How accurate were the original cowboy shooters? - Page 2

gunsmokeTPF · June 9, 2012, 09:28 PM

Not really knowing for sure, but how accurate were the statistics back then, or did anyone even keep records? As a matter of fact, who kept records back then regarding how much people shot? My guess and it's only a guess would be no one. There were more important things to do unlike today.

Gee, I've always read that gun shops and hardware stores weren't everywhere and that's why pistol and rifle ammo in many cases were compatable. Many back then did their own reloading out of necessity and didn't have the opportunity to just walk into the neihborhood Walmart, or Dick's and buy a few boxes of ammo to just practice with. I'm sure that even those who hunted for their food were afraid to waste ammo. Many did live away from civilization and were forced to hunt in order to eat, as well as defend themselves from the two legged threats they encountered, but these people were few and far between, because the population was very low compared to those who lived in towns.

Today it's not so uncommon to see people regularly going to a range and firing 2, or 300 rounds, or more. I would just be guessing, but I think in the 1800's that would probably be considered unrealistic and unaffordable.

There were expert shots during the Revolutionary War and Civil War as well who made with primitive weapons unbelieveable shots. But as good as Annie Oakley was she used gimmicks like shot in her 22's to make those trick shots. They weren't stupid back then either.

m&p45acp10+1 · June 10, 2012, 10:18 AM

As for shooting with revolvers many did not use the sights on their pistols. They pointed, and shot. It was noted that Jesse James emptied his Scotfield revolver in a bank at a teller, and missed him with all six shots. He then knocked him out by clubbing him over the head with the gun. All the smoke inside of the building made it hard to see more than past the end of the gun itself.

Though there was a case where it was noted that Jesse fired one shot at a man while riding out of town after a bank job, and hit him in the heat dropping him dead on the spot.

Ok now I am off to the range to shoot the Navy .36 today. Last time I shot it I was making decent hits on a B-27 at 100 yards with it. So today I will see if it was just a case of even a blind dog catches a squirrel every now and again.

Hardcase · June 11, 2012, 10:44 AM

For what it's worth, almost all of the pistol shooting done in the Boise Basin area here in Southwest Idaho back in the mid to late 1800s was at close range - not quite spittin' range, but not much more. And most shootings happened in saloons or at mining claims.

After reading Governor McConnell's and John Hailey's histories of the state, I get the impression that gunfights in the area were more common than they might have been because the prevailing wisdom was that if both parties were visibly armed, each could claim self defense. Woe betide, though, the bushwhacker who carried concealed. There was certainly a sense of fair play and hiding one's hogleg was a serious violation.

drayegon · June 15, 2012, 07:27 PM

quote In one saloon fight, two groups of rival ranch hands fired over 200 shots at each other. Result - one dead cat!
Well, the day wasn't a total loss.

I just wanted you to know I have a cat that thinks he is a dog. He is also coal black. I named him Sarge as the only good Sargent' I had in SEA were all black. They kept me from being stupid and getting killed.

One note the shooter today are not a bit better than they were back then. We figured Overseas that it took at least a thousand rounds to drop one bad guy. So much for one shot one kill. I even wound up the time over there as being a sniper. I did shoot more than two. to rub together.

dray

buckhorn · June 16, 2012, 01:12 PM

Back in the 1880's, a gun, holster and ammo, could cost a poor guy a whole month's wages. So, unless they were naturally born good shots [and there were a few] they didn't have money to waste practising. Reloading cartridge ammo wasn't that common back then. They couldn't carry around the equipment needed for one thing, and secondly, they didn't have the slightest idea how to do it. A box of 25 or 50 rounds might have to last a year! Although, Wild Bill shot and emptied his revolvers each morning with his first whisky. But , he was paid considerably better than most people back then. And he used, and continued to use black powder into the cartridge age.

June 9, 2012, 09:28 PM	#26
gunsmokeTPF Junior member Join Date: February 14, 2012 Posts: 268	Not really knowing for sure, but how accurate were the statistics back then, or did anyone even keep records? As a matter of fact, who kept records back then regarding how much people shot? My guess and it's only a guess would be no one. There were more important things to do unlike today. Gee, I've always read that gun shops and hardware stores weren't everywhere and that's why pistol and rifle ammo in many cases were compatable. Many back then did their own reloading out of necessity and didn't have the opportunity to just walk into the neihborhood Walmart, or Dick's and buy a few boxes of ammo to just practice with. I'm sure that even those who hunted for their food were afraid to waste ammo. Many did live away from civilization and were forced to hunt in order to eat, as well as defend themselves from the two legged threats they encountered, but these people were few and far between, because the population was very low compared to those who lived in towns. Today it's not so uncommon to see people regularly going to a range and firing 2, or 300 rounds, or more. I would just be guessing, but I think in the 1800's that would probably be considered unrealistic and unaffordable. There were expert shots during the Revolutionary War and Civil War as well who made with primitive weapons unbelieveable shots. But as good as Annie Oakley was she used gimmicks like shot in her 22's to make those trick shots. They weren't stupid back then either. Last edited by Mike Irwin; June 12, 2012 at 11:26 AM.

June 10, 2012, 10:18 AM	#27
m&p45acp10+1 Senior Member Join Date: May 3, 2009 Location: Central Texas Posts: 3,930	As for shooting with revolvers many did not use the sights on their pistols. They pointed, and shot. It was noted that Jesse James emptied his Scotfield revolver in a bank at a teller, and missed him with all six shots. He then knocked him out by clubbing him over the head with the gun. All the smoke inside of the building made it hard to see more than past the end of the gun itself. Though there was a case where it was noted that Jesse fired one shot at a man while riding out of town after a bank job, and hit him in the heat dropping him dead on the spot. Ok now I am off to the range to shoot the Navy .36 today. Last time I shot it I was making decent hits on a B-27 at 100 yards with it. So today I will see if it was just a case of even a blind dog catches a squirrel every now and again. __________________ No matter how many times you do it and nothing happens it only takes something going wrong one time to kill you.

June 11, 2012, 10:44 AM	#28
Hardcase Senior Member Join Date: April 14, 2009 Location: Sunny Southern Idaho Posts: 1,909	For what it's worth, almost all of the pistol shooting done in the Boise Basin area here in Southwest Idaho back in the mid to late 1800s was at close range - not quite spittin' range, but not much more. And most shootings happened in saloons or at mining claims. After reading Governor McConnell's and John Hailey's histories of the state, I get the impression that gunfights in the area were more common than they might have been because the prevailing wisdom was that if both parties were visibly armed, each could claim self defense. Woe betide, though, the bushwhacker who carried concealed. There was certainly a sense of fair play and hiding one's hogleg was a serious violation. __________________ Well we don't rent pigs and I figure it's better to say it right out front because a man that does like to rent pigs is... he's hard to stop - Gus McCrae

June 15, 2012, 07:27 PM	#29
drayegon Junior Member Join Date: August 11, 2009 Location: Big TePee Posts: 2	SARGE sarge sargE quote In one saloon fight, two groups of rival ranch hands fired over 200 shots at each other. Result - one dead cat! Well, the day wasn't a total loss. I just wanted you to know I have a cat that thinks he is a dog. He is also coal black. I named him Sarge as the only good Sargent' I had in SEA were all black. They kept me from being stupid and getting killed. One note the shooter today are not a bit better than they were back then. We figured Overseas that it took at least a thousand rounds to drop one bad guy. So much for one shot one kill. I even wound up the time over there as being a sniper. I did shoot more than two. to rub together. dray

June 16, 2012, 01:12 PM	#30
buckhorn Senior Member Join Date: May 11, 2012 Location: mid michigan Posts: 196	Back in the 1880's, a gun, holster and ammo, could cost a poor guy a whole month's wages. So, unless they were naturally born good shots [and there were a few] they didn't have money to waste practising. Reloading cartridge ammo wasn't that common back then. They couldn't carry around the equipment needed for one thing, and secondly, they didn't have the slightest idea how to do it. A box of 25 or 50 rounds might have to last a year! Although, Wild Bill shot and emptied his revolvers each morning with his first whisky. But , he was paid considerably better than most people back then. And he used, and continued to use black powder into the cartridge age.