Surviving Gunshot Wounds In The Old West

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gaucho Gringo

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2006
Messages
1,124
Location
Vancouver, WA
Off and on in different posts it seems like a lot of people think that getting wounded in the wild west with any caliber gun was a death sentence. I am sure a lot of them were but there were a number that weren't. The thing that got me thinking about it was a program on the History Channel yesterday on outlaws. One of the outlaw gangs they covered were the Dalton Gang. They said in the final bank robbery the Dalton's pulled that Emmett Dalton, the only brother that lived suffered 50 gunshot wounds. Granted they must have counted every scrape and scratch he had to get that many, but it still sounds somewhat hard to believe. I am sure that a lot of factors come into play such as the persons general health, the clothing worn, caliber of guns that other people are shooting at you and quality of medical care afterwards. Still I cannot imagine getting shot once let alone 50 times even though I have had a few serious injuries in my life that were on the verge of amputation. Anyone have any comments or thoughts on the subject. Thanks.
 
Even today, doctors have a "formula" of sorts for situations where no one injury is going to kill you, but you get enough of 'em together at once and your odds of survival start looking grim.

A *lot* of it is about how clean the wounds were kept. Also, in an age with few if any hollowpoints, rounds that went through and through were less of an infection risk than rounds that stayed in.
 
Even today, doctors have a "formula" of sorts for situations where no one injury is going to kill you, but you get enough of 'em together at once and your odds of survival start looking grim.

Reminds me of a formula I sorta made up myself. The rule of 30s. An injury, if you don't get to the hospital, will kill you in either 30 seconds, 30 minutes, 30 hours, or 3 days (the one violation of the 30 thing). So if you last 30 seconds, you can most likely count on at least 30 minutes, etc.

Anyway, shot placement and infection were the biggest factors. Most hits in the gut would be a death sentence, as peritonitis would kill you within a few days, if contracted. That's where terms like "yellowbelly" and "lilly-liver" come from; peritonitis turns your guts yellow. It's pretty gross.

Uncomplicated lung shots (no major blood vessels hit) were pretty survivable, however.

Also, the medical treatment you got would be a big factor. Most of it revolved around digging the bullet out, and quite often, doctors did more damage doing that, than the bullet did. Nowadays, doctors know better than to try and get a bullet out no matter what. If it's somewhere really hard to get to, they'll leave it.
 
I thought I saw something on the history channel that said that most of the deaths from wounds in the civil war (where the wound didn't do major damage to organs, etc.) weren't because of the wound itself but because the minnie ball took a piece of the clothing (usually filthy) and drove it inside the body where it festered. I'll see if I can find that . . .seemed pretty logical to me.

FWIW.
 
Not every wound was a death sentance. Take the O.K. Coral, everyone involved, less Waytt Earp and Ike Clanton, were wounded or killed. That including both of Waytt's brothers and Doc Holiday, neither of them died from their wounds that day.

Lack of doctors and distance between them acounted to alot of deaths that could have been saved even back then with medical care of the time. Infection was what would kill most. That's why a .41 rimfire from a derringer to the abmdoman was feared like a .45 Colt to the chest
 
dmftoy1,

Yes, I remember reading about how British sailors/marines during the Napoleonic wars generally regarded having a piece of cloth removed from the body as one of the most excruciating things that could happen to you. If it was left in you would almost certainly die, but removal meant digging around inside you, grabbing hold of the cloth and pulling it out which would abrade the cut flesh and move the lead shot about possibly ripping open new wounds - especially as lead shot back then was not uniform and spherical like it is now, but riddled with sharp ridges and veins.
 
you have to realize that in those days, people got and fought an amazing amount of infections that would kill us today without antibiotics. They lived in a festering stew of infectious agents and it was only the really strong bugs that would kill a healthy person.

If you really want to learn about this, there is a book about the medical practices of the napoleonic wars and the american Civil War that will make you loose your lunch, I can not find it now, but its on a shelf here and I will find it and post it.

There are also descriptions of guys getting killed not by shot or ball, but by the bits and pieces of the surrounding soldiers getting blown into them.
 
The heavy clothing of the time may have also slowed down a soft lead bullet fairly dramaticaly. Also what were typical velocities back then for pistols? If it was fifty shallow wounds, I would think that would be eisier to treat than if they were all very deep.
 
when the ira kneecapped minor criminals they would have the guy drop his pants same reason so no cloth in wound
 
The human body will reject any forign protein, that is, any thing that was once living. Things like metal and glass will not usually cause problems if they are clean. Very often people who are shot with modern jacketed bullets recover with the bullets still inside them because surgery ito remove them is more riskey than just leaving the bullet in. During the Civil war, minie balls were lubricated with beef tallow, lard or other organic based lubricants that once introduced inside the human body, can set up a massive infection.
 
When the James/Younger gang hit Northfield MN, Cole Younger suffered a total of (IIRC) thirteen gunshot wounds, at least two from a .56 caliber Spencer rifle. He survived that, twenty years in prison, and died of old age at, I think, 83(?).
 
Prior to the general adoption of the conical bullet, a great many gunshot woulds were survivable because the roundball tended to push things like intestines out of the way rather than tear through them like the conical bullets would.
The Minnie' ball would also splinter large sections of bone creating the need for amputaion where the roundball would tend to break the same bone allowing for a recoverable wound.
 
actually the cloth tearing away and festering inside the body was a major cause of death before antibiotics. This is why somewhere in history they started using silk shirts as the silk would not tear away a complete hole as cotton would from a musket shot.

The silk threads were stronger and would rip open to one side and remain attached to the shirt as opposed to the cotton that would usually attach itself to the front of the lead shot penetrating into the wound.
 
I found one situation that happened during the War of Northern Aggression very interesting.

AS many have stated, infection was the biggest single reason for post wound deaths.

Cat gut was the common material Used for sutures. The Confederacy had basically run out of Cat gut. They started using horse hair from horses tails and such.

The Horse hair was to stiff to use, and had to be boiled to make it flexible enough. Guess what, they started having a lower number of infections, in the wounds.

Some times, things just work out.

Go figure.

Fred
 
During the Civil war, minie balls were lubricated with beef tallow, lard or other organic based lubricants that once introduced inside the human body, can set up a massive infection.
O.K. who is going to start doing this to the ammo in their ccw? :neener::D O yeah wouldn't dropping the tips of the bullets into rat poison or any other coagulant prevent the body from being able to stop the blood?
 
They said in the final bank robbery the Dalton's pulled that Emmett Dalton, the only brother that lived suffered 50 gunshot wounds.

I bet a bunch were birdshot, so no surprise.

Reminds me of a formula I sorta made up myself. The rule of 30s. An injury, if you don't get to the hospital, will kill you in either 30 seconds, 30 minutes, 30 hours, or 3 days (the one violation of the 30 thing). So if you last 30 seconds, you can most likely count on at least 30 minutes, etc.

So if you last 30 seconds, you will likely last 30 minutes? 30 minutes to 30 hours, 30 hours to 3 days? That would mean that if you last 30 seconds, you will likely last the 3 days, unless you don't.

Paramedics and doctors go by the Golden Hour concept. For major trauma, bleeding, etc. if you can get the patient (alive) to a hospital or proper medical care within an hour of the injury, then the patients chance for survival is supposed to be dramatically higher than for those who arrive in over an hour.
 
A while back I read a story about the last war between the US Cavalry and the Nez Perce. (interesting reading) The story was pieced together from news articles of the times, and interviews with the participants. In it, the main character, a 17-year-old Nez Perce makes the comment that they (the Nez Perce) could never understand why the US soldiers didn't strip down to loincloths before going into battle, as everybody knew that the real dangere from gunshot wounds was the cloth being torn from the fighter's clothing and forced into the body. In that book, "From Where The Sun Now Sets", there is a fairly graphic description of the Nez Perce warriors huddled in the cold, wearing only loincloths, waiting for the battle to begin.
 
The heavy clothing of the time may have also slowed down a soft lead bullet fairly dramaticaly. Also what were typical velocities back then for pistols?

Witness Bill Hickock's killing round fired into Dave Tutt at an estimated distance of about 75 yards. A .36 caliber round ball fired from an 1851 Navy Colt penetrated his heart and dropped him like a bad habit. The ballistics of the .36 Navy was roughly equivalent to a .38 Special target wadcutter....but it did a number on Tutt at a relatively fantastic range.
 
So if you last 30 seconds, you will likely last 30 minutes? 30 minutes to 30 hours, 30 hours to 3 days? That would mean that if you last 30 seconds, you will likely last the 3 days, unless you don't.

Paramedics and doctors go by the Golden Hour concept. For major trauma, bleeding, etc. if you can get the patient (alive) to a hospital or proper medical care within an hour of the injury, then the patients chance for survival is supposed to be dramatically higher than for those who arrive in over an hour.

Sort of like that. Basically an extension of the golden hour thing. Severe bleeding, like an injury to the heart, aorta, etc., will probably kill you within 30 seconds. Somewhat less severe but still life-threatening bleeding, like the liver, a kidney, pelvic fracture, etc., probably about a half hour. Anything where you're not going to bleed to death in under an hour, it'd probably be shock that would kill you. Could last about a day, with good self-treatment. If shock isn't as much of a problem, or if you survive it, then it's infection, dehydration, or exposure, any of which would likely kill you within 3 days.
 
dang someone beat me to it. Silk under shirts were one of the military achievements of the Mongols. When hit with an arrow the silk would mesh with the arrow head and make it easier to remove.

Some humans are just incredible. I am sure you can find cases where someone has survived an ungodly amount of stab wounds. If there is any truth to the account of the assassination of Rasputin then some truly appear superhuman. In the end he died of drowning.
 
chieftain said:
War of Northern Aggression

LOL people actually still call it that? Fort Sumter must have attacked itself.

Seriously, though, soldiers must have been afraid to death of getting wounded on the battlefield.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top