I really liked this movie a lot, between the women doing what they had to do (just as in WWII) and still wanting to enjoy being female when circumstances allowed. However, I could never believe the scenes,where after the men left, that they had all this shooting practice. Back in those days, ammo was very precious and would not have been wasted in this manner.
shareI did not find it hard to believe that the women would have used powder and shot to practice shooting. After all, regardless of whether there were men on the train or not, they would have needed ammunition for hunting and protection. Also, they were probably carrying, not only wives, but also supplies for the men back in California.
Spin
In those days they would've either been using muzzle-loaders, OR if we accept the cartridge guns, they would've collected their empty brass and reloaded it for further use. Very little waste would result, either way.
"It ain't dying I'm talking about, it's living!!!"
Augustus McCrae
Considering the situation they were in, it was a good idea that the women learned how to shoot. If they hadn't, the Indian attacks would have ended alot worse then they did.
Trouble is - as alluded to by the OP - there was a finite amount of ammunition, whether in cartridge form or bulk black powder and lead shot. All the ammo consumed in the extended practice session probably represented half a dozen Indian encounters that they'd have had to fight with sticks and stones, since they'd have been out of ammunition. Very unrealistic - or monumentally foolish, at least.
shareWell in real life the probability of having even one battle with hostile Indians would be low, so the probability that they used up so much ammo they would have to fight half a dozen fights with sticks and stones would be very low.
shareI thought the very same thing! But then i remembered, they could just collect the bullets and recast them.
shareWhen I saw that scene in the movie, I wondered about the ammo too. I agreed all the women needed to know how to shoot but how much ammo could they have brought with them and wouldn't the men have taken some of it?
Here's the question: is it better to save ammo and have fewer people who are able to shoot or have more and better shooters and less ammo? That's a hard choice to make but it's the decision people in their position would have had to make.
I would have done the same thing. I think the better the women were at shooting the guns the more likely they'd hit their target and in fewer shots. In the end, they'd use less ammo than if they hadn't been given lessons. Even if they didn't become expert shots, the lessons helped the women get accustomed to handling the guns before they actually had to use them. That alone was worth the cost of ammunition. Being comfortable with guns and knowing how to use them are things they women will need to do anyway where they're going to be living.
Woman, man! That's the way it should be Tarzan. [Tarzan and his mate]
Back in those days, ammo was very precious and would not have been wasted in this manner