I read a really good book recently “Tombstone” by Tom Clavin. Very well researched and 90% + of the book is a very well researched deep dive into the players involved don both sides. They were all not very good people. Wyatt Earp was known for his ability to “ buffalo” miscreants which is to pistol whip them. I’m sure he would much rather bust a drunk asshole across his melon and knock him out than actually kill him. He was 6-0 tall which is a bit more than average of 5-5 in the 1870s. The shooting itself at OK corral was about 30 seconds and a lot of lead went flying maybe he had divine intervention that he didn’t get hit.

I have that book but have yet to get around to reading it.

When I was very young, my father straightened me out on the myth of the Old West gunfighter. In a nutshell, back-shooting and ambushes were the order of the day. It seems he was correct.

History has assigned Doc Holliday with masterful skills as a pistolero. When you read up on the man, though, you find that he was quick to use the pistol because he was a pencil-thin little guy, dying of tuberculosis. He used the gun because without it, he would have had his ass kicked all the way to the Mexican border. There was nothing exceptional about his abilities with firearms. What was exceptional is the willingness he had for shooting someone at the drop of a hat.

When you think about it, you'd have to be drunk, a complete idiot or have a death wish to stand across from another man and willingly bet your life on who can draw and fire a pistol the fastest.
I'm not taking about the older tradition of duels involving honor, just the idea of two people staring each other down in the street.
I sure as hell wouldn't have taken that chance.

It would seem illogical that someone would go “out west” to make a new life or blaze his trail and take only a knife.

I expect a greater majority of people in those days were more familiar with firearms than those of today. More people depended on firearms for food on the table, than people today.

How many firearms were there? That might be some interesting research. Company production numbers might help. What was the population then? Adult males? Adult males west of the Mississippi? Population of those using the tool vs. tool production numbers, then you might make assumptions about how common they were.

If the guns of the 1800’s were indeed rare, why are they so common and affordable now?. While I am not wealthy, I could buy a relic of the period (shooting condition or not) tomorrow.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris17404:
Interesting! Great info on those old gunfighters. I assume similar things could be said about more recent gunfighters like Jim Cirillo on the NYPD Stakeout Squad.

Cirillo was known to be a reloader and competitor. Plus he was an instructor with at least one federal agency. Check out his books. He also discussed several of his shootouts. The stakeout squad would use tactics and the layout of the locations to give themselves the advantage.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: CD228,

If one reads Cirillo's book, I don't believe we would find any similarity between him and his squad and the tales that were invented to entertain the readers of the 19th century and continued via TV through the 1950s.

quote:

Originally posted by sigspecops:
When you think about it, you'd have to be drunk, a complete idiot or have a death wish to stand across from another man and willingly bet your life on who can draw and fire a pistol the fastest.
I'm not taking about the older tradition of duels involving honor, just the idea of two people staring each other down in the street.

There is no difference between the two.

Why would you think one was less about honor?

quote:

I sure as hell wouldn't have taken that chance.

Of course dueling would be just as stupid, I was specifically talking about the Hollywood and dime novel gunfight.

From what I've read , there wasn't nearly as much gunfighting going on as the TV and movies would have you believe . Two guys going at it out in the street for the sole purpose of establishing who is faster is probably a load of bullshit .

pretty sure a decent percentage were alcohol-fueled also

------------------------------------

Read up on Pat Garrett and how he shot Billy the Kid. And later, how Garrett was himself killed. Neither event was the Hollywood scenario, even though the Garrett / Bonny shooting has been portrayed on film a few times.

quote:

Originally posted by sigspecops:
Of course dueling would be just as stupid, I was specifically talking about the Hollywood and dime novel gunfight.

Real dueling existed and folks were a bit more careful of offending others back then if they couldn't back it up.

It is much like how the internet has made people more rude as they are less likely to face the consequences of their rudeness

quote:

Originally posted by Sig209:
pretty sure a decent percentage were alcohol-fueled also

------------------------------------

The hell you say.

People don’t really change. Look at the gunfights , gang fights, drive bys and ambushes today I would imagine the old west wasn’t all that different as people aren’t all that different. The VAST majority of us whether we carry and are skilled will never shoot at another human being and I suspect it’s always been that way. There are rare times where a “normal” person might engage in a fight with a miscreant but lots of crime is crime on crime or between folks like LEO’s who have to interject themselves into a fight. The old west was likely pretty much the same.

It always amazes me how movies/tv/fiction colors our perspective of the world. You see it in the shooting community all the time where the mental image is a “Miami Vice” gunfight vs the reality of a knock down, roll on the floor close range, exchange of a couple shots while everybody involved is looking to find a new zip code once the bullets start flying.

I am sure, like today, there are instances of actual movie like gun fights but those are likely rare as hens teeth vs the typical ambush or rounds flying while everybody is trying to un-ass the AO so to speak. I mean how many Hollywood bank shoot outs or 1986 FBI shootouts are there vs the vast amount of a few shots flying a a few mags dumped into a car or some such.