From: goodsoldierschweik@invalid.com
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:52:39 -0500, "deowll" wrote:
>
>"Good Soldier Schweik" wrote in message
>news:vfl8e5hqcjiaqf9c4g6ttfet60id8srgi6@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:54:30 -0500, "deowll" wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"B. Goode" wrote in message
>>>news:f373e55p18jsbkbbmu9p98jg5fru08pbls@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 23:48:36 -0500, "deowll" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"Good Soldier Schweik" wrote in message
>>>>>news:fistd55rvkh9eb6r4cdffnivaeop3fth4l@4ax.com...
>>>>>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 22:36:49 -0500, "deowll" wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Good Soldier Schweik" wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:8ocnd5h41of5qkg9tg8jv5co84tikun41l@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 15:52:05 +0000 (UTC), wrat@panix.com (the wharf
>>>>>>>> rat) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>In article <7jvb1jF3761kfU1@mid.individual.net>,
>>>>>>>>>Del Cecchi wrote:
Much Snipped
>Some years back I read an article about the dueling pistols used in the
>Burr-Hamilton duel. Even though Hamilton owned dueling pistols he borrowed a
>set to use in the duel in which he fired early and was killed. A son of
>Hamilton later met the same fate. The guns ended up I think in the
>Smithsonian. Somebody wanted to make a reproduction set and when examined
>internally it turned out these had adjustable triggers. That is very much a
>no no and since both father and son fired early it sort of looked like they
>might have been messing with the trigger and given themselves to light a
>trigger pull or some such.
If the pistols had "set triggers", and it is very possible that they
did, then the pressure to fire the gun would have been adjustable,
usually with a small screw inside the trigger guard. It is possible to
adjust most of these types of triggers to less then an ounce of
pressure to fire. Very beneficial in a target pistol but likely not
the best thing in a duel.
>Burr challenged and Bur killed a man standing flat footed with an empty gun.
>I can't feel any pity for Hamilton because he had been writing slander under
>a fake name and gotten caught. He most likely did try to kill Burr and
>cheated on top of it.
But Hamilton did fire and from the reports I read say that he did not
deliberately fire into the ground which apparently was the proper
procedure if one wanted to indicate that he did not wish to kill his
opponent.
From all I read it appears that Burr was not condemned for his conduct
during the duel at the time.
>Bowie was fighting for his life against long odds and won. There isn't any
>doubt from any account who attacked whom. The only thing shocking about the
>fight was Bowie won and lived.
>
>Many people already had the same gun that killed Hickok. Many people already
>had the same gun Wyatt used. They were extremely common guns at the time. It
>would be hard to tell if the fights impacted sells
Other then the "Buntline Specials" there seems no contemporary
publicity regarding the type of guns used in the Old West. Modern
legend has it that THE Buffalo Gun was a Sharps when in fact there
were far more single shot Remingtons sold then Sharps.
> but Hickok was shot in
>the back while seated at a table playing cards. That's not exactly the kind
>of thing that attracts hero worship.
>
>As for as most people in the west were concerned if you wanted a hangun you
>bought a colt.
Not necessarily so. Gen. Custer, for example,owned a Remington :-)
>
>> Nope. I believe that my original assertion is the best explanation;
>> that the people who were mass producing knives and exporting to the
>> U.S., seized on the "duel" as an example of the "wild west" and used
>> it to popularize their product.
>>
>Which it did but it wouldn't have worked if Bowie had been killed in that
>fight would it?
Given the wounds that Bowie sustained we should be wondering what kind
of supplements he was taking :-)
>>
>> Schweik
>> (goodsoldierschweikatgmaildotcom)
Cheers,
Schweik
(goodsoldierschweikatgmaildotcom)
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
