Another lone-gunman theorist exercise in self-delusion, misrepresentation, and omission of contrary facts.
Notice there's not one word about the WC's rifle test, which used the alleged murder weapon itself, or the 1967 CBS rifle test. In the WC's test, three Master-rated riflemen utterly failed to duplicate Oswald's alleged shooting feat, even though they fired from only 30 feet up, took as much time as they wanted for their first shot, and were not required to fire through a half-open window in cramped quarters.
BTW, here's what WC staffer Wesley Liebeler said about Oswald's alleged "practice" and the alleged shooting feat in internal WC memos in which Liebeler critiqued the draft of the Warren Report (all the memos are reprinted in 11 HSCA):
1. I do not believe there is any real authority for the proposition that Oswald sighted through the telescopic sight on the porch in New Orleans. Marina Oswald first said she did not know what he did with the rifle out on the porch, and then was led into a statement which might be thought to support the instant proposition. It is not very convincing. . . .I do not see how someone can conclude that a shot is easy or hard unless he knows something about how long the firer has to shoot, that is, how much time allotted for the shots.
4. On the nature of the shots--Frazier testified that one would have no difficulty in hitting a target with a telescopic sight, since all you have to do is put the crosshairs on the target. On page 51 of the galleys, however, he testified that shots fired by FBI agents with the assassination weapon were "a few inches high and to the right of the target * * * because of a defect in the scope."
Apparently no one knows when that defect appeared, or if it was in the scope at the time of the assassination. If it was, and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary one may assume that it was, putting the crosshairs on the target would clearly have resulted in a miss, or it very likely would, in any event. I have raised this question before.
There is a great deal of testimony in the record that a telescopic sight is a sensitive proposition. You can't leave a rifle and scope laying around in a garage underfoot for almost 3 months, just having brought it back from New Orleans in the back of a station wagon, and expect to hit anything with it, unless you take the trouble to fire it and sight the scope in.
This would have been a problem that should have been dealt with in any event, and now that it turns out that there actually was a defect in the scope, it is perfectly clear that the question must be considered. The present draft leaves the Commission open to severe criticism. Furthermore, to the extent that it leaves testimony suggesting that the shots might not have been so easy out of the discussion, thereby giving only a part of the story, it is simply dishonest.And when we consider the information that this thread's OP omits, I think it is clear that the OP is likewise "simply dishonest." To get more of an idea of the key information that Charles Collins is ignoring, see my posts in these threads:
The 1967 CBS Rifle Test: More Evidence Against the Lone-Gunman Theory
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4580.0.htmlWhat Would a Valid Lone-Gunman Rifle Test Look Like?
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4589.0.htmlWhen Could Oswald Have "Zeroed" (Sighted-In) the Alleged Murder Weapon?
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4543.0.html