Shells, rifle, SN... Who?

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?  (Read 187569 times)

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #126 on: March 29, 2020, 10:54:10 PM »
Like I said, it comes down to what Hosty actually told Revill, and by extension how Revill related that to Gannaway. The point of contention in Revills memo is pretty non-specific: "they [FBI] had information that this subject was capable of committing the assassination of President Kennedy." Exactly what that means is anyone's guess. In one sense, anyone this side of Stephen Hawking would be "capable of committing the assassination." Only Hosty and Revill really know. The original point is that the subject that Curry backed down on wasn't what he'd said in the press conference, which was that the FBI hadn't told the DPD that Oswald was in town.

Where did Weitzman ever say that he was handed, or ever held, the rifle? Where did anyone else not named Roger Craig ever said they saw Weitzman handed, or ever held the, rifle? Who claimed that they saw two rifles found in the depository?
To begin with, "clip" in itself isn't a particularly specific term. Using "clip" in the sense of "en bloc  clip," Mausers simply don't use them. The Carcano uses a clip that locks into the magazine somewhere below the receiver. When the last round is chambered, the sides of the clip collapse inwards, unlocking it and (hopefully) allowing it to fall through the hole in the bottom of the magazine. Doesn't always work that way, but that's the design. This usage fits, combines with the Carcano's operating system fits Sawyer's description of a "clip which is locked on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard."

Using "clip" in the sense of "stripper clip," yes, Mausers use those, but they don't lock into anything, especially on the underside of the receiver. There's a guide notch for it cut into the top of the receiver, but that's at the top, not the bottom. And it doesn't lock anything in place.  This usage, combined with the Mauser operating system, does not fit Sawyer's "clip which is locked on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard."

Finally, there's "clip" in the sense of "a magazine from which ammunition is fed into the chamber of a firearm," as Mirriam-Webster says. Quite a few people use the term this way. As I've already mentioned, the Mauser model 91's have a magazine that is definitely "locked" and very conspicuously located "on the underside of the receiver forward of the trigger guard." That fits a model 91 Mauser very well, and (again) the underslung magazine is a feature that the Carcano shares.

Of the three possibilities for the definition of clip, the "Mauser-only," stripper clip explanation is the one that just doesn't work. Myself, I find it interesting that of all of the rifle's mechanical features that could be brought out, it's the magazine that gets emphasized. That strengthens the "clip=magazine" conclusion quite a bit.

Now, on the to the five-round vs six round thing. Is it a Mauser because Weitzman saw five rounds in the magazine, or did Weitzman first decide that the rifle was a Mauser, therefore it had a five-round capacity? The first possibility leads to something of a problem: if the magazine held five rounds, and Fritz ejected on from the chamber, then that rifle couldn't have fired a shot. And where did anyone say Weitzman or anyone else emptied the magazine? Or, in an alternative silliness, Did Weitzman just happen to have a fistful of ammunition of the proper caliber, and decided to top the rifle off to determine it's capacity? Neither of those "five rounds first" scenarios are satisfying. Nor is there any evidence to support them: who claimed that anyone did anything to check the magazine capacity on the rifle? The only explanation still standing is the Mauser-first one: Once Weitzman decided the rifle was a Mauser, then it held five rounds because Mausers hold five rounds. And that means the number of rounds described simply isn't probative.
Here I am bursting your bubble:

"Gun metal color, gray or blue" comes from Sayers' 11/23 report. Boone's 11/22 report says the rifle was blued. Weitzman was asked by the WC whether it was gray or blue, and he replied "blue."
So we have gray or blue, blue, and blue. That doesn't add up to gray. However, you're wrong about Mausers being gray. On '91's, the barrel, receiver, trigger, trigger guard, and magazine are all blued. Only the bolt was left au naturel. Most Mausers I've seen are that way. The exceptions that I've seen are K98K's made during WWII, and that may be due to the good ol' wartime finish, especially later in the war. My '91 was definitely blued at the factory.
Lt Day thought the rifle's wooden parts were rough: "I noted that the stock was too rough apparently to take fingerprints."

One of the best high resolution photo sets of CE139 that I know of are maintained by the National Archives, and are stored here: https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305134. It's a javascript page, so I can't directly link the images. However, you have the advantage of being able to pan and zoom as much as you want.

Another JS-limited page is here Getty:

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/passport-rifle-bullets-and-other-items-belonging-to-news-photo/50681899?adppopup=true 
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/passport-rifle-bullets-and-other-items-belonging-to-news-photo/50681902?adppopup=true

Another couple, that I can link directly to:



The wood definitely looks rough, dinged, and scratched to me, especially near the butt ends of the stock. And the wear on the edges of the safety lever at the end of the bolt knob is apparent, as well as the wear on the bolt knob.

It's not "Hollywood Optics" It's:

      4 x 18 COATED
ORDNANCE OPTICS INC
HOLLYWOOD CALIFORNIA

      010  JAPAN

Anyway, my point is that "4x18" and "JAPAN" are prominently printed on the scope in nice white letters on a black background. Easy to read without needing any real study.

 
On the leather bandolier rifle slings I've seen, the bandolier part is a fat piece that is attached to the sling proper. Like what these guys sell:

https://brassstacker.com/Rifle-Sling-and-Cartridge-Bandolier-1.html

I figure that's because the sling has to be able to be comfortably wrapped around you forearm, and a leather bandolier would be too bulky and stiff to do that.  I figure someone saw the fat oval part of the "sling" and took it from there to bandolierland.
Well, honestly, it's nice to be appreciated.

A bandoleer type sling is a sling that will hold a few cartridge in loops on the sling ....Just a a bandoleer cartridge pistol belt is one that has loops to hold extra cartridges.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11351
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #127 on: March 29, 2020, 10:58:20 PM »
Now, on the to the five-round vs six round thing. Is it a Mauser because Weitzman saw five rounds in the magazine, or did Weitzman first decide that the rifle was a Mauser, therefore it had a five-round capacity? The first possibility leads to something of a problem: if the magazine held five rounds, and Fritz ejected on from the chamber, then that rifle couldn't have fired a shot. And where did anyone say Weitzman or anyone else emptied the magazine? Or, in an alternative silliness, Did Weitzman just happen to have a fistful of ammunition of the proper caliber, and decided to top the rifle off to determine it's capacity? Neither of those "five rounds first" scenarios are satisfying. Nor is there any evidence to support them: who claimed that anyone did anything to check the magazine capacity on the rifle? The only explanation still standing is the Mauser-first one: Once Weitzman decided the rifle was a Mauser, then it held five rounds because Mausers hold five rounds. And that means the number of rounds described simply isn't probative.

This seems really contrived to me. He described details that he didn’t actually see but invented them to match his assumption that he saw a Mauser? Why would anyone do that? He’s supposed to be describing what he saw.

And who says that Weitzman’s Mauser fired a shot?

Online Mitch Todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1100
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #128 on: March 29, 2020, 11:56:35 PM »
This seems really contrived to me. He described details that he didn’t actually see but invented them to match his assumption that he saw a Mauser? Why would anyone do that? He’s supposed to be describing what he saw.
It's simple syllogistic logic. If you know that Mausers hold 5 rounds, and you think that a rifle you see is a Mauser, then you are liable to that the "Mauser" hold five rounds.

And who says that Weitzman’s Mauser fired a shot?
Who said that Weitzman or Boone or anyone else found a second rifle, separate from the Carcano seen in the Alyea film?

Online Mitch Todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1100
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #129 on: March 30, 2020, 12:02:20 AM »

"you'll notice the tool marks where some took a grinder to the top of the receivers on the top two rifles (it's easier to see on the second photo).  That's because the Argentine government required that their military rifles have the national crest removed from their surplus firearms before they could sold for export."

Yes, you're correct. Argentina started grinding their national crest off exported rifles in the 1930's.

https://gunsinthenews.com/1891-argentine-mauser-history/

"Collectors in the U.S., though, often find the national crest ground off of Argentine 1891 Mausers. This was done in the aftermath of the Chaco War of 1935, which pitted Bolivia and Paraguay against one another in a vicious albeit brief struggle for control of South America’s resource-rich Chaco Boreal. Argentina provided Paraguay with a large number of Model 1891 Mausers during the conflict in a move that jeopardized its relationship with Bolivia. The presence of unground national crests made it impossible to deny Argentina’s direct support for Paraguay, so after the war Argentina instituted a law requiring the removal of the national crest from any gun leaving the country. Although the government in Buenos Aires later dropped this requirement, by then most of the Argentine 1891 Mausers had been ground, and this accounts for why it is rare to find one with the crest intact."

The "7.65 Mauser" was added decades after the rifles' manufacture. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed in reaction to RFK's assassination.  One of it's provisions was that imported firearms were required to have the caliber engraved on the weapon after 1968.

That doesn't mean 7.65 wasn't added to any exported rifles before 1968. Seems like it would be a natural to add it to the place where the national crest was was ground off the rifles.

 Also, since the majority of the Argentine '91 7.65 rifles imported into the US had the national crest ground off, and Boone and Weitzman were, according to you and most WC apologists, making a guess after a quick glance, could you show me the area on the TSBD Carcano where the crest was ground off that would have given them that impression?



Who said anything about a crest, ground off or not, on the rifle found in the TSBD? Do you even know what you're arguing, or why you're arguing it?

Online Mitch Todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1100
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #130 on: March 30, 2020, 12:32:26 AM »
Maybe it actually happened.  You can't expect that the small amount of remaining Alyea footage captured everything that happened.
What evidence is there for a second rifle being discovered?

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 864
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #131 on: March 30, 2020, 01:32:47 AM »
What evidence is there for a second rifle being discovered?

Doesn't Weitzman's signed affidavit that he examined a Mauser on the 22nd give you the slightest bit of pause? Otherwise, why would you think he knew Mausers were 7.65 caliber and a Mauser held 5 rounds? He admitted that he was no expert. Do you really think that Weitzman was describing a rifle from another day or the MC?

If Weitzman was telling the truth (before he thought better of it) then there were 2 rifles found on the 22nd. In which case, the Mauser was not captured on film because Fritz pulled a switcheroo before Alyea started filming. Fritz seemed to be in control of what got documented and how to stage the crime scene before any film was shot.  For example, Fritz tampered with the crime scene by picking up the 3 hulls with his bare hands and put them in his pocket, then later staged an in situ photograph of the hulls in a more scattered (believable) arrangement by tossing them onto the floor so a rookie cop could take a photo of them. If he could do that, then what's the big deal about pulling a switcheroo with the rifle, if he had to because a DPD bumpkin stumbled onto the Mauser by mistake?

Otherwise, you have to believe the testimony of the conspirators that the 1st rifle found was the MC. Why you and Walt believe Fritz and Day is beyond me. Screw the film. Fritz staged that too. Alyea might have been oblivious to it all, but I doubt he would have been allowed to be there if Fritz didn't  have control over the narrative his film portrayed.

But since you are a LNer, you think the MC is THE 1 and only rifle, which Oswald used to kill the POTUS with a magic bullet and a wonky scope from the 6th floor of the TSBD. And definitely NOT with a Mauser! Walt thinks the whole Mauser story is insane BS but his crazy conspiracy theory is AOK.  Thumb1:
« Last Edit: March 30, 2020, 01:35:40 AM by Jack Trojan »

Offline Gary Craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #132 on: March 30, 2020, 02:22:15 AM »
Who said anything about a crest, ground off or not, on the rifle found in the TSBD? Do you even know what you're arguing, or why you're arguing it?

I'm not arguing anything with you. Just pointing out some facts and asking questions.

The majority of model '91 Argentine 7.65 Mausers imported into the US had the Argentine national crest ground off.

https://gunsinthenews.com/1891-argentine-mauser-history/

"Collectors in the U.S., though, often find the national crest ground off of Argentine 1891 Mausers. This was done in the aftermath of the Chaco War of 1935, which pitted Bolivia and Paraguay against one another in a vicious albeit brief struggle for control of South America’s resource-rich Chaco Boreal. Argentina provided Paraguay with a large number of Model 1891 Mausers during the conflict in a move that jeopardized its relationship with Bolivia. The presence of unground national crests made it impossible to deny Argentina’s direct support for Paraguay, so after the war Argentina instituted a law requiring the removal of the national crest from any gun leaving the country. Although the government in Buenos Aires later dropped this requirement, by then most of the Argentine 1891 Mausers had been ground, and this accounts for why it is rare to find one with the crest intact."

Pertinent to the conversation because of the alleged Boone and Weitzman misidentification of a rifle in the TSBD. Apparently a '91 Argentine Mauser because it's the Mauser that most resembles the TSBD Carcano. My question: Is there something on the TSBD Carcano  that would have given them the impression it had a ground off Argentine national crest?


'91 Argentine Mauser with crest ground off and caliber stamped on.


« Last Edit: March 30, 2020, 02:30:45 AM by Gary Craig »