A fellow from Wyoming told me this stuff about lightning-swift draws was a lot of old hokum, arising from the explanation "He went for his gun and I outdrew him," which the law might accept when not to do so would be more trouble than it was worth. True?
2007-04-08 07:15:58 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Yes, that seems to track with what is historically accurate about "gunfights", and the typical jury of that time. "Going for his (her) gun" was considered a life-threatening act, ergo the right of self-defense would say that one would be authorized to kill him (her). Quite a few murders were disposed of with the self-defense plea.
The lightening-draw seen in movies is a lot of BS. First off the show-down on Main Street is myth. There are a couple gunfights in the historical record that HAPPENED on Main Street, but nothing like the movies. When one thinks about it, the last thing you're going to want to do, is give your opponent any opportunity to kill you. Secondly, according to Wyatt Earp, and Bat Materson, two guys who actually were in gun battles, the two most important things were to a: maintain mental focus and b: aim. The person who took their time, was the one who would walk away. Modern reconstructions like the Discovery Channel did on the OK Corral bear this theory out.
2007-04-08 07:31:04 · answer #1 · answered by jim 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There were people who were supposed to be extremely skilled such as Wild Bill Hickock but how much of this was myth is unclear .A lot of true accounts show that famous outlaws were killed by a shot in the back.Just like in the romanticised cavalry charges of the civil war with flashing sabres the preferred weapons were often sawn off shotguns by lawmen as at the gunfight at the OK coral and by the civil war cavalry but the Hollywood version of the High Noon gun fight seems to stir peoples imaginations.
2007-04-08 14:37:40 · answer #2 · answered by frankturk50 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
False, mostly
Nobody in their right mind would carry a gun with a bullet in every chamber. You could blow your own foot off trying to quick draw in a life or death situation. If you wanted to kill someone, you didn't need to wait till High Noon and meet in the middle of the main street!
I 'm sure there were people who practised it and showed off but real gunfighters shot their enemies in the the back or from a long way away using a rifle.
I think revolvers were used more for killing snakes and dogs and hammering in nails when there wasn't a toolbox handy.
2007-04-08 21:13:36 · answer #3 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
True! First motor skills vary in individuals. Secondly, a person would telegraph there intent to draw with body shift. Third, the faster would draw and shoot while the initiator was still clearing leather.
Myth Busters recently had a segment dealing with quick draw and solicited the help of a current quick-draw expert. You could probably find documented evidence on a website of one of the clubs with that orientation.
2007-04-08 14:28:35 · answer #4 · answered by Caretaker 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
More than likely. There were only a very small handful of fast draw gunmen and most of them couldn't hit the side of a barn at forty yards. The fastest and most accurate person of the era, was a gunsmith and he threatened to kill Ned Buntline if mentioned a word of it. The most accurate lawman was Bat Masterson. He drew slow and aimed long, but then he was usually out of range of the gunfighter's weapon.
2007-04-08 14:27:26 · answer #5 · answered by Sophist 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
To (attempt to) answer the question... mebbe you have in mind The Man From Laramie. He had so many notches on his gun everyone admired the fearless stranger. Danger was this man's specialty, there was no coyoot that could outshoot The Man From Laramie.
2007-04-08 17:05:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The old wild west draw is possible with the correct wepon and holster and a lot of practice.
However I doubt if many would have mastered it.
2007-04-08 15:47:05 · answer #7 · answered by Kevan M 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
TRUE.....Not all gunslingers wore holsters but had their pistols tucked in their belts and they could pull out their weapons faster than men that wore holsters. That was not all but the crossdraw was most effective. For a right handed man...he had his gun tucked in his left side in his belt and all he had to do was reach across...draw and point.
2007-04-08 14:55:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
false ...I think they were more likely to sneak up and shoot the other fella in the back in those days.
2007-04-08 14:22:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋