"The Pistol as a Weapon of Defence..." 1875

1
Just found this one in a library catalog. Unfortunately I can't check out the book (it's in a special collection). I then did the next best thing and I checked Google to see if it was out there...and lo and behold...

"The Pistol as a Weapon of Defence In the House And On The Road. How to choose it and how to use it.", 1875.
http://books.google.com/books?id=pfMWAA ... &q&f=false

Xela
"We are all born mad. Some remain so." Waiting for Godot

"...as soon as there is language, generality has entered the scene..." Derrida

Re: "The Pistol as a Weapon of Defence..." 1875

2
Hey Mark move this to book reviews.
. Assuming that our pistol is a good one, and that we are able, without taking deliberate aim, to strike a five-inch ring every time at a distance of ten paces, we are tolerably safe if we know where to send the bullets.
Huh, sounds like an IDPA meet.

Undoubtedly the place in which a missile will ordinarily prove most effective is the chest, and the most judicious aim is that taken at the portion of the body ordinarily covered by the exposed part of the shirt bosom. A bullet planted there can hardly fail to lacerate some of the great blood-vessels and shock the nervous system. Those who have seen a cat, a dog or a deer struck behind the fore shoulder, the direction of the bullet being forward, must have noted how quickly paralysis and death ensue in such cases. This, therefore, we regard as the most instantly fatal wound that can be inflicted, except perhaps a shot through the brain; but as we have previously remarked, 50

HOW TO USE THE PISTOL.
A wound inflicted in the chest is almost always fatal. Is there no way of disabling our assailant without killing him? There may be, and yet we can think of no really effective wound which does not involve this risk. Perhaps a wound in the shoulder would be least dangerous and most likely to disable, but in order to inflict a wound which will disable without killing, we must be very expert in the use of the weapon. If we can shatter a large bone, the enemy will be placed hors du combat very effectually, but this requires close calculation, and even under the most favorable circumstances we run great risk of cutting a large artery, an accident which will probably prove fatal. It may be noted in this connection that there is in general least danger of cutting an artery when the shot passes outside the central line of -the limb. The large arteries run on the inside.
And he reads like Sanow.... I wonder how much affect this guy had on all the modern authors...
It is evident that in making shots of this kind we have no tim to look along the barrel and bring the sights into line. The aim must be taken in the same way that the boy throws a stone, or the wood-chopper strikes the exact spot where it is necessary that the axe should fall. How is this done ? Simply by steadily fixing the sight on the object (not on the weapon), bringing the pistol quickly up, and firing the moment hand and eye both tell us that it is in proper position. This requires practice, but it is an art that is not nearly so difficult to acquire as would at first appear. Almost every man is in the habit of performing operations which require the exercise of the same faculties that are here brought into play. The following remarks, taken from the well known little book, " Shooting on the Wing,"* though intended to apply to the use of shot-guns, are so clearly to the point that we cannot forbear to quote them.

" The truth is that the great secret of success lies in perfect sympathy between the eye and the hand. The archer does not shut one eye and look along the arrow when he wishes to strike a mark, and yet many savage nations are so expert with the bow that they kill small animals when running, and even bring down little birds on the wing with this weapon. Vafilant informs us that the boors in the neighborhood of the Cape of Good Hope, when following the plow, are frequently accompanied by numbers of small birds, that pick up the worms and grubs thus exposed to view, and so dexterous are these men with their long whips, that any of the little fluttering objects to which their attention is directed, will be struck by them with the greatest nicety possible. In doing this they

*" Plain Directions for Acquiring the Art of Shooting on the Wing." By an Old Gamekeeper. New York: Industrial Publication Company.

never shut one eye. Neither does the carpenter when lie drives a nail, or the blacksmith as he swings the ponderous hammer. The fly-fisher, when he casts his fly lightly to the very spot where the trout lies, does it with both eyes open; and those who, at base ba 1, try to catch or strike a ball, never shut one eye. All these are cases of sympathy between eye, hand and finger. That this may exist in very great perfection when only one eye is used is undoubtedly true, but those who have to learn from the beginning had better learn with both eyes open.

EDIT

Damn I am reading this whole book, this guy is good! In Sanow's book there's a section on black powder for self defense, and they come to a surprising conclusion, that the old-fashioned lead ball is the most effective ammo. The reason is the sphere as a geometric shape has the lowest ratio of cross sectional area to weight, so the bullet acts more like a hollow point and gives up it's energy in the body, and in addition the round shape tends to change direction and follow a longer path through tissue, destroying more stuff. Guess which one this guy recommends?
When only cops have guns, it's called a police state.
I carry due to toxic masculinity.......just other people's.

Re: "The Pistol as a Weapon of Defence..." 1875

3
I tried looking for the author of the book, and I haven't found it yet.

I did find a paper saying that the "gun industry put out a little book..."

"To remain profitable and successful, the gun makers promoted the handgun as essential to personal protection in the modern urban envi- ronment. In 1875 the gun industry put out a little book titled The Pistol as a Weapon of Defence in Its Home and on the Road. This work praised the pistol as an equalizer that "renders mere physical strength of no account, and enables the weak and delicate to successfully resist the attacks of the strong and brutal." The book optimistically did not consider the possibility that the gun could be used for attack as well as defense and baldly stated that "there can be no objections to it [a pistol] on moral or prudential grounds" (The Pistol as a Weapon of Defence 1875)."

Guess the author? Michael Bellsiles of "Arming America" fame. If you have access to JSTOR, the article can be found here: Crime and Justice, Vol. 28 (2001), pp. 137-195. Published by: The University of Chicago PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1147674.

Xela
"We are all born mad. Some remain so." Waiting for Godot

"...as soon as there is language, generality has entered the scene..." Derrida

Re: "The Pistol as a Weapon of Defence..." 1875

6
samspade wrote:It is amazing that in 1875 they were teaching combat shooting. Everyone thinks that they are the generation that has the know, but then you find out some guy was doing it a hundred years before the same year you graduated.
Glad you enjoyed the reading :)

I also think it's quite a treasure.

In my 10+ years that I have been gathering gun books, I've never read one single reference to this source.

Xela
"We are all born mad. Some remain so." Waiting for Godot

"...as soon as there is language, generality has entered the scene..." Derrida

Re: "The Pistol as a Weapon of Defence..." 1875

9
Simmer down wrote:You can read the Forward by clicking on the "Take a Look on the Inside"
Ding-ding-ding!!!

Thanks Simmer Down.

They only omit the first page of the Forward, I was expecting most of it would be missing, that's why I didn't bother looking there.

True to form and style, the Colonel keeps it short, and throws the royal "we". I honestly thought he was going to say more given the historic significance of the document/pamphlet. I doubt I missed anything from the missing first page of his Foreword...but I remain a bit curious.

Thanks again,

Xela
"We are all born mad. Some remain so." Waiting for Godot

"...as soon as there is language, generality has entered the scene..." Derrida

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest