Author Topic: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle  (Read 34412 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online Joe Elliott

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2242
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2017, 11:56:30 PM »

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Everyone knows that the assassination rifle was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD with a telescopic sight mounted on it, and it is assumed that Oswald used this telescopic sight for at least one of the shots. What is not commonly known is the type and quality of this scope, the type and quality of the scope mount, the quality of the work in mounting the scope to the rifle and how all of these factors would affect the sighting in of this telescopic sight plus the ability of this telescopic sight to remain sighted in any longer than the next successive shot.

Using testimonial evidence presented to the Warren Commission, I will show why Oswald, who had rifle training in the USMC but who was never trained in the use and maintenance of a telescopic rifle sight, would have quickly become frustrated with the gross deficiencies of the telescopic sight on C2766, and would have removed the telescopic sight and mount from this rifle long before 22/11/63.


The rifle with the scope mounted could be aimed with the scope or the iron sights. The scope in no way prevented the iron sights from being used. This has been demonstrated in firing tests with that type of rifle. This is just one of those inconvenient truth that many wish to ignore.

While using the scope was not a realistic option for aiming the scope (probably not, but we will never know for certain) there are many reasons why Oswald would chose to keep the scope mounted.

1.   It did not prevent the iron sights from being used.

2.   It makes the rifle look more “lethal”. Like the assassin really knew what he was doing when he used it as the murder weapon, because it had a scope.

3.   If nothing else, the scope could help him identify JFK as soon as possible, after rounding the corner onto Houston Street, allowing him to know as soon as possible which vehicle JFK was in and where he was sitting in. He could see this without having to take the time to put down his rifle and pick it up again.


4.   Oswald was known to want to leave behind images that show how dangerous he was, which could increase his notoriety, after he, hopefully, escaped over the border

a.   The pictures he had his wife taken of him with his rifle, with the scope clearly visible and his handgun.

b.   The Same pictures that show him dressed in black.


c.   His insistence, just before leaving the jail, to dress in black, to wait for his black sweater to be brought to him, which ironically delayed him just enough to allow Jack Ruby to arrive just in time to shoot him.

At best, one can argue that the scope would be perhaps an annoyance that he might have want to ignore. But many people pretend that this arguments don’t exist and it really only makes sense for him to remove the scope before using the rifle.


Online Walt Cakebread

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10941
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2017, 12:06:46 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The rifle with the scope mounted could be aimed with the scope or the iron sights. The scope in no way prevented the iron sights from being used. This has been demonstrated in firing tests with that type of rifle. This is just one of those inconvenient truth that many wish to ignore.

While using the scope was not a realistic option for aiming the scope (probably not, but we will never know for certain) there are many reasons why Oswald would chose to keep the scope mounted.

1.   It did not prevent the iron sights from being used.

2.   It makes the rifle look more “lethal”. Like the assassin really knew what he was doing when he used it as the murder weapon, because it had a scope.

3.   If nothing else, the scope could help him identify JFK as soon as possible, after rounding the corner onto Houston Street, allowing him to know as soon as possible which vehicle JFK was in and where he was sitting in. He could see this without having to take the time to put down his rifle and pick it up again.


4.   Oswald was known to want to leave behind images that show how dangerous he was, which could increase his notoriety, after he, hopefully, escaped over the border

a.   The pictures he had his wife taken of him with his rifle, with the scope clearly visible and his handgun.

b.   The Same pictures that show him dressed in black.


c.   His insistence, just before leaving the jail, to dress in black, to wait for his black sweater to be brought to him, which ironically delayed him just enough to allow Jack Ruby to arrive just in time to shoot him.

At best, one can argue that the scope would be perhaps an annoyance that he might have want to ignore. But many people pretend that this arguments don’t exist and it really only makes sense for him to remove the scope before using the rifle.



Mr Elliot, have you ever fired a carcano with the scope mounted like it was on CE 139 ??

Online Bob Prudhomme

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 862
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #9 on: March 20, 2017, 12:16:51 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The rifle with the scope mounted could be aimed with the scope or the iron sights. The scope in no way prevented the iron sights from being used. This has been demonstrated in firing tests with that type of rifle. This is just one of those inconvenient truth that many wish to ignore.

While using the scope was not a realistic option for aiming the scope (probably not, but we will never know for certain) there are many reasons why Oswald would chose to keep the scope mounted.

1.   It did not prevent the iron sights from being used.

2.   It makes the rifle look more “lethal”. Like the assassin really knew what he was doing when he used it as the murder weapon, because it had a scope.

3.   If nothing else, the scope could help him identify JFK as soon as possible, after rounding the corner onto Houston Street, allowing him to know as soon as possible which vehicle JFK was in and where he was sitting in. He could see this without having to take the time to put down his rifle and pick it up again.


4.   Oswald was known to want to leave behind images that show how dangerous he was, which could increase his notoriety, after he, hopefully, escaped over the border

a.   The pictures he had his wife taken of him with his rifle, with the scope clearly visible and his handgun.

b.   The Same pictures that show him dressed in black.


c.   His insistence, just before leaving the jail, to dress in black, to wait for his black sweater to be brought to him, which ironically delayed him just enough to allow Jack Ruby to arrive just in time to shoot him.

At best, one can argue that the scope would be perhaps an annoyance that he might have want to ignore. But many people pretend that this arguments don’t exist and it really only makes sense for him to remove the scope before using the rifle.



1. Yes the open sights could be used but, it would be extremely awkward with the eyepiece of the scope up against your face. I know this from experience, as a friend of mine had a side mounted scope on a Winchester Model 94, and I tried several shots with the open sights. Definitely not something I would want to do if I was attempting to get several shots off quickly.

It's not a matter of the open sights being possible to use; it's a question of why he would keep the scope on the rifle, once he discovered how horribly inadequate it really was.

2. Pure conjecture. You have no way of knowing what LHO thought.

3. Help to identify JFK? What a laugh, Joe. Seriously? Let's see now, the first vehicle, the biggest limo in the motorcade and it has the flags flying on the front fenders. Oh, and Jackie is dressed in pink, so that kinda narrows it down, too. No, he didn't need a scope to ID JFK.

4. More conjecture, and very weak arguments. If killing JFK did not leave an image, I doubt that having a scope on the rifle would help.

Anyways, the theme of this thread is why LHO would have removed the scope, if this really was the assassination rifle. Once I have presented all of my arguments, you will see there were far more reasons to remove the scope than to keep it on.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 12:18:02 AM
by Bob Prudhomme
»
"Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car." WC testimony of SA Clint Hill

Online Walt Cakebread

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10941
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #10 on: March 20, 2017, 12:53:37 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
1. Yes the open sights could be used but, it would be extremely awkward with the eyepiece of the scope up against your face. I know this from experience, as a friend of mine had a side mounted scope on a Winchester Model 94, and I tried several shots with the open sights. Definitely not something I would want to do if I was attempting to get several shots off quickly.

It's not a matter of the open sights being possible to use; it's a question of why he would keep the scope on the rifle, once he discovered how horribly inadequate it really was.

2. Pure conjecture. You have no way of knowing what LHO thought.

3. Help to identify JFK? What a laugh, Joe. Seriously? Let's see now, the first vehicle, the biggest limo in the motorcade and it has the flags flying on the front fenders. Oh, and Jackie is dressed in pink, so that kinda narrows it down, too. No, he didn't need a scope to ID JFK.

4. More conjecture, and very weak arguments. If killing JFK did not leave an image, I doubt that having a scope on the rifle would help.

Anyways, the theme of this thread is why LHO would have removed the scope, if this really was the assassination rifle. Once I have presented all of my arguments, you will see there were far more reasons to remove the scope than to keep it on.

It's easy to proclaim how a person could use the iron sights because the scope was mounted askew, but it's an entirely different horse race when it comes to doing it....

Online Bob Prudhomme

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 862
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #11 on: March 20, 2017, 01:05:21 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's easy to proclaim how a person could use the iron sights because the scope was mounted askew, but it's an entirely different horse race when it comes to doing it....

Hey Walt, you're absolutely right. Did you read my PM ?
"Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car." WC testimony of SA Clint Hill

Online Bob Prudhomme

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 862
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #12 on: March 20, 2017, 01:16:13 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The man in this photo is using open sights. Where would the scope be in relation to his head, if he was shooting C2766?
"Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car." WC testimony of SA Clint Hill

Online Bob Prudhomme

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 862
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #13 on: March 20, 2017, 01:38:22 AM »
Here is the modern equivalent of the 4 x 18 Ordnance Optics Inc. scope found on C2766. It can be ordered off of Ebay for US $5.28 plus Free Shipping from China.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Note that it says "Air Rifle Telescopic Scope Sights" in the description.

Edit: Actually, this would be a better scope, as its objective lens is 2 mm larger in diameter.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 01:39:37 AM
by Bob Prudhomme
»
"Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car." WC testimony of SA Clint Hill