Why the First Cowboy To Draw Always Gets Shot 398
cremeglace writes "Have you ever noticed that the first cowboy to draw his gun in a Hollywood Western is invariably the one to get shot? Nobel-winning physicist Niels Bohr did, once arranging mock duels to test the validity of this cinematic curiosity. Researchers have now confirmed that people indeed move faster if they are reacting, rather than acting first."
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:3, Interesting)
Agreed. Someone who draws first would (theoretically) be the one who DIDN'T think they could win, and as such would prolly be a little more nervous than the other guy.
Just my opinion though...my apologies if that is way more stupid than it was in my head.
The mythbusters need to test this! (Score:5, Interesting)
The mythbusters need to test this!
well - YA. Wyatt Earp even said so (Score:2, Interesting)
Before he died, Wyatt Earp was interviewed where he admitted he was no where near the fastest draw - but he pointed out that being accurate with your first shot was by far the most important criteria
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:4, Interesting)
The article says that the first person to draw will be the last one to pull the trigger, but the one reacting (drawing second after seeing the first person draw) will draw and pull the trigger quicker but they are less likely to get a hit.
What's wrong with a blank? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Oblig. (Score:5, Interesting)
It was always the intent of George Lucas to have Luke Skywalker and Obi-Wan ride on Greedo's ship, The Manka Hunter, but Harrison Ford was cheaper than keeping famous actor Paul Blake around (who demanded more money for sitting in a rubber suit most of the day) so he decided to rewrite the script to have Han kill Greedo instead of the other way around.
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:3, Interesting)
They explained that in Unforgiven
Wrter: "But what if he draws first?"
Sheriff: "Then he'll miss. You see, you can only draw, aim, and shoot so fast. Me, this is about as fast as I can draw my gun and hit anything smaller than a barn. The guy that keeps a cool head, he'll come out standing."
There was an interview with someone who'd been in a few gunfights and come out the winner. He said he was not that great of a shot but simply did not panic when he had to shoot someone for real.
You can test out this phenomenon in real life quite easily. Find someone who can consistently sink 3 pointers and tell him the next basket has $25k riding on it. More than likely he'll muff the next shot now that he knows something is riding on it. If he can put that out of his mind and take the next shot like he did the last fifty, your wallet's gong to be lighter.
But if the guy doing the first draw is as calm and collected as you hope to be, you're still likely dead.
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:4, Interesting)
This was my one experience with it in paintball.
It came down to me and one person from the other team.
I and a single shot gun and he had a machinegun. But to be cute, they let him use a second machinegun from a dead person on his side.
I was behind a 3' tree. He was running towards me rambo style with both guns going from his hip.
I *calmly* leaned out one one knee, took aim, and shot him with one shot in the chest from about 25'-30' away and then leaned back behind the tree so some stray ball wouldn't hit me.
He probably fired 10 shots while I took my one but they were all at the tree and over my head and off to my right into the bushes.
I have no gun experience and don't play tons of paintball. And I'm about as big as a barn.
Re:well - YA. Wyatt Earp even said so (Score:4, Interesting)
If you can shoot accurately from the hip. People who participate in quick draw competitions practice this. Otherwise its a wasted shot.
You've also got to size up your opponent. There are times when a first, wild shot will psyche them out, so they'll miss. And then there's your equipment. If you can get multiple shots off fast, a first, low probability shot is worthwhile. You can correct your sight picture and fire again. Old cowboy guns were largely single action pistols. Re-cocking and firing a second time was difficult.
And if your opponent is holding his piece sideways, it means you've got all the time in the world. Because he can't shoot worth shit.
Re:Duel on main street at high noon is a MYTH. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:3, Interesting)
Chances are you'll encounter a thug or a psychopath who is a combat veteran of many firefights.
Huh? Got a citation for that or are you just making assumptions? Most criminals aren't "combat veterans". They rely on intimidation and fear to get what they want. When confronted with someone who has the means and will to fight back they will usually run away.
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:3, Interesting)
That's nothing, the guys at Myth-busters lit a match [aol.com] by shooting a bullet that just barely grazed the top of it. I'd like to see someone do that shooting from the hip!
Re:In movies, it's a Morality lesson (Score:3, Interesting)
I always thought it was because if the guy who drew first usually won, then there'd be no point to those dramatic stand-offs where everyone waits for someone else to draw. They'd just be giving the other guys a chance to kill them. The bad guy would draw immediately.
And only sometimes is it implied that the good guy wouldn't draw first. It's just there's the stand off that has to happen.
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:3, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:5, Interesting)
A bunch of buddies of mine played paintball in the woods, and after months of nagging I bought some cheap used equipment and joined them. My buddies were high school jocks, and one of the guys they played with had been in the army. The army guy sized me up and made a snide comment, and when they picked teams I was picked last and ended up on the team opposite him. That very first game I personally knocked their entire team out.
In the months that followed I played with them many weekends, and everyone soon acknowledged that I was the deadliest player there. I has shot real guns previously I was as accurate a shot as I could be with my cheap paintball marker. More importantly I have read a lot of WW2 books and I have played a lot of first person shooter games and I had a good layman's understanding about suppressing fire and flanking. Often I would let the rest of my team rush in first to draw fire while I moved around the edge a bit to study the other team's positions. Many of my kills were a single shot from the side or from behind at very close range while the target was otherwise distracted. Even when a match was down to one on one, once I got the opponent to duck behind cover I could approach their position obliquely, keeping him suppressed with bursts of fire, until I had the angle to get in a kill shot.
Then one weekend came where a bunch of serious "speedball" players joined us. My tactics weren't any good against them, because they could not be suppressed. They would use cover VERY well. They knew to return fire regardless of being under fire, exposing only the nose of their gun and just enough mask to get one eye down the sight. They were vigilant about constantly scanning for movement, so I could not flank them without running through a hail of paint balls first. Their expensive guns had long range were very accurate. That day was humbling.
In martial arts too... (Score:1, Interesting)
Good to know that it's been scientifically proven but in martial arts it's been well-known since a long time and there are even martial artists who master (?) the art (pun ?) of striking first faking a reaction: you picture your opponent attacking first even tough it's not true and you hence create a "fake" reaction which enhance your striking speed. Casus clay was doing that. Lot's of chinese Kung-Fu practionners do it too. It requires skills but it works.
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:3, Interesting)
Oops. Was rushed and didn't read the previous post all the way thorough. This was addressed. But it didn't get it quite right - it had the Chinese below the Irish. In fact in the old west the Irish WERE below the Chinese - and most of the Indians (depending on tribe, location, period, rank, and individual merit - many American Indians were quite high status).
As I understand it (from my wife, a descendant of the settlers), the issue was that the Irish immigration wave was perceived as a very large number of extremely poor religious fanatics who took over the local governments and imposed their religion by law. Thus were seen as a threat to the freedom of those around them. (Much of Oregon, for instance, was settled by people who moved en masse from Boston, after a government driven by the Irish instituted pro-Catholic religious persecution and book censorship - in that former bastion of revolutionary freedom.)
Think of how, say, the Wahabis are viewed now by the intolerant. Now imagine their poorest, driven by famine, immigrating in large numbers, setting up ghetto gangs and staging gang warfare, then flooding a major east-coast city with enough to vote in the next city council, passing a Wahabi-style version of Islamic Law as a city ordinance (including anti-"blasphemy" laws and a censorship board that purges both religious books - including bible versions - they don't agree with and "pornographic" books they don't like), followed by mobs burning the publishers of such books and chasing women who didn't cover their hair when going to church. Then a bunch of them are hired as cheap labor by a major corporation and start showing up in YOUR neighborhood, taking all the industrial jobs and flooding the downtown. Now switch the image of the typical individual from a thin ascetic to a big, strong, alcoholic, street-mob brawler. THAT is how the Irish were perceived.
Action focuses the eye on the target. (Score:3, Interesting)
The one who moves first is 'moving' (in place). That bit of action focuses the eye of a responder and gives them a better visual target than the first guy has. If you stand absolutely still when someone shoots you, you don't present as good a target as if you are moving your arms or making some motion (but not large enough motion that it would throw off the other person's perspective of your center of target.
It's like bull fighting -- if you stand still with the red-cape, the bull may or may not go at you or the cape. But if you wave the red cape, the bull goes after the target that is moving.
Our visual system is designed to pick up *differences* faster than 'sameness'. The motion of drawing the gun would often generate a 'difference' in an opponent's visual field, thus providing a better target.
At least that's my observations....I suppose I could read the article, but they are just researchers.
What do they know? :-)
-l
Having relatives in law enforcement (Score:4, Interesting)
I have cop relatives. On more than one occasion, I've heard said that police are trained not to draw their weapon unless they intend to use it.
And when you think about it, it makes little sense for an officer to draw a gun and make an armed criminal *more* nervous. That is, unless he intends to put a bullet in the criminal.
Think about the typical cop-criminal standoff in the movies. Both point their guns at the other, but no one fires. Why?
In short, a cop gains no tactical or situational advantage by drawing his weapon but not firing. In real life, the movie standoff doesn't end with the criminal laying down his gun; it usually ends up much worse.
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:4, Interesting)
Even shots to the head don't necessarily stop unless you've taken out some part of the brain
There was a Japanese fighter pilot [wikipedia.org] in WW2. He mistook a torpedo bomber (from the USS Enterprise no less) as a fighter. He walked right into the line of fire of both rear gunners and took a .30-06 to the head. It blinded him in one eye and paralyzed half his body but he still managed to fly his plane home and land it in one piece.
Never underestimate what the human body is capable of.
Re:Unforgivable! (Score:1, Interesting)
From experience, I can say you are missing one vital thing. Projectile mass. A .50 bullet will knock you the fuck down, especially if it hits bone. I've seen 5.56 tear someone up inside, and 7.62 go straight through someone, and slugs go through a door and still knock someone down. Also another way that stops someone is if they get shot in the leg or ankle. When you're knee is in 5 different places your not getting up no matter how much pcp or andrenaline you're taking. And lastly, on a similar not is the nervous system disabling. The "soft triangle" of tissue formed by the mouth and eyes, if you can actually hit the spot, is pretty much a sure thing. The skull is harder than you think and can minimize trauma surprisingly well sometimes. I used to work in anti-terrorism.