JFK Assassination Forum

  Hey John - Have you viewed the higher def Current Z Film(s) posted on You Tube? I have 1 that I prefer, and it clearly shows JFK being HIT with such force that he is PROPELLED BACKWARD into the backrest. JFK is hit with such force the he literally bounces off of the backrest and then falls to the (L) like a tree that has just been cut down.
                  We can argue the bona fides of the Current Z Film, but even hi def copies of that clearly display the impact of a Front (R) shot. The lower def Z Film copies are like watching anything on an old SD Broadcast/TV. Just think back to the stark difference between broadcast SD vs HD. This is why Bart Kamp continues gaining attention. He is posting better definition images. The Current Z Film images being posted on this Forum are outdated. Even the Z Film images that you are posting has all kinds of crappola consistently flying through it. That's a dead giveaway that this "material" dates way back.
                     

Did you happen to notice where JFK hit the seat? It was on the far right side. That shoots down the claim he went "back and to the left". He was already leaning to his left when the bullet struck his head. From that left leaning position, he went straight back.

While impossible to prove, the most likely explanation for JFK's rearward movement is a neuro-muscular reaction to the massive brain trauma. Also a contributing to the rearward movement could be the so called jet effect caused by the force full ejection of matter from the front of the head propelling him backward. I don't think that force would be enough to cause the backward movement by itself, but it probably was a contributing factor.

What we can rule out is the force of the bullet driving JFK backward. Bullets are two small and don't have that much throw weight. They only transfer a small amount of momentum to the body being struck. I have shot empty aluminum cans with a .44 Magnum and it usually doesn't even knock the cans down. That's because the cans offer almost no resistance to the bullet. There's almost no momentum transfer. Bullets throwing human bodies around like rag dolls is a Hollywood invention done for visual impact. The first time that was done was in the movie Shane. The gunfighter Wilson (Jack Palance)* gunned down a sodbuster whom he had goaded into drawing on him. To create the effect, a rope was tied around the sodbusters waist and as Wilson fired the gun, the sodbuster was yanked backward in an unrealistic manner. Since then, that kind of reaction has become a Hollywood staple in gunfights.

*In the movie Shane, Jack Palance was billed as Walter Jack Palance, a name he kept for several years until dropping the Walter. He was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for his role in Shane. He didn't win for Shane but four decades later he was nominated for the same award for City Slickers and won the Oscar for that performance.

Vigilantism can never be defended or supported John. Who gets to decide when the act can be done? The vigilante? How many Leo Franks do we need to have? Isn't one enough?

I don't defend or support vigilantism. That doesn't mean I can't be happy about it when it happens to someone like Oswald.

If Ruby hadn't shot Oswald none of us would be here. Oswald's lies would have been exposed, his acts revealed. He couldn't explain where he was, why he left work, why he was in that movie theater, how the BYPs were made, and on and on. His alibis would have fallen apart.

You underestimate the CT mindset. James Earl Ray confessed and was convicted and that hasn't stopped people from theorizing he was part of a conspiracy. Sirhan Sirhan gunned RFK down in a crowded room and still there are people who don't even think he was a lone gunman or even that he fired the shots. His conviction didn't stop the wild speculation. Neither would Oswald's. There are people who would claim he had been railroaded.

More important, if Ruby's act is defensible then does that mean the conspiracy crowd could be justified in shooting Ruth Paine when she lived? Some of them are certain she was one of the murderers; in fact they believe there's more evidence of her culpability than Oswald. So one of them could have shot her like Ruby shot Oswald? How about Michael Paine? Earl Warren? Hugh Aynesworth? Hoover? LBJ? Marina? There's a long list of people the conspiracy crowd is convinced murdered JFK. Would shooting them be justified? Like Ruby's act? Vigilantism for me but not for thee? How could you argue their acts, shooting Ruth Paine, was wrong?

Again, I don't justify Ruby's killing of Oswald, but I'm still glad he did it.

No, Ruby's act is indefensible on many levels.

For those not familiar, here is the story of Leo Frank: https://www.history.com/articles/leo-frank-lynching

I can applaud Ruby's act without defending it. Oswald's murder was a terrible thing but if it was going to happen to somebody, Oswald was a damn good choice.

I was four days short of my 12th birthday was Oswald was shot. I was out playing touch football in our neighbor's yard when my younger sister came running out of their house and over to our house yelling, "Mom, somebody shot Oswald.". A man followed her out and we asked him if it was true. He said, "Yeah, somebody just walked up and BOOM". The football game ended abruptly, and I went back home and saw the replay. I've always regretted I didn't get to see it happen live. I think it was about an hour and a half later, NBC's Frank McGee came on the air and announced Oswald had died. I remember being happy to hear that and I've never felt any different for one second since. I'm glad that little bastard never got to enjoy his newfound notoriety. I think he was looking forward to that, even knowing he would probably get the death penalty. It's unlikely the sentence would have been carried out. An 86-year-old Oswald might still be thumbing his nose at us from his jail cell. Jack Ruby handed down a death sentence Oswald couldn't appeal. Nice shot, Jack. I hope Oswald suffered greatly before he died.

Vigilantism can never be defended or supported John. Who gets to decide when the act can be done? The vigilante? How many Leo Franks do we need to have? Isn't one enough?

If Ruby hadn't shot Oswald none of us would be here. Oswald's lies would have been exposed, his acts revealed. He couldn't explain where he was, why he left work, why he was in that movie theater, how the BYPs were made, and on and on. His alibis would have fallen apart.

More important, if Ruby's act is defensible then does that mean the conspiracy crowd could be justified in shooting Ruth Paine when she lived? Some of them are certain she was one of the murderers; in fact they believe there's more evidence of her culpability than Oswald. So one of them could have shot her like Ruby shot Oswald? How about Michael Paine? Earl Warren? Hugh Aynesworth? Hoover? LBJ? Marina? There's a long list of people the conspiracy crowd is convinced murdered JFK. Would shooting them be justified? Like Ruby's act? Vigilantism for me but not for thee? How could you argue their acts, shooting Ruth Paine, was wrong?

No, Ruby's act is indefensible on many levels.

For those not familiar, here is the story of Leo Frank: https://www.history.com/articles/leo-frank-lynching

MT-

You raise an arcane question. Was the ammo found in the TSBD6 0.268 or 0.264?

The gun boards say you get better results, accuracy wise, with the 0.268.

My Carcano is a 7.35. Finding ammunition is harder, but finding ammunition that is the correct diameter (0.268" vs 0.264" for the 6.5mm version) is much easier.

the 7.35mm rifle is identical to CE139 in every way except for the bore.

If I could find a 6.5 short rifle at a reasonable cost, I might by one, but if I'm going to spend $500 on what would be a collector's item, I want it to be the same model as Oswald's. I can't think of a practical use I would have for such a rifle. I have better choices for home defense and I'm not a hunter. Even if I was, hunting with a rifle is prohibited in Ohio except for short range ammo, the kind typically used in handguns. Ohio deer hunters hunt with shotguns. There is a separate deer season a month later for hunting deer with primitive weapons, bows or muzzle loaders.