...but let's keep a balanced view of who and what is involved in such illegal activity. It appears, though we lack much real information on them, the Patterson crowd were a bad bunch and got into a lot of thievery.

So because the McLaurys were squatting on a large piece of land nearby and therefore associated with the Pattersons and others by the demands of survival on the frontier, some would instantly lump them together as outlaws. This is really not a fair assessment. In such an environment, treating your neighbour, even if he is a rotten egg, as a neighbour, is a requirement for survival. Now, I am not talking about out of fear of some sort of reprisal; I am talking about survival against the unfriendly elements and unfriendly neighbours like Apaches, ect.

Under such conditions, you turn no man away from your door. You would be considered "little of a man" if you did not offer hospitality regardless of who you might think or know who your visitor is. You mind your own business and ask no questions and life goes on for both of you.

The Clantons and McLaurys and their circle of associates were hard men, but they were never charged with a crime and caused no trouble to others other than a little carousing when drinking too much. That was acceptable conduct among such men, but it was rarely vicious.

The Earps and their connections were a whole different story. Respecting your fellow man was not a deciding factor for them.

Just my daily soap-box entry, thank you!