Author Topic: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle  (Read 34389 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online Walt Cakebread

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10936
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #14 on: March 20, 2017, 02:17:31 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
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.

Rifle mounted scopes were relatively new to hunters and the general population in 1963........The term telescopic sight gave the media spin master's like ol Unc Walt Klunkite the sinister ring they needed to paint the arch villain Lee Harrrrrvy Ossssswald ( booooo, hisss) as a crack shot sniper with the very latest and deadliest equipment.   The unknowing pissants sucked it up, and many ignoramuses still believe the propaganda that was spewed by LBJ's cronies.    
« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 03:17:20 PM
by Walt Cakebread
»

Online John Iacoletti

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9059
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #15 on: March 20, 2017, 10:31:58 PM »
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.

There's a simpler explanation if you are an LN-er:  he didn't remove the scope because he had never actually used the rifle before.

Do you have any reason at all to think that LHO wanted notoriety for this?  He had a strange way of showing it.  And there's no way someone could use that scope to
figure out who was in which car.  If you don't believe that, try playing JFK Reloaded and use the scope to look around the motorcade.

Online Michael Capasse

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3641
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #16 on: March 21, 2017, 10:26:38 PM »
An 18 mm objective lens is extremely small

Hi Bob... 
What size objective lens might be expected on a scope for this type of rifle?
« Last Edit: March 21, 2017, 11:48:12 PM
by Michael Capasse
»

Online Bill Chapman

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3365
  • A View to a Kill
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #17 on: March 22, 2017, 12:43:49 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Rifle mounted scopes were relatively new to hunters and the general population in 1963........The term telescopic sight gave the media spin master's like ol Unc Walt Klunkite the sinister ring they needed to paint the arch villain Lee Harrrrrvy Ossssswald ( booooo, hisss) as a crack shot sniper with the very latest and deadliest equipment.   The unknowing pissants sucked it up, and many ignoramuses still believe the propaganda that was spewed by LBJ's cronies.    

Pretty sure WaltC said it was a cheap rifle

Online Walt Cakebread

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10936
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #18 on: March 22, 2017, 12:47:27 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Pretty sure WaltC said it was a cheap rifle

Ol Unca Walt was referring to the price.......While at the same time depicting it as a high powered deadly weapon with a telescopic sight.......

This may be one of the reasons ol Unca Walt reveled in calling the rifle a mauser..... It had a nice sinister ring to it......
« Last Edit: March 22, 2017, 12:49:35 AM
by Walt Cakebread
»

Offline Anthony Clayden

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #19 on: March 22, 2017, 01:06:06 AM »
Both scope and strap were superfluous to the task Oswald is planning, and even if he didn't know whether he needed the scope, he definitely did not need a strap on the gun.
So pull gun apart in garage either in the evening or in the morning and the dissembled parts into a large paper bag. (Surely your wanting to minimize bulk and weight so why take the strap?)
Then reassemble the gun at the TSBD and you have so much time and are so unstressed that you bother to put the strap back on.
Unless your planning to carry the gun some distance a strap just gets in the way.




Offline Joe Elliott

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2241
Re: Why Oswald Would Have Removed The Scope From The Rifle
« Reply #20 on: March 22, 2017, 02:48:06 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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


No. I have never fired a rifle of any sort. But others have fired Carcano rifles with similar scopes (identical scopes are not available, I assume) and found it not too difficult. See ARTICLE at the bottom of this post.

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.


Others have a different point of view. See ARTICLE at the bottom of this post.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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


But a very reasonable conjecture. And yes, I have not used an Ouija board to confirm what Oswald was really thinking.

But it certainly appears, from the reasons I listed, that Oswald was concerned about his image. He wanted to be photographed by his wife and presented to the press on November 24 wearing black. He wanted to be photograph by his wife holding his rifle with the scope clearly visible. It appears he was concerned about his image, about how images should portray him and his rifle. We can never say for certain, but that is what it certainly appears to be the case.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.


Did Oswald know that Jackie was dressed in pink? Did Oswald know that JFK’s limousine would be the biggest limousine? Did he know it would be the first? How could he tell which was the biggest limousine since JFK would be well by him by the time the last limousine came in view. Would JFK’s limousine be the only one having an American flag and if so, would Oswald know this? Oswald could tell from the Presidential flag, but that would even be harder to identify from over one hundred yards than JFK.

I never claimed that the scope needs to be kept mounted in order for Oswald to find JFK. But, it certainly would be useful to help him be certain of where JFK was sitting and confirm as soon as possible that he was not looking at some young congressman from Texas who was sitting next to his wife in pink. Perhaps he didn’t use the scope for this purpose. Perhaps he did. I just strongly suspect he did not use the scope to aim the rifle. But may have wanted to keep the scope mounted for reasons of his own, which I have speculated on.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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.


He certainly gave the impression he was concerned with his image. And while you don’t think having images of Oswald with a rifle with a scope makes him look more dangerous, Oswald may have felt it did.

In all the images I have seen of sniper’s, I always see them using a rifle with a scope. It is reasonable that anyone interested in appearing to be a sniper would likely like to have this image strengthen with a scope visible as well.

Can you find any image of a sniper, particularly an expert sniper, who is using a rifle without a scope?




In any case, you are not logically consistent with your reasoning. If I think Oswald was concerned with looking as dangerous as possible, wanted to appear in a picture with a rifle with a scope, that is merely SPECULATION. But your opposite belief, that Oswald did not feel this way is in no way SPECULATION but you seem to think of it as almost an established fact. Because YOU don’t believe a scope makes Oswald look more dangerous, we can all be confident that Oswald didn’t feel that way either.

If you can going to criticize my speculation, at least acknowledge your own.



ARTICLE

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The last element from this American Handgunner article that should be noted is Ayoob’s statement that “Most of the shooters (in the recreation) agreed that, given the well under 100 range involved, iron sights were much easier to use effectively.”

Using:
The shooters used Carcano carbines with scopes and mounts similar to, but not exactly like, Oswald’s rifle.



The examples you have is just someone claiming the scope is awkward, when using the iron sights. And even if that was true, what does “awkward” mean? That it could not be done? Most of the shooters in the “Ayoob” recreation didn’t think so.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2017, 02:51:24 AM
by Joe Elliott
»