Shells, rifle, SN... Who?

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?  (Read 188000 times)

Online Mitch Todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1101
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #294 on: April 09, 2020, 04:05:30 AM »
"You have it backwards. If you want to say that Boone and Fritz saw the receiver inscription and the bare metal where the crest was ground off, then you need to show that they saw such things."
You got it wrong. I'm not claiming they found/saw a Argentine Mauser. The Argentine Mauser is only interjected into the conversation because it's the 7.65 Mauser that looks the most like the Carcano. Legitimizes the concept of misidentification.

My point is if, as WC apologists contend, Boone and Weitzman mistook the Carcano for a Argentine Mauser they would need to have been familiar enough with it to mistake one for the other. If they were the 2 prominent identifying characteristics, the ground off Argentine National Crest and the receiver inscriptions would have been mentioned in their affidavits and investigation reports.

IMO The '91 Argentine 7.65 Mauser is a smoke screen. Part of the cover-up. A sleight of hand trick. Make one Mauser appear and
another disappear.
1.) The prominent identifying characteristic on a model 89/90/91 is the magazine. If you've studied enough, you can pick out one on these rifles from 50 feet away based solely on magazine.
2.) Accurate identification using the magazine requires a certain level of knowledge of the model 89/90/91, as well as a certain level of knowledge of the design of other single-stack magazine rifles.
3.) If you have some knowledge, but not enough, you're prone to making mistakes.
4.) The rifle that most resembles the Carcano isn't a Mauser '91, it's a Gew88, which isn't a coincidence, BTW. OK, maybe a Mannlicher M1893.


 

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 864
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #295 on: April 09, 2020, 04:45:07 AM »
1.) The prominent identifying characteristic on a model 89/90/91 is the magazine. If you've studied enough, you can pick out one on these rifles from 50 feet away based solely on magazine.
2.) Accurate identification using the magazine requires a certain level of knowledge of the model 89/90/91, as well as a certain level of knowledge of the design of other single-stack magazine rifles.
3.) If you have some knowledge, but not enough, you're prone to making mistakes.
4.) The rifle that most resembles the Carcano isn't a Mauser '91, it's a Gew88, which isn't a coincidence, BTW. OK, maybe a Mannlicher M1893.

Sure, but who would take a "glance" at a rifle and make up all that crap, even if he did know the caliber of a Mauser and how many bullets the clip held?  Especially for a sworn affidavit pertaining to the assassination of the POTUS! No one would do that. Weitzman was obviously pressured into recanting his sworn testimony and concede that he only glanced at the rifle and guessed it was a Mauser. Sure, his affidavit was a guesstimate. Only a LNer believes that.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2020, 04:48:40 AM by Jack Trojan »

Online Mitch Todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1101
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #296 on: April 09, 2020, 05:03:07 AM »
Sure, but who would take a "glance" at a rifle and make up all that crap, even if he did know the caliber of a Mauser and how many bullets the clip held?  Especially for a sworn affidavit pertaining to the assassination of the POTUS! No one would do that. Weitzman was obviously pressured into recanting his sworn testimony and concede that he only glanced at the rifle and guessed it was a Mauser. Sure, his affidavit was a guesstimate. Only a LNer believes that.
Who said he made up any of it? That's what he honestly thought at the time. But just because he honestly thought so doesn't mean he was right. People do that all the time. The rest is just a bunch of your patented baseless assertions.

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 864
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #297 on: April 09, 2020, 05:11:53 AM »
Who said he made up any of it? That's what he honestly thought at the time. But just because he honestly thought so doesn't mean he was right. People do that all the time. The rest is just a bunch of your patented baseless assertions.

Why do you think Weitzman pretended like he knew what the rifle was, at a glance? This was a pretty important event to just "wing it", don't you think?

Online Mitch Todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1101
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #298 on: April 09, 2020, 05:45:38 AM »
Why do you think Weitzman pretended like he knew what the rifle was, at a glance? This was a pretty important event to just "wing it", don't you think?
When did I ever say Weitzman pretended anything? 
« Last Edit: April 12, 2020, 01:10:04 PM by Mitch Todd »

Offline Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 864
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #299 on: April 09, 2020, 05:59:12 AM »
When did I ever way Weitzman pretended anything?

I never said you claimed anything, I asked you a question. Why do you think Weitzman pretended he knew the rifle was a Mauser, conjured up specific details about it, at a glance, and swear by it?

Online Mitch Todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1101
Re: Shells, rifle, SN... Who?
« Reply #300 on: April 09, 2020, 06:06:14 AM »
I never said you claimed anything, I asked you a question. Why do you think Weitzman pretended he knew the rifle was a Mauser, conjured up specific details about it, at a glance, and swear by it?
Your question presupposes that either I've said Weitzman pretended whatever, or that I think that Weitzman pretended whatever. Both presumptions are the result of your own cognitive disfunctions.