That's be great. I already mentioned the gunsamerica attempt, which concluded that no one can do a legitimate recreation because even if you were to find the exact batch of ammo Oswald's ammo came from, it's now so old that it makes any conclusions hopelessly unusable.
Thanks for providing that. I guess we have to weigh the gunsamerica hold-under claim with this, but regardless whether you have to aim 6 inches under the head or 7 inches, you will likely miss if you line up the sights with center of the target's head.
And I don't expect perfection. For example, I don't expect all the "I could make the JFK kill shot easily" guys here to reproduce the ambient temperature and humidity that were present in Dealey Plaza that day. Heck, I don't even expect you to factor in the windspeed and wind direction in your duplication. What you DO have to reproduce, at minimum, is the gun, sights, ammo and target as closely as possible. And to the degree that yours differ from the real ones, the confidence in your conclusions is lessened. That is just common sense.
The question to ask is: Would those people be justified in concluding they had the skill to make those shots? It's easy to hear about someone else succeeding at something and to say "I could make that buzzer-beating half-court jump shot" or "I could throw that in-overtime touchdown pass" or "I could sink that 20-yard approach putt" but in real life, it's not always that easy to actually do.
I don't know what to tell you except from a pure distance shot, it wasn't a half court jumpshot or a 20 yard putt for a win. In NBA terms, it was 15' away, a 4' putt and in NFL terms, it was a 15 yard pass to the wide open uncovered 6'6' Tight End. All tough to hit with money on the line but in terms of shooting, putting, hooping or TD's, easier for partially skilled people. Oswald had been a pro before and the shot was doable for him and no doubt for a large percentage on this gun board. It wasn't 250 yards with iron sites and I doubt temp, humidity, winds or Coriolis Effect made any difference.
Again, 2 cents. Maybe more gunman but Oswald could have pulled it off alone.
You may have no doubt, but am a skeptic who doesn't swallow claims just because someone makes them. I'd want to actually see a large percentage of this gun board have 3 tries with a rifle and sights and ammo just like Oswald used, on a head-sized target from 88 yards, and see a large percentage of them get 1/3 in the head zone.
It wasn't 250 yards with iron sites and I doubt temp, humidity, winds or Coriolis Effect made any difference.
My point is there should be no difficulty understanding it could be done and that Oswald could do it, as many others have done as I have provided supportive evidence. Not that it was an impossible feat, not that it was “easy”, just that it was doable. I just don’t see anything unbelievable here. Combine that with rest of the evidence that Oswald was the shooter and there is nothing to support a second shooter, what are you left with? Again let us know your theory since you apparently remain incredulous.
Now you’re just repeating demonstrable lies, as I’ve already referenced in this thread. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt but thanks for finally coming clean. That’s why this gets so tedious.
Now you’re just repeating demonstrable lies, as I’ve already referenced in this thread. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt but thanks for finally coming clean. That’s why this gets so tedious.
How about if you have chosen to use a flat basketball, a plastic toy football from the dollar store, and a Little Tykes "My First Golf Set" ?
..using an M1 Garand, a vastly superior firearm
You may have no doubt, but am a skeptic who doesn't swallow claims just because someone makes them. I'd want to actually see a large percentage of this gun board have 3 tries with a rifle and sights and ammo just like Oswald used, on a head-sized target from 88 yards, and see a large percentage of them get 1/3 in the head zone.
It was 80-90 yards using a rifle sighted in for 200 yards. And if you doubt that wind can affect POI at 88 yards, you may want to re-think that.
I agree that it's possible that he did it using a crap gun, crap ammo, and crappy sights.
I never said he couldn't do it, so your resorting to "he could do it" as some sort of rebuttal to me, is called a Straw Man fallacy.
I don't think you need to stoop to fallacies to make your arguments seem valid.
And these "many others" who have done it...who are they? What lengths did they go to in order to make their replications qualify as credible replications?
Not that it was an impossible feat, not that it was “easy”, just that it was doable.
Well, if that is the sum total of your arguments, I don't know what there was to even argue from your standpoint, since I never claimed it wasn't doable. More Straw Men?
Me neither, so what exactly is your complaint? I never said it's unbelievable that Oswald made 1/3 shots in the head zone from 88 yards using a rifle with a scope that couldn't be zeroed but that he chose not to remove from the gun, and using fixed open sights that were set for 200 yards. Find something hard to believe something is not the same as finding it impossible to believe, last time I checked.
And were you the poster who confessed to having questioned and doubted the WC Report's findings for most of your life? Why so much animosity to people who are basically you for most of your life?
Combine that with rest of the evidence that Oswald was the shooter and there is nothing to support a second shooter, what are you left with?
I have never claimed to have a theory, and I don't have one. I am just being like most-of-your-life you: There is one (or maybe 2 or 3) claim in the WC Report that I find curious or insufficiently explained and resolved. Sorry if you have a hard time believing that other people have a hard believing that.
I wonder how many whitetail sized deer are killed every year by hunters. Each one of those has a vital zone that is pretty much the same size as to what is being discussed here. Many of these are killed at similar distances or greater by just some random Joe in the woods with a rifle who has no military training.
It could be easy or hard, depending on the variables present--gun, ammo, sights,speed of target, steadiness of target, wind and elevation, state of mind of shooter, etc. If you're lucky in all those departments, then yeah, a kid could do it without difficulty.
I wonder how many whitetail sized deer are killed every year by hunters. Each one of those has a vital zone that is pretty much the same size as to what is being discussed here. Many of these are killed at similar distances or greater by just some random Joe in the woods with a rifle who has no military training.
I also wonder what the hit-to-miss ratio is among all those hunters. Some of them shoot other hunters. Or themselves. Many of them hit the deer in a non-vital zone. Some of them fall out of their tree stands.
A forum community dedicated to Glock firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, troubleshooting, accessories, classifieds, and more!
