Just to add context to my previous post regarding the number of homicides committed with rifles, AI gave the following answer:

Annual Homicides Involving Rifles in the U.S.

In the most recent full FBI dataset available (2024), 401 homicides in the United States were committed with rifles www.opencrime.us. This represents about 1.5% of all firearm homicides in that year, which totaled 23,434 www.opencrime.us.

For comparison, earlier years show a similar small share:

2019: 364 rifle homicides FBI

2018: 305 rifle homicides FBI

2017: 389 rifle homicides FBI

These numbers are far below the dominant role of handguns in U.S. homicides — which accounted for roughly two-thirds of all firearm homicides in 2024 www.opencrime.us. Rifles, while present, are a minor weapon type in the overall homicide landscape.

Key context:

Firearms were used in 85.2% of all U.S. murders in 2024 www.opencrime.us.

Handguns made up the largest single category of firearm homicides, with rifles and shotguns each representing less than 2% of all firearm homicides.

The share of rifle homicides has been relatively stable over the past decade, with slight year-to-year variation.

I'm guessing that you didn't bother to read the rest of the thread before you posted your reply. I also gather that your research into forensic and ballistics evidence in the JFK case has been rather insufficient.

You're the one "spewing misinformation." Again, you appear to have posted this gaffe without reading the rest of the thread, but even then you should have known better than to make such an erroneous claim.

One, no FMJ bullet would never, ever, ever produce the kind bullet fragmentation that we see on the JFK autopsy skull x-rays. Those x-rays show a "lead snowstorm" of over 40 tiny fragments in the right-frontal region, which alone automatically rules out FMJ ammo, as world-renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Vincent DiMaio pointed out:

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Are we clear? Let's review: (1) In the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment if they penetrate bone, they will only leave "a few" fragments. And (2) if an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," this "rules out" FMJ ammo.

Two, the alleged murder weapon was a low-velocity rifle. I quote none other than FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier, who explained this to the Warren Commission:

Mr. FRAZIER. Considerably less. The recoil is nominal with this weapon, because it has a very low velocity and pressure, and just an average-size bullet weight.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is the killing power of the bullets essentially similar to the killing power at these ranges---the killing power of the rifles you have named?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. How much difference is there?
Mr. FRAZIER. The higher velocity bullets of approximately the same weight would have more killing power. This has a low velocity. . . . (3 H 414, emphasis added)

Did you ever ask yourself a simple question. How much first hand experience do you think Vincent Di Maio had with FMJ rifle ammo striking a skull. Most gun homicides are committed with handguns. Homicides with rifles are rare, a very small subset of all gun homicides. FBI stats show that more homicides are committed each year with bare hands and feet than with all rifles combined. Of homicides committed with rifles, an even smaller subset of them are committed using FMJ ammo. Of all rifle homicides committed using FMJ ammo, an even smaller subset are gunshots to the skull using FMJ ammo fired from a rifle. I'm sure most of Vincent Di Maio's experience with homicides using FMJ ammo would be with handgun ammo. Typically, handguns have about half the muzzle velocity of Oswald's Carcano, which had an average muzzle velocity of 2265 fps. Since FMJ bullets fired from a handgun have about half the velocity of Oswald's FMJ bullet, it makes no sense to believe such ammo would shatter to the same degree as those fired from Oswald's Carcano. Given the small sample size of homicides committed with FMJ rifle ammo fired into the victim's skull, it makes the statement that "no FMJ bullet would never, ever, ever produce the kind bullet fragmentation that we see on the JFK autopsy skull x-rays." a highly dubious one.

PS. Are you aware the statement you made which I quoted contains a double negative. Maybe you should remember that next time you want to chastise me for my spelling and grammar errors.   

I'm guessing that you didn't bother to read the rest of the thread before you posted your reply. I also gather that your research into forensic and ballistics evidence in the JFK case has been rather insufficient.

You're the one "spewing misinformation." Again, you appear to have posted this gaffe without reading the rest of the thread, but even then you should have known better than to make such an erroneous claim.

One, no FMJ bullet would never, ever, ever produce the kind bullet fragmentation that we see on the JFK autopsy skull x-rays. Those x-rays show a "lead snowstorm" of over 40 tiny fragments in the right-frontal region, which alone automatically rules out FMJ ammo, as world-renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Vincent DiMaio pointed out:

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Are we clear? Let's review: (1) In the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment if they penetrate bone, they will only leave "a few" fragments. And (2) if an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," this "rules out" FMJ ammo.

Two, the alleged murder weapon was a low-velocity rifle. I quote none other than FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier, who explained this to the Warren Commission:

Mr. FRAZIER. Considerably less. The recoil is nominal with this weapon, because it has a very low velocity and pressure, and just an average-size bullet weight.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is the killing power of the bullets essentially similar to the killing power at these ranges---the killing power of the rifles you have named?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. How much difference is there?
Mr. FRAZIER. The higher velocity bullets of approximately the same weight would have more killing power. This has a low velocity. . . . (3 H 414, emphasis added)

I'm guessing that you didn't bother to read the rest of the thread before you posted your reply. I also gather that your research into forensic and ballistics evidence in the JFK case has been rather insufficient.

No, I didn't bother to read through most of the thread.  Why?  Did you backpedal?

The bottom line is that you stated that "FMJ bullets will never, ever, ever fragment in this manner" as you were describing a specific manner in which the bullet which struck Kennedy in the head fragmented.  I am telling you that what you are saying is simply not true.

Full metal jacketed bullets can indeed fragment in ANY specific manner when traveling at full velocity and striking a skull.

Rydberg also said the following:

-- That the "stare of death" autopsy photo does not show the damage that was visible on JFK's face during the autopsy.

-- That there are many autopsy photos missing from the official collection.

-- That he doubted that the autopsy photos in evidence are the authentic autopsy photos.

-- That he and other hospital personnel involved with the autopsy or JFK medical evidence in any way were placed under strict gag orders.

It's nice that Ryberg has skill as an artist. If he believes some of the things you attribute to him, he is a real kook.

The lack of damage to the windshield in Altgens 6 has already been pretty thoroughly explained. Yourf OP fails completely at that point, and can't be resuscitated by anything Weldon presented.

Another surreal denial that simply ignores contrary evidence.

So never mind that Weldon demonstrated with a huge enlargement of Altgens 6 that the photo shows windshield damage? Never mind that Waldon also demonstrated that some subsequent printed versions of Altgens 6 were altered to conceal the damage? I mean, he proves this for all to see in his 1999 presentation. Did you even bother to watch the video of the presentation?

And what about the windshield damage visible in some of the pre-Z256 frames of the Zapruder film in the MPI large-format version of the film? If you spend a small amount of money and buy the DVD of the MPI version and play it on a large HD flat screen TV, you can see the damage with your own eyes in at least a few of the pre-Z256 frames that Dr. Mantik discusses. We both know your theory of the shooting has no plausible explanation for that damage, which is why you won't admit its existence.