Three shot, Wild West reenactment

[billwatson2]

It's not us, but odds are it will affect us. Three shot. (http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_3d550fbc-9bce-11e0-be99-001cc4c03286.html)

Just for your information, because of all the posts in the past month about firearm safety in reenacting. Note how carefully the Rapid City Journal phrased things: "Lead fragments," not bullets, etc. They are leaving room for this to have been something other than Wild West reenactor error with live ammo. I picked a link to the closest newspaper to the event, rather than a wire service story. You can definitely sense the consternation this is causing in a community dependent on tourism.

[flattop32355]

There's a national Reenactors Guild of America????? How about that.

Nice to see that the authorities in charge aren't jumping the gun (no pun intended) with possibilities and speculation, but following through on finding out just what did happen before making definitive statements as to guilt and innocence; something that some in this hobby need to learn.

[billwatson2]

It pays to be cautious. Remember the fellow shot in the jewels a few years back? And it turned out, as I recall, to be from a modern .22? That may have been one of several things, but it wasn't reenactor accidental error.

[billwatson2]

Yes. Reenactors Guild of America (http://www.rgamerica.org/Bylaws.htm). "Old West".

[billwatson2]

Speaking of national groups: An incipient group with potential. Note the emphasis on accurate history.

National Society of Living Historians. (http://www.nationalsocietyoflivinghistorians.com/about_us)

[hanktrent]

Speaking of national groups: An incipient group with potential. Note the emphasis on accurate history.

National Society of Living Historians. (http://www.nationalsocietyoflivinghistorians.com/about_us)

Since they're located in my state, I'd have a genuine interest in this if it seemed to be offering an island of better accuracy within local mainstream events.

What kind of potential or accuracy do you mean? The 2011 schedule is just a list of typical mainstream events, fashion shows, big Saturday night suppers, etc. and there seem to be no accuracy standards whatsoever for the group itself, other than hide your cooler, pop and plastic bags during the day (code of conduct page).

For example, here's (http://www.nationalsocietyoflivinghistorians.com/ordinary_history_extraordinary_women_2011_registra tion)an event they're accepting registrations for that's within a few hours of my wife and me. I see no accuracy standards or safety standards mentioned at all.

As far as safety, the code of conduct page says, "Members bearing weapons agree to attend a weapon safety course pertaining to their weapon. Members must be at least 16 years of age and have their weapons cleaned and checked at each event." That's good, of course, but it has no specifics.

Guess I'm not seeing what you're seeing. :confused:

Hank Trent
hanktrent@gmail.com

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

Beauty is on the eye of the beholder.

IMHO, and experience, "they" are the result of what happens when "mainstream" folks apply labels to themselves and so reenactors become living historians, living historians become experiential anthropologists, experiential anthropologists become experimental archeologists ALL without a mutually agreed upon definition or consensus as to use, denotation, connotation, standards, activities, or events.

"Eras we currently have represented: Roman, Medieval Europe, American Revolutionary War, Frontiersmen, Native American Indians, War of 1812, Regency, Civil War, Pioneers, “Wild West”, WW I, Roaring 20s, WW II, 1980s. "

Not being negative, critical, or knocking their vision or efforts.

CHS
Who knows folks who refer to themselves as "living historians" because they put on a costume to attend a gun show becasue that is "living history"

[Blair]

Here is a perception, that tends to get lost within many of the reenacting communities today. (Historical time periods are not specifically irrelevant.)

Do not forget that these are 'real' firearms! Or, in some cases, non arms made to act like real firearms. (but that is another issue!)

There are several Organizations that have worked very hard at setting up rules of conduct that set and/or establish various guidelines regarding safety in the usage of these 'real' firearms.
Most of these are based off of the obvious dangers of "live" shooting projectiles.
A good educational/teaching program established within the live fire community can and does aid immensely in the promotion of safe handling and usage of "BLANK" firing procedures within reenacting too.
For one reason or another, many of these procedures are deemed either not "accurately or authentically" sufficient, or very controversial based on the historical documentation. Again, we tend to forget within the historical context... they were trying to cause harm to one another by shooting "live" back and fourth at one another.
I don't think for a moment that anyone is actually wishing this type of an immersion experience. So, why not make the adjustments to the historical documentation that allow for the safe usage and handling of "BLANK" base on the live fire Organizations?
The ACW reenacting community does not seem to be able to do this. Perhaps, because there is NO 'real' organization to speak of?

Not meaning to be negative... it just seems to be the nature of the beast, from my observations.

[billwatson2]

Hank: I don't disagree with the assessment, it's why I p ut "incipient" ahead of the nouns. :-) They are starting on a journey, I think. How many reenactors would find this a step forward from what they do toward what you do? Here's a group that declares accuracy to be valuable. Compared to the number of groups who attach no value at all to accuracy, and to the many people who have adopted some kind of neo-history or "whatever I feel is right is true history," these folks are evolving. No big deal, just remembered them when backtracking to see if anyone had started a bonafide national organization for Civil War reenactors.

[hanktrent]

Here's a group that declares accuracy to be valuable. Compared to the number of groups who attach no value at all to accuracy, and to the many people who have adopted some kind of neo-history or "whatever I feel is right is true history," these folks are evolving.

For what it's worth, I've met very few reenactors who say that accuracy isn't valuable. It doesn't seem to be much of a litmus test.

Since this is a thread primarily about safety, their requirement that "Members bearing weapons agree to attend a weapon safety course pertaining to their weapon," seems like a good one. Are there such things? If most units and/or events made that a requirement, how would a reenactor find such a course? Is there a database or something? I have no idea, since I don't usually carry a firearm at events, and edged weapon consensus at reenactments seems to be not even on the radar, other than rules about bayonets.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@gmail.com

[sultan]

I live only a few mile's away from hill city. The reenactor's I saw there where safe,responsible people.

[RJSamp]

"Members bearing weapons agree to attend a weapon safety course pertaining to their weapon," seems like a good one. Are there such things?

Yes. Hunter Safety courses, firearms safety courses, etc. Riflery merit badge. There might even be a blackpowder gun course.

Unfortunately they all start out with treat every weapon as if it is loaded at all times and do not aim directly at something as it might get killed....

[hanktrent]

"Members bearing weapons agree to attend a weapon safety course pertaining to their weapon," seems like a good one. Are there such things?

Yes. Hunter Safety courses, firearms safety courses, etc. Riflery merit badge. There might even be a blackpowder gun course.

Unfortunately they all start out with treat every weapon as if it is loaded at all times and do not aim directly at something as it might get killed....

Aside from the problems you note in that last sentence... :)

The hunter safety, riflery merit badges, etc. that you mention wouldn't apply. The directive is to attend a course "pertaining to their weapon." You say there might even be a blackpowder course, but that's actually the only one that would apply.

For fun, I looked at some sample questions (http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/Home/HuntingandTrappingSubhomePage/Hunter_Trapper_Certification_tool/takesampletest/tabid/18573/Default.aspx) from the generic Ohio hunter safety course. "You should unload your gun before crossing a fence, climbing a tree, or crossing over a stream or log." I marked it true and was correct, but in our world it would be uncap, not pull the ball. Not weapon-specific.

This true-false one was funny, though: "When participating in a deer drive, as a driver, it is safe to shoot at a deer running away from you towards the standers, as they will be well hidden and will know to stay out of the way of any shots you fire."

But I think a course to learn how to safely handle the types of weapons reenactors use, let alone do what we do--fire blanks in the general direction of people--is going to be very hard to find.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@gmail.com

[RJSamp]

Tom Smith (USV's) had a big booklet about weapons safety that was for ACW reenactors and weapons specifically.....

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

Isn't this ultimately rhetorical questions in an inane discussion?

;) :)

If the first four "rules" of firearm safety are:

1. Guns are always loaded
2. Never aim at anything you do not intend to shoot
3. Never shoot anything you do not want to kill
4. Be sure of your target and background before you fire

ALL go out the window or down the toilet when it comes to reenacting where we point firearms at one another at relatively close ranges and fire blanks at one another simulating pretend death and destruction for hobby.

IMHO, the serious side to this, AND the elephant in the room next to the 800 pound gorilla, is that we...

Lack any kind of training, licensing, or authoratative empowered body to deal with teh establishment of standards, education, monitoring, and enforcement.
Instead we allow anyone to show up with a CW reproduction weapon with a trusting set of hopes that that person is mature, of sound judgment and thought, firearm educated, self-disciplined, and regulated by a series of informal expectations and actual practices of weapon safety and inspection at the individual, unit, or event levels.

Yeah...

We are blessed by the gods of reenacitng that our mistakes, errors, non-accidents, and true accidents.... are very few "per capita" and the exceptions rather than the rules.

Others' heresies, and mileage, will vary...

CHS
We have done really well, to have done so really well with weapons Mess

And who has seen "Wild West" street shoot-outs done as street-theatre entertainment for tourists and spectators that have no bearing or basis in any actual History other than the history of Hollywood/TV.

[Ala-Sippi Rifle]

I have followed this post here on the forum and also on Facebook closely and have read some very good points on both. I am but a humble country bumpkin and the answer maybe lost on me, but in all the years our little hobby has gone on why hasn't a governing body ever been established to regulate and enforce safety protocol procedures? I mean in amateur sports there are rules and regulations one must still adhere to. Surely as knowledgeable as many are in such matters within the reenacting community a set of standard safety regulations could be done in such a way that everyone could agree upon following.

[RJSamp]

Hallo!

Instead we allow anyone to show up with a CW reproduction weapon with a trusting set of hopes that that person is mature, of sound judgment and thought, firearm educated, self-disciplined, and regulated by a series of informal expectations and actual practices of weapon safety and inspection at the individual, unit, or event levels.

To add: sober, rested, focused, hydrated, healthy, fit, emotionally stable as far as being of the moment and not carried away......

[flattop32355]

Surely as knowledgeable as many are in such matters within the reenacting community a set of standard safety regulations could be done in such a way that everyone could agree upon following.

Wanna bet on that?

[Rob Weaver]

Hey! I'm back! The Internet gods have allowed me into the site again!!!
I took the Pennsylvania Hunter's Safety Course in 1973. My daughter took it in 2003. There's not much about black powder or muzzleloading in it at all. However, it was a good starting point for gun safety of all kinds. I've been a safe reenactor all those years and I think early learning was important.
If you're taught to treat every gun as real, and loaded, that becomes the default setting. If I'm tempted to do something stupid, I remember rule #1 and hold my fire.
I don't think a gun specific course is possible, just given the plethora of firearms types, but I do think a HSC is a good start point. (I think it's a good start point for minors bearing arms, too.)

[billwatson2]

Jason,

The same personality traits that permit us to dress up in funny clothes and take part in activities most people find pointless, lame, inappropriate, immature, and either silly or dangerous work in tandem on another track to make us suspicious of any organization or activity smacking of coercion, no matter how sensible. That is not universally true, of course, but it is true often enough to explain why there really isn't any national organization for reenactors for standards, lobbying, agenda, or safety. Look at it this way: How many reenactors do you know who would say "They'll take away the coon bone from my hat when they pry it from my cold, dead hands" ? Sorry for that mental image, but really, this is a hobby with few parallels in terms of mistrust of authority and conviction that any authority granted to anyone will soon be abused. We are more like people released from an asylum for the whimsical and the mildly paranoid than, say, model railroaders, golfers, or dog show enthusiasts. :-)

[billwatson2]

Update on shootings. (http://www.kotatv.com/story/14956118/police-unable-to-locate-key-evidence-in-hill-city-shootout) Police can't seem to find projectiles, although I thought earlier reports said metal was removed from some of the wounds.

[billwatson2]

Our problems with weapons stem partly from using them for art, not their intended functional use. Art may not be the right word, but what we do on the field is a kind of theater. Nobody expects to go to a movie where actors point their guns at the sky. And even in movies, where they often have someone on the staff who does nothing but nag people about safety of all the action and stunts, the inherent dangerous nature of even unloaded weapons has caused at least two fatalities when people without enough knowledge thought a weapon loaded with blanks wouldn't hurt them if they fired it against their skull. I think of that every time I see a reenactor with his hands folded over the muzzle. I solved the cavalier amateur attitude toward weapons when I did Boy Scout merit badges by, as the first act of training, blowing apart a rotten stump with a 12-gauge shotgun. I've seen reenactment groups take the same approach by shooting a piece of meat with just black powder at very close range, for the edification of the careless and ignorant; of course beef was a lot cheaper then.
What we do is in part innately dangerous. We accept that, if we think about it at all. Wounding the spectators, however, is just not going to be good marketing.

[Regular3]

The closest thing to a black powder safety course that I know of is the one-day NPS familiarization and safety course, which once upon a time was required before we were allowed to fire on NPS property.

Many of our members took it when the rangers at Fort Washington offered it, but that was practically another lifetime ago and those rangers have retired or otherwise moved on and I'm not aware that any of the other parks in this area (Fort Washington, Manassas, Harpers Ferry, Antietam) have anyone willing or qualified to teach it. So we do our best to pass it on to our fresh fish, but it's not the same as being a card-carrying "graduate" of a class taught by a certified instructor.

[indguard]

I have followed this post here on the forum and also on Facebook closely and have read some very good points on both. I am but a humble country bumpkin and the answer maybe lost on me, but in all the years our little hobby has gone on why hasn't a governing body ever been established to regulate and enforce safety protocol procedures? I mean in amateur sports there are rules and regulations one must still adhere to. Surely as knowledgeable as many are in such matters within the reenacting community a set of standard safety regulations could be done in such a way that everyone could agree upon following.

I think most CW reenactors would not be disposed to allow some outside group start dictating what they do, safety or not. In fact, its one of the few that haven't. The WWII guys, the Rev War Guys... many of these other eras have nation-wide organizations that govern events. Civil War reenactors have always rejected that culture, though.

WTH

[Blair]

Indguard,

Very interesting concept.
However, what begs to be answered is;
What is it within the CW reenacting culture that would cause them (reenacters) to reject issues of firearms safety?
Is it all based solely on accurate/authenticity?
Or, does common since have any room for play in this game of ACW reenacting?

[billwatson2]

Blair,

Rejecting a national organization is different from rejecting issues of firearms safety. If you make them the same issue, you confuse the issue.

[hanktrent]

Blair,

Rejecting a national organization is different from rejecting issues of firearms safety. If you make them the same issue, you confuse the issue.

Excellent point. In fact, I think one thing which would turn reenactors off from a national organization very quickly, is if the organization was presented with the attitude of: join us or you're unsafe with firearms. It sounds too much like bullying.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@gmail.com

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

"Civil War reenactors have always rejected that culture, though."

Quite true.

I understand the culture, and have lived within and without it for decades. But still have to ponder, beyond the territories, the turfs, the personalities, the egos, the meglomaniacs, the politicians, the idiots, the knaives, etc., etc., as to why not? (A Rhetorical Question requiring no answer..)

:)

CHS

We reject your culture, and substitute our own. Er, we reject your reality and substitute are own. :) :) :)
Er, we are Borg. You will be assimilated. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.

[billwatson2]

It may be rhetorical, but it might have something to do with a bunch of fellows who fear loss of their ability to do, literally, whatever the heck they want in the name of their own version of history, from coon bones to Confederate recidivism. It might have to do with rejection of boring old fact-based reality and the wonderful attraction of perception-based reality. National societies for, say, engineers have an annoying habit of wanting engineers to qualify in engineering before they are accepted as members and get the credibility that goes with having their qualifications certified by a national society. What if that applied to reenacting? We have people who will, right now, suggest that any national organization basing its certification on reality would be the tool of somebody with an agenda, because we have people in the ranks who deny reality, grey and blue alike. To some extent this war is still being fought by people who seek to write history for their own agenda; setting up a national fact-based organization means a lot of folks wouldn't be certifiably historic. It is very very odd to find people who claim to be advocates of history taking a post-modernist kind of approach in which they say history is anything they say it is, but here we all are 50 years after the first of the modern reenactments with a hobby that mirrors the national diversity of opinion the day before John Brown's raid polarized everything to the point where there really were two sides instead of 40 positions across a range of issues. It is quite amazing.

[Rob Weaver]

In addition, umbrella organizations can and do get hidebound and change-resistant. The benefits of national organizations end up being weighed against the risks of ossified leadership and outmoded philosophy. Reenacting is, after all, a hobby, not a profession where a union or association can largely monopolize the participant base. About 20 years ago, there was a safety issue that caused Revolutionary War units to circle the wagons briefly. The effort didn't last however. I'm not sure it should.

[Mint Julep]

It pays to be cautious. Remember the fellow shot in the jewels a few years back? And it turned out, as I recall, to be from a modern .22? That may have been one of several things, but it wasn't reenactor accidental error.

Bill,

As I recall, no bullet was ever recovered and the size and shape of the wounds were such that it was impossible to tell what hit him. I've long suspected that a loaded musket was put at "ground arms", a pebble got in the barrel and when the musket went off ... the pebble became the projectile.

[indguard]

It may be rhetorical, but it might have something to do with a bunch of fellows who fear loss of their ability to do, literally, whatever the heck they want in the name of their own version of history...

Unfortunately, your lament wouldn't likely change if some national organization suddenly rose up to take iron-fisted control of all of CW events across the nation. It would go from a bunch of guys arranging their hobby "to do, literally, whatever the heck they want" to a national organization run by a handful of guys determined "to do, literally, whatever the heck they want."

It IS human nature, after all.

WTH

[billwatson2]

True enough, however that was an observation from me, not a lament. If things ever get to the point where I can't plausibly convince people not all reenactors are "like that," whatever it is at that moment, I'll simply adapt Hank's philosophy and not draw attention to the fact I'm a reenactor. Or I'll go find a rocking chair on the porch and watch from a distance. :-)

Thank you Mint Julep. The point at which I stopped following that controversy was the phase where everyone denied that a period weapon was involved. Things move on whether I'm paying attention or not.