Is Jim DiEugenio correct about Oswalds rifle?

[John Iacoletti]

...to which I predict that DVP will respond with yet another strawman along the lines of "why would conspirators plant a different rifle than the one that they planted the order for"?

That's the go-to argument when an LNer is confronted with any anomaly in the evidence.

[Gerry Down]

Speaking of reasonable questions, you have still never explained how Oswald ordered one size long gun, but received a different sized long gun.

Maybe the guy packing the rifle just made a mistake?

[John Iacoletti]

The LN strawman conspirators plan everything in intricate detail in advance and never make a mistake.

[David Von Pein]

...you have still never explained how Oswald ordered one size long gun, but received a different sized long gun.

I've explained the "36-inch vs. 40-inch" discrepancy on many occasions in the past (such as in the articles linked below). It's a very easy problem to solve too (except if you're a conspiracy theorist, of course)....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=36-inch+vs.+40-inch

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/12/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1081.html

[John Iacoletti]

And by "explain", he means that he's guessing that they "simply ran out of 36-inch guns" and decided to substitute 40-inch guns.

[David Von Pein]

And by "explain", he means that he's guessing that they "simply ran out of 36-inch guns" and decided to substitute 40-inch guns.

It couldn't be more obvious that Klein's was definitely running out of the 36-inch rifles in the early months of 1963, because they completely stopped selling (and stopped advertising) the 36-inch variant after February of '63. Every Klein's ad after February shows the "40-inch Carbine".

It's not hard at all to figure out what happened with Oswald's order in March (except if you're a conspiracy theorist, of course).

[John Iacoletti]

Klein's was still advertising the 36" rifle in the July 1963 issue of Guns Magazine.