws was most definitely ignorant of linguistics.

Has NES turned in to Northeast Scientists????
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
4,247
Likes
480
Location
New Vermont
Sorry, but whoever wrote the firearms laws was most definitely ignorant of linguistics.

Somewhat, though I think it is more in the vein that they are not shooters or hunters or otherwise involved in the shooting sports at all.

If the advice on a law to be authored comes from a non-swat officer you can be pretty sure the information is going to be off base and further based on personal perspective. Look at Dianne 'it goes up over the shoulder' McCarthy for example.

Another thing is laws (legalese) generally are not easy to read.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
9,468
Likes
658
Location
Lost in the MGLs
Somewhat, though I think it is more in the vein that they are not shooters or hunters or otherwise involved in the shooting sports at all.

Yes, you're absolutely right, that's the more important discussion here. I just took issue with Scriv calling the term 'High Capacity Magazine' not linguistically correct. But it's really a side issue. I do agree they should be called 'Large Capacity Magazines' even if it's not linguistically proper, because it is how they are, for better or worse, legally defined.
 
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Joined
Aug 15, 2007
Messages
12,175
Likes
1,247
"Large" refers to volume.

Now explain to us how heat and cholesterol have volume. [rolleyes]

That's pretty easy. To have a high cholesterol count, you have to have a large volume of cholesterol inside your body. A count of something can be high, a volume of something is large. You can measure pedantry however you please.
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
61   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
75,723
Likes
47,532
I like "Cripplemag" and "Clinton mag".

"Post Ban" is a bad term, because depending on where one
lives, it means two different things.

-Mike
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
61   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
75,723
Likes
47,532
The big false fear of large capacity magazines is that it indicates how many people will be killed.

+1000...

One thing I noticed recently... The media and anti gun types don't like acknowledging the fact that the VT psychopath a**h*** used a ton of 10 round cripplemags for the Glock he was using, and only a couple of standard mags. It's living proof that "capacity" is meaningless when the people being attacked can't shoot back.

The media also doesn't like talking about that guy in china that killed 16? people with a homemade firearm. (which, I doubt was anything more complicated than a shotgun or something, given the complexity required to make something like an autoloader or wheelgun) It's basically a graphic illustration that even the tightest gun control is still an abject failure as a viable concept.

-Mike
 

drgrant

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
61   0   0
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
75,723
Likes
47,532
Look at Diane 'it goes up over the shoulder' Feinstein for example.

That was McCarthy not Swinestine that said that.

Guy: "Can you tell me what a barrel shroud is?" (more or less,
after badgering her about 10 times to answer the stupid question).

McCarthy: "It's a shoulder thing that goes up... (stupid motion)"

Guy: Uhh, no its not. (kinda put a period on the end of the
whole thing... [laugh)

I love that video. It shows how dumb many antis really are.

-Mike
 
Top Bottom