Recently I read about Charles Dickinson, and his death on a duel with Andrew Jackson (then a general, later a US President). According to this link, Jackson killed him in a breach of dueling etiquette
Jackson received Dickinson's first bullet in the chest next to his heart. Jackson put his hand over the wound to staunch the flow of blood and stayed standing long enough to fire his gun. Dickinson's seconds claimed Jackson's first shot misfired, which would have meant the duel was over, but, in a breach of etiquette, Jackson re-cocked the gun and shot again, this time killing his opponent.
While according to Wikipedia it is generally acceptable, although the locals didn't like this:
Locals were outraged that Dickinson had to stand defenseless while Jackson re-cocked and shot him, even though it was acceptable behavior in a duel (my emphasis). Jackson could have shot in the air or shot only to injure Dickinson; this would have been considered sufficient satisfaction under dueling rules.
Was this an acceptable behaviour according to duelling customs at that time? If yes, why did the locals complain about it? If no, why didn't Dickinson's second do something about it?