Oswald's performance on 11/22/1963 proved he was capable of making the shots that killed JFK because the evidence he did that is overwhelming.
LOL! Look up the term "circular reasoning."
The burden of proof is on the CTs to provide the evidence that he was NOT capable of making he shots.
We've done that, in spades. You just won't admit it. Any credible, serious person would acknowledge that Oswald was not capable of performing his alleged feat given the fact that his alleged feat has never been duplicated in any halfway realistic Oswald rifle test. You keep ignoring the fact that virtually everyone who saw him shoot in the Marine Corps and in Russia said he was a poor shot.
A semi-auto like the M1 does automate the chambering of each round after the clip is inserted, but once the round is in the chamber, the fundamentals for making an accurate shot are pretty much the same. Both rifles have significant recoil which will require the shooter to reacquire the target and put the sight on the intended target. A bolt action rifle has the added step of manually operating the bolt to eject the spent round and chamber the next round in the clip.
IOW, you are so blindly biased that you can't even admit the self-evident, demonstrable fact that accurately firing a semi-automatic rifle is easier than accurately firing a bolt-action rifle.
A slow moving target moving almost directly away from the shooter is almost stationary in that there is very little movement in relation to the line of fire.
One, 11 mph is not a "slow moving target." If you ran 100 meters in 20 seconds, that would be 11 mph. 11 mph is a fairly rapid sprint. And you seem to forget that Elm Street sloped downward. I know you're just blindly repeating talking points you've read on lone-gunman sites, but you should have thought about this claim before repeating it.
That would have been true for Oswald's second and third shots but not for his first which is why that shot was by far the most difficult.
I've refuted this nonsense several times, but you just keep repeating it. Among the problems I've noted with this specious argument, I'll repeat the fact that the three Master-rated riflemen in the WC's rifle test missed the head and neck area of the target silhouettes 13 out of 14 times with their second and third shots, even though they were firing at stationary target boards from only 30 feet up.
The effect of firing at greater ranges effectively makes the target smaller. I guess during your critical thinking you failed to take that into account.
Gee, I had no idea! I guess you "failed to take into account" that using a 4-power scope, as Oswald allegedly did, makes targets seem much closer than they are because of the magnification.
Let me see if I can do the arithmetic without a calculator. Oswald had to hit 42 out of 50 shots to qualify. That's an 84% hit rate. When shooting at JFK, he hit his target 2 out or 3 times. That's a hit rate of 67%. Sounds like Oswald was a little sharper when shooting in the USMC, but let's cut him some slack. He was firing with a bolt action rifle.
It would be hard to dream up a worse example of grade-school-level faulty logic and evasion. As I proved in my reply, it is clearly invalid to use Oswald's Marine Corps rifle scores as evidence he could have performed the alleged lone-gunman shooting feat. Yet, here are you are doing exactly that, ignoring all the factors that I listed that show that scoring a 210 in Marine Corps rifle qualification back then would have been far, far, far easier than scoring 2 hits in 3 shots in a max of 11 seconds and scoring both hits in 5.6 seconds.
When firing from a level position or an elevated position, gravity starts to take effect as soon as the bullet leaves the barrel. The shorter the distance, the less the bullet will drop while in flight.
You really should stop pretending to know anything about marksmanship.
Oswald's longest shot was 88 yards, so gravity had less effect on his shot.
But it would have had some effect. You might want to read what former Marine Corps sniper Craig Roberts has said about Oswald's alleged shooting feat. Why do you suppose that the most legendary Marine Corps sniper in the modern era, Gunny Carlos Hathcock, scoffed at the idea that Oswald could have done the shooting feat that your side claims he did?
And I see you're still assuming a priori that Oswald fired the shots, yet you refuse to deal with the fact that the ammo that hit JFK's head behaved nothing like the kind of ammo that Oswald allegedly used, that CE 543 could not have fired a bullet during the shooting, that acoustical science shows that at least 4 shots were fired, that a number of eyewitness accounts rule out Oswald being on the sixth-floor during the shooting, etc., etc.
14 x 4 inch area? I didn't know JFK was a pinhead.
An area 14 inches high and 4 inches wide is hardly a pinhead. And we're actually probably talking about an area only 12-13 inches high, but I'm erring on the side of caution. Go look at the target silhouettes from the WC's rifle test. The WC's three Master-rated riflemen missed a larger area in the head-and-neck region 20 out of 21 times, but you say Oswald hit a smaller area twice in 5.6 seconds.
