What the hell is a .233?

[evan price]

233, 234, whatever it takes.

There's a Tom Clancy book- one of the good ones- wherein an FBI agent is involved in a kidnap attempt on President Ryan's kid at a day care center.
Can't recall if it was the Feeby or an SS agent who is involved in a shootout with the bad guys (both are, the SS agent dies) but I recall Clancy writing something to the effect of "The shiny stainless-steel casings ejecting from the gun" and thinking totally WTF?? it broke the moment for me.
Clancy does this from time to time.

There's also a guy named Lee Child who writes a series of books I enjoy about a character named Jack Reacher. iirc Child is British and knows nothing about guns.

He wrote a story wherein the entire climax of the story depended on the main character (Reacher) absolutely knowing and betting his life that an old Beretta 92 service pistol that had been stolen from another character would misfire.

Reacher had previously seen the pistol (which had been the retired service weapon of a Secret Service officer who had bought it when they transitioned to another platform) sitting in a drawer with the mags all loaded to the full capacity, and had been sitting for many years. When Reacher had found the gun he had commented that the mag springs would be ruined from sitting loaded for so long.

At the end climax against the bad guys (The bad guys were long time career police officers from somewhere) one of the bad guys pulls out the stolen Beretta pistol intending to kill Reacher and his companion with it.

Reacher tells his companion, "At the click, jump them." or something like that. And of course, when the Beretta trigger is pulled, it does not go off and only clicks, and Reacher monologues that it is because the mag springs had settled from being loaded for ten years and not unloaded and the gun had jammed.

I had to put the book down at that point. Seriously? I know cops are not often gun experts but these guys were involved in a plot to kill the vice president and knew enough about guns that they had been in a long and involved plot involving sniper rifles and pistols and were good shooters. Maybe- MAYBE- the second round MIGHT have jammed, but the chambered round would have fired. And the whole "Springs will fail if left loaded" meme is totally BS anyway.

I highly doubt that the bad guys would be stupid enough to NOT jack a round in the chamber when they picked up the gun, or not noticed the gun jamming when first chambered. I just don't see it happening. And so in my mind the main character got shot in the head and died. And this is because Lee Child didn't know his butt from his elbow in relation to guns.

[HTRN]

everybody just followed along, because it's "procedure".

Procedural Orthodoxy! Right? Wrong? Who knows, we're following instructions!

Welcome to ISO 9000!

[toad]

Ed McBain wrote once about how he would get complaints when he fouled up on the technical details of firearms in his novels. He actually couldn't understand why readers would get upset about it.
My theory is if you aren't a bit obsessive compulsive when you deal with airplanes, motor cycles, and firearms you are going to have a short life??
Hence a magazine labeled .233 would be bothersome.

[Erik]

Ed McBain wrote once about how he would get complaints when he fouled up on the technical details of firearms in his novels. He actually couldn't understand why readers would get upset about it.
My theory is if you aren't a bit obsessive compulsive when you deal with airplanes, motor cycles, and firearms you are going to have a short life??
Hence a magazine labeled .233 would be bothersome.

There's probably a bit of truth in this. However, I react the same way when I read things about other topics that are not only incorrect, but shows that the writer didn't care about it enough to get the details right.

I think it's that I feel insulted. Here you have a writer that is writing a story that they want me to read and enjoy, but they don't care about it enough to get the details right, instead they are assuming that I'm a moron that won't know or care about the difference, so why bother getting the facts right?
If it's a novel it ruins the story if the writer can just wing it as he goes along, changing reality as he pleases. If it's an article, then why should I bother reading a paper or magazine that doesn't contain useful and correct info.

[PawPaw]

I once had the opportunity to talk with Bill Kinsella (Field of Dreams, the Iowa Baseball Confederacy, etc). A student wandered over to chat and asked Bill where he got all his baseball facts. Bill was startlingly honest with the kid. "I make them up. I'm a fiction writer, so I get paid to make stuff up. A few good facts and some made-up stuff, and you've got good fiction." Or, words to that effect.