Challenge to Cyril Wecht

[Jack Trojan]

As usual, CTers focus on the misaligned scope. We don't know if the scope was misaligned. However, I think it almost certainly was misaligned.

But this ignores the alternative. What about using the iron sights?

* The iron sights could have been used instead of the scope. The scope did not "block the view" or prevent the use of the iron sights.

You obviously don't know much about military sharpshooters. A sharpshooter must practice regularly and Oswald would have practiced for such an important job. Did he ignore the scope and use the iron sights during practice? Of course not, Oswald would have sighted-in the scope during practice.

*Oswald was trained in the Marines to use a rifle with iron sights. He never received any training using a scope. He was able to hit a human size targets at ranges of 200, 300 and 500 yards, using iron sights.

Then why did Oswald leave the scope on the rifle if he wasn't going to use it? Don't claim that the scope would not have obstructed his view via the iron sights. How many sharpshooters would do this? None.

* While Marines are only trained with stationary targets (it appears to be impracticable to train thousands of recruits at once using moving targets) they have proven time and time again to be proficient at hitting moving targets in battle.

* The Marines at Guadalcanal used the M1903 Springfield rifle, with iron sights, with great effectiveness, even against moving targets, Japanese infantry charging at greater speeds than the limousine at Dealey Plaza.

Non sequitur/false equivalence

Conclusions:

* A sharpshooter would not have used a misaligned scope.
* A sharpshooter would not have kept the scope on the rifle if they did not intend to use it.
* A sharpshooter would have practiced with the rifle beforehand and sighted-in the scope.
* Oswald would have removed the scope from the rifle when he disassembled it and placed it into a paper bag if he did not intend to use it.
* Oswald did not even touch the rifle since there were no prints on it or gunshot residue on his face.
* Oswald could not have taken any shots because there wasn't a valid trajectory from the 6th floor of the TSBD into JFK's back and out his throat.
* The MC did not shoot magic bullets.

[Joe Elliott]

We also don't know that Oswald shot anybody.

But in your "could have been" narrative, why would Oswald have bothered having a scope on the rifle at all?

Answered before. When he ordered the rifle, he would not have known that the scope would not be aligned. He could still just use the iron sights. And may wish to keep the scope on because his rifle would look more like the rifle of an "expert" assassin. Just as he took a couple of minutes to change into a black sweater, to look more "dangerous", just enough time for Ruby to get there in time to shoot him.

[Joe Elliott]

You obviously don't know much about military sharpshooters. A sharpshooter must practice regularly and Oswald would have practiced for such an important job. Did he ignore the scope and use the iron sights during practice? Of course not, Oswald would have sighted-in the scope during practice.

Granted, going a few years without practice will degrade a shooters ability to fire accurately at 500 yards. But at ranges under 100 yards?

Question:

Where is the evidence that shooters who can hit a target at 200, 300 or 500 yards, if they go four years with just a little practice, won't be able to hit a target at under 100 yards?

If you cannot provide any, than you obviously don't know much about military sharpshooters.

Then why did Oswald leave the scope on the rifle if he wasn't going to use it? Don't claim that the scope would not have obstructed his view via the iron sights. How many sharpshooters would do this? None.

The rifle with the scope on looks more like a rifle of a "dangerous" assassin. That is a reason he might what to keep the scope on.

Also, the scope could be used to verify, from a distance, that JFK was in the limousine that just turned onto Houston Street. The scope doesn't have to be aligned to do that. He could, from that time forward, ignore the scope and use the iron sights for any aiming.

It is not true that Oswald has "No possible reason" for keeping the scope on, as you like to pretent.

[John Iacoletti]

Answered before. When he ordered the rifle, he would not have known that the scope would not be aligned. He could still just use the iron sights. And may wish to keep the scope on because his rifle would look more like the rifle of an "expert" assassin.

A good one to add to the “lame LN excuses” file.

[Joe Elliott]

Granted, going a few years without practice will degrade a shooters ability to fire accurately at 500 yards. But at ranges under 100 yards?

Question:

Where is the evidence that shooters who can hit a target at 200, 300 or 500 yards, if they go four years with just a little practice, won't be able to hit a target at under 100 yards?

If you cannot provide any, than you obviously don't know much about military sharpshooters.

. . .

Of course. No answer to my question. Jack cannot provide any evidence to support this claim that someone's ability to hit a person, even at ranges under 100 yards, would greatly diminish within a few years of not practicing, even if they had the ability to shoot accurately at 200, 300 or 500 yards.

But can I meet the same sort of challenge? Find an example of someone's skill not going downhill after more than a year of no shooting practice?

Yes. And I don't have to go far in time or distance from Dallas, 1963.

The Texas Tower Shooting by Charles Whitman in 1966,

Charles Whitman was trained in the Marines and had a very similar rating to Oswald. He scored 215 (close to Oswald's 212) in his Marine's marksmen test and like Oswald was rated at the level of "Sharpshooter". Like Oswald, he had shown he could hit a human size target at 200, 300 and 500 yards.

Whitman left the Marines in December 1964. The Texas Tower shooting occurred in August 1966, a year in a half later. Oswald had been out of the Maines for four years in 1963.

How well did Whitman shoot? Unfortunately, very well. He killed 15 people and wounded 31. The longest range in which he killed someone was 500 yards. His ability to shoot accurately was not diminished by his lack of practice over the course of one and a half years.

Someone tried to take him out with a rifle fired from an airplane. Whitman managed to hit the aircraft twice before the aircraft wisely moved out of range. Even though Whitman, like Oswald, only practiced at hitting stationary targets, he was still able to hit a flying airplane. So it is no surprise that Oswald was able to hit a moving limousine which travelled at 13 mph or less during the Dealey Plaza shooting.

Of course there are some differences. Whitman bought a new and better quality rifle. But still, the Carcano rifle was certainly adequate, using the iron sights, at ranges under 100 yards.

Oswald had been out of the Marines for four years, whereas Whitman was out for only one and a half years.

On the other hand, Oswald had his rifle for over six months and had some opportunity to fire it in practice. Indeed, his wife said he did that. Whitman, in contrast, and just bought his rifle that morning and had no chance to practice with it before he started shooting from the tower.

I have no experience with shooting rifles. But my guess would be, if an experienced rifle shooter was entering a shooting contest, at targets less than 100 yards away, he would choose a Carcano rifle which he had experience with over a more expensive rifle that he had no experience with.

[Mike Orr]

One of the best Premier snipers of the Marine Corps  was Retired Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock who said that in Virginia they set up an area to duplicate the JFK Assassination so they could see how it would be to try and duplicate the Assassination of JFK and he said they could not pull it off . " Let me tell you what we did at Quantico . We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything . I don't know how many times we tried it, but we couldn't duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did ".        Kennedy assassination : Gunny Hathcock's take .      Hathcock had History's longest single kill-shot of 2,500 meters . that is 2,734 yards !

[John Mytton]

One of the best Premier snipers of the Marine Corps  was Retired Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock who said that in Virginia they set up an area to duplicate the JFK Assassination so they could see how it would be to try and duplicate the Assassination of JFK and he said they could not pull it off . " Let me tell you what we did at Quantico . We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything . I don't know how many times we tried it, but we couldn't duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did ".        Kennedy assassination : Gunny Hathcock's take .      Hathcock had History's longest single kill-shot of 2,500 meters . that is 2,734 yards !

to try and duplicate the Assassination of JFK and he said they could not pull it off .

Wow, if the best of the best couldn't do it, then that must mean that Kennedy survived Dealey Plaza!?



JohnM