...that your responses to me are meant with humorous needling and I have no problem with that. I have a hide like an alligator most of the time.
I approach this whole Tombstone evaluation from a completely different angle which I like to call the 'viewpoint of the man on the street.' I do not claim to be an Historian. I have almost no education to speak of, but I can read. Therefore, when I read something on the subject, I am inclined to question things that do not have the 'ring-of-truth.' I do my best to present my argument by quoting word for word historical records and also apply some logic and reasoning in the equation.
Some of this is based on actual knowledge and experience regarding the way of life on the frontier. My ranch experience comes from living among people who never seemed to leave the time period we are discussing. One of my brothers-in-law worked cattle one day and his horse was charged by a steer, both were shoved into a Mesquite tree, and damage was done. The cowboy did his job; he managed to get back on his horse, work his way back to the ranch, unsaddle the horse, water it, turn it out and then make his way to the house in excruciating pain. He was dead two days later at 21 years old...but he completed his job and took care of his horse.
My own husband died from a punctured lung when the horse he was breaking went through fencing and broke his ribs. Pete was in his mid-seventies. He also did not survive long because he wouldn't take time to go to the hospital.
I am not trying to bore you or whine. I am talking about men who lived lives of hardship and asked for nothing in return but respect. To just assume without actual fact that such people were criminals based on the words of someone like the Earp crowd is not reasonable, nor is it fair. It is biased, something I am often accused of.
All I ask when one disagrees is that they offer some support for their argument. That is helpful to all of us.
Were the ranchers perfect; of course not! They were hardened by the daily needs of survival, something people today do not well understand. So I do resent someone like Mike making such comments about the way I present my argument when he has probably never hand-dug miles of post-holes in the hot sun all day or strung five strands of barbed wire tills his hands were bleeding.
Sitting at a desk with a pile of reference material or at a computer with the same is highly beneficial and needed. But there is more to the lives of the people we examine than printed words on the paper. If Mike or anyone else has disagreements with my opinions, that is good and beneficial in this field. But name-calling because one disagrees is not research or discussion.
There is no reason for Mike to feel frustration as all he has to do is not read what I post! No one is cramming it down his throat. If you feel the need to defend his position because he cannot lower himself to respond to me with dignity and respect then we are dealing with arrogance; not frustration. I am too old and have seen a lot, so I am not impressed by much anymore, but especially not with cocky youngsters!
However, I still look forward to enjoying fun and lively exchanges with others as long as you permit me to and I really am grateful for having the privilege of being allowed to share my viewpoint, thanks to you.
Thank you for letting me sound off!
With respect and appreciation,