• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -110 months ago

    It’s not even over-analyzing. A revolver does not take shells; they use cartridges, which are not shells. That’s just a simple fact.

    • ZephrC
      link
      fedilink
      010 months ago

      Uh, no. No it’s not. You can have a cartridge that fires a shell instead of a bullet. That is totally a thing.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        0
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        One that is designed for revolvers, not shotguns? (And yes, I know about revolver shotguns, but those are mainly just a gimmick and not really ever used in most contexts. I’m talking about handgun revolvers.)

        • ZephrC
          link
          fedilink
          110 months ago

          Okay. I see the problem here. Shell doesn’t mean shotgun round. Bullet and shell are technical terms for the bit of a round that comes out of the business end of a weapon at high velocity. A bullet is a single, simple solid mass that follows a ballistic trajectory and just imparts kinetic force into whatever it hits. A shell is anything more complicated than that. Shotguns are just the small arms weapons that are most likely to use shells, but anything can, and it doesn’t have to be buckshot to be a shell. Even something as simple as a tracer round is technically a shell.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            210 months ago

            …You know, thinking about it, I think you’re right. After all, artillery uses shells, and they’re not exactly buckshot, those things. Lol.