Firearms experts who say; ?I can't do it so it can't be done?, cannot be trusted

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

Seems you're the one still watching kiddie shows

Things are never what they seem, for example, it appears to you LHO is guilty but the problem you have is no evidence to support your stupid idea

[John Iacoletti]

It also staggers belief that no Marine could be found who could hit such a target 2 out of 3 times. Particularly since Michael Yardley was able to do so 16 out of 16 times.

Yardley shot at watermelons from a scaffold and then took "shots" in Dealey Plaza with a rifle hooked up to a laser switch.

[Joe Elliott]

Yardley shot at watermelons from a scaffold and then took "shots" in Dealey Plaza with a rifle hooked up to a laser switch.

The show I am talking about is the 2003 Discovery Channel program:
     Unsolved History - JFK Conspiracy

The firing tests I am talking about are shown during: 10:00 ? 18:00

Now, there were some problems. Yardley, unlike Oswald, did not have weeks to practice with the bolt of the rifle, to practice working it smoothly. So, in about half his tests, the rifle jammed at some point.

But in about half the tests, he got off all three shots. And all the shots he successfully fired, hit the target.

So basically, we are seeing Yardley succeed when Hathcock and the best shooters at Quantico (allegedly, according the Roberts) could not come close to doing. Hitting a moving target with a Carcano rifle with at least two of their three shots. No one could do this.

Buy Robert?s story and I have a bridge to sell you.

Question:

Is any poster here willing to step up and say that they believe Robert?s story about Hathcock? Yes or No.

[Jack Trojan]

The show I am talking about is the 2003 Discovery Channel program:
     Unsolved History - JFK Conspiracy

The firing tests I am talking about are shown during: 10:00 ? 18:00

Now, there were some problems. Yardley, unlike Oswald, did not have weeks to practice with the bolt of the rifle, to practice working it smoothly. So, in about half his tests, the rifle jammed at some point.

But in about half the tests, he got off all three shots. And all the shots he successfully fired, hit the target.

So basically, we are seeing Yardley succeed when Hathcock and the best shooters at Quantico (allegedly, according the Roberts) could not come close to doing. Hitting a moving target with a Carcano rifle with at least two of their three shots. No one could do this.

Buy Robert?s story and I have a bridge to sell you.

Question:

Is any poster here willing to step up and say that they believe Robert?s story about Hathcock? Yes or No.

Why was Yardley using the scope, which he obviously had enough practice to sight in? Otherwise, what a waste of time and money. And did he dust the rifle for his prints afterwards, and found none?

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

The show I am talking about is the 2003 Discovery Channel program:
     Unsolved History - JFK Conspiracy

The firing tests I am talking about are shown during: 10:00 ? 18:00

Now, there were some problems. Yardley, unlike Oswald, did not have weeks to practice with the bolt of the rifle, to practice working it smoothly. So, in about half his tests, the rifle jammed at some point.

But in about half the tests, he got off all three shots. And all the shots he successfully fired, hit the target.

So basically, we are seeing Yardley succeed when Hathcock and the best shooters at Quantico (allegedly, according the Roberts) could not come close to doing. Hitting a moving target with a Carcano rifle with at least two of their three shots. No one could do this.

Buy Robert?s story and I have a bridge to sell you.

Question:

Is any poster here willing to step up and say that they believe Robert?s story about Hathcock? Yes or No.

Are you serious?

Lone nut believers always show their stupidity when they present videos that contain at least one of the following.


-People from the Discovery Channel
-People from National Geographic
-or even worse Gary "I change my mind more than a woman" Mack

"unlike Oswald, did not have weeks to practice with the bolt of the rifle, to practice working it smoothly."

You can't even prove that Oswald shot a gun that day.
What makes you think someone practiced? So if someone shot from a window they must have practiced from that window, assuming it was a window and assuming it was that window.
Your cousin Gary "I change my mind more than a woman"Mack even says the WC changes the amount of time for the shots to be fired,
yet these idiots create randoms situations blowing up any possible scenarios that may or may not have taken place

[John Iacoletti]

Now, there were some problems. Yardley, unlike Oswald, did not have weeks to practice with the bolt of the rifle, to practice working it smoothly. So, in about half his tests, the rifle jammed at some point.

What?s your evidence that Oswald practiced working the bolt of any rifle for weeks?

[Joe Elliott]

What?s your evidence that Oswald practiced working the bolt of any rifle for weeks?

Oswald had weeks of opportunity to practice working the bolt.

In the testimony of Mrs. Oswald:
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm
we learn that he did at least have some practice working the bolt of the rifle.

And even if he had no more practice than Michael Yardley, he should have about a 50-50 chance of getting off 3 shots. Yardley attempted firing 3 shots in quick session 7 times. This should result in 21 shots. Instead he only got off 16 shots. As I recall he got off all 3 shots about half the time, while sometimes only able to fire just one or two shots.

Every time he got off a shot, he hit the target. Indicating that accurately aiming the rifle at a moving target at under 100 yards was not too difficult.