The preponderance of the evidence

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: The preponderance of the evidence  (Read 144656 times)

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 864
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #196 on: April 05, 2019, 02:14:07 AM »
From the CT POV: Oswald was a crappy shot with a crappy rifle and ammo. Do I have that right so far?

No, you have it wrong. Oswald was probably a decent shot had he practiced, which all sharpshooters must do to keep sharp. If Oswald knew he was going to take some shots at the POTUS it was imperative that he was well practiced and familiar with a reliable rifle. The fact that Oswald was a military marksman meant he knew what would increase his odds of success. This included:

1) Get a Mauser, not a MC (which was probably only a few bucks more, but much more reliable. The MC tended to jam almost every clip)
2) Practice practice practice...then practice some more.
3) Sight-in your scope (the fact that it wasn't implies that Oswald never practiced with the rifle)
4) Do NOT disassemble/reassemble the rifle or you will have to zero the sights in the TSBD.
5) Remove the misaligned scope from the rifle if you don't intend to use it. It takes up less space in the paper bag and it's just in the way if you intend to use the iron sights.

A preponderance of the evidence implies that Oswald never took a shot with the MC. I still haven't got a satisfactory answer from the LNers how Oswald managed to not get a single print on the rifle's stock, bolt, barrel, scope, trigger, clip, shells and strap after he disassembled/reassembled the rifle and supposedly fired it 3 times. Why doesn't that give you LNers pause?

Quote
If so, I'd ask how would any framers would go about convincing anyone that he was believable as killer.

Because you LNers have been carrying the conspirators water for 56 years now. Congrats!
« Last Edit: April 05, 2019, 02:24:06 AM by Jack Trojan »

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #197 on: April 05, 2019, 07:21:08 AM »
No, you have it wrong. Oswald was probably a decent shot had he practiced, which all sharpshooters must do to keep sharp. If Oswald knew he was going to take some shots at the POTUS it was imperative that he was well practiced and familiar with a reliable rifle. The fact that Oswald was a military marksman meant he knew what would increase his odds of success. This included:

1) Get a Mauser, not a MC (which was probably only a few bucks more, but much more reliable. The MC tended to jam almost every clip)
2) Practice practice practice...then practice some more.
3) Sight-in your scope (the fact that it wasn't implies that Oswald never practiced with the rifle)
4) Do NOT disassemble/reassemble the rifle or you will have to zero the sights in the TSBD.
5) Remove the misaligned scope from the rifle if you don't intend to use it. It takes up less space in the paper bag and it's just in the way if you intend to use the iron sights.

A preponderance of the evidence implies that Oswald never took a shot with the MC. I still haven't got a satisfactory answer from the LNers how Oswald managed to not get a single print on the rifle's stock, bolt, barrel, scope, trigger, clip, shells and strap after he disassembled/reassembled the rifle and supposedly fired it 3 times. Why doesn't that give you LNers pause?

Because you LNers have been carrying the conspirators water for 56 years now. Congrats!

You're assuming Oswald planned to assassinate JFK months in advance.

The science as to why finding usable prints on weapons in shooting crimes can be so difficult is readily available online.

No usable prints found where they would normally expect to be found, and removed, suggests that the shooter took a few seconds to wipe down said areas... in a 'this-is-my-rifle-this-my-gun' sense.


.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2019, 07:41:28 AM by Bill Chapman »

Offline Ray Mitcham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 994
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #198 on: April 05, 2019, 09:56:04 AM »
"No usable prints found where they would normally expect to be found, and removed, suggests that the shooter took a few seconds to wipe down said areas... "

Does this include taking time to collect the bullet shells from their various positions in the SN, and wiping them clean, Chappers?
And how do you load a clip with bullets without getting either thumb or fingerprint on the shells? Use gloves? ;D
« Last Edit: April 05, 2019, 09:56:49 AM by Ray Mitcham »

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4402
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #199 on: April 05, 2019, 02:29:26 PM »
No, you have it wrong. Oswald was probably a decent shot had he practiced, which all sharpshooters must do to keep sharp. If Oswald knew he was going to take some shots at the POTUS it was imperative that he was well practiced and familiar with a reliable rifle. The fact that Oswald was a military marksman meant he knew what would increase his odds of success. This included:

1) Get a Mauser, not a MC (which was probably only a few bucks more, but much more reliable. The MC tended to jam almost every clip)
2) Practice practice practice...then practice some more.
3) Sight-in your scope (the fact that it wasn't implies that Oswald never practiced with the rifle)
4) Do NOT disassemble/reassemble the rifle or you will have to zero the sights in the TSBD.
5) Remove the misaligned scope from the rifle if you don't intend to use it. It takes up less space in the paper bag and it's just in the way if you intend to use the iron sights.

A preponderance of the evidence implies that Oswald never took a shot with the MC. I still haven't got a satisfactory answer from the LNers how Oswald managed to not get a single print on the rifle's stock, bolt, barrel, scope, trigger, clip, shells and strap after he disassembled/reassembled the rifle and supposedly fired it 3 times. Why doesn't that give you LNers pause?

Because you LNers have been carrying the conspirators water for 56 years now. Congrats!

These are questions. I am trying to learn something. I am not making any claims.

item #3: Could it be that LHO did practice with the rifle, adjusted it the best he could, made a mental note that it was just a little off target one way or another, and then he could adjust his aim a little to compensate for this?

Item #4: As I remember, the disassembly needed (so that the rifle would fit inside the bag) involved removing the wooden stock from the metal barrel. Did the scope need to be removed from the barrel also? If not, then why would it need to be adjusted after reassembly?

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #200 on: April 05, 2019, 02:54:27 PM »
No, you have it wrong. Oswald was probably a decent shot had he practiced, which all sharpshooters must do to keep sharp. If Oswald knew he was going to take some shots at the POTUS it was imperative that he was well practiced and familiar with a reliable rifle. The fact that Oswald was a military marksman meant he knew what would increase his odds of success. This included:

1) Get a Mauser, not a MC (which was probably only a few bucks more, but much more reliable. The MC tended to jam almost every clip)
2) Practice practice practice...then practice some more.
3) Sight-in your scope (the fact that it wasn't implies that Oswald never practiced with the rifle)
4) Do NOT disassemble/reassemble the rifle or you will have to zero the sights in the TSBD.
5) Remove the misaligned scope from the rifle if you don't intend to use it. It takes up less space in the paper bag and it's just in the way if you intend to use the iron sights.

A preponderance of the evidence implies that Oswald never took a shot with the MC. I still haven't got a satisfactory answer from the LNers how Oswald managed to not get a single print on the rifle's stock, bolt, barrel, scope, trigger, clip, shells and strap after he disassembled/reassembled the rifle and supposedly fired it 3 times. Why doesn't that give you LNers pause?

Because you LNers have been carrying the conspirators water for 56 years now. Congrats!

A preponderance of the evidence implies that Oswald never took a shot with the MC.

That's right, Jack....  And furthermore the preponderance of the FACTUAL evidence ( See 15 feet 4 inches) indicates that the carcano was never fired that day.

Offline Jerry Freeman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3723
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #201 on: April 05, 2019, 07:12:42 PM »
No, you have it wrong. Oswald was probably a decent shot had he practiced
Because you LNers have been carrying the conspirators water for 56 years now. 
I don't believe he had any more interest in shooting than most of this membership.
There may be some readers here who have pistols they never shoot.
Anyway here is one I don't recall ever seeing before...Final Compost--by David Belin
What could he have added that wasn't in the Report [duplicated by You are the Jury]??
 

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Re: The preponderance of the evidence
« Reply #202 on: April 05, 2019, 09:10:13 PM »
"No usable prints found where they would normally expect to be found, and removed, suggests that the shooter took a few seconds to wipe down said areas... "

Does this include taking time to collect the bullet shells from their various positions in the SN, and wiping them clean, Chappers?
And how do you load a clip with bullets without getting either thumb or fingerprint on the shells? Use gloves? ;D

What makes you think he had a need to wipe the shell casings