GlockTalk Forum banner

281 - 300 of 330 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,829 Posts
I don't think a few on here really want to hear that. It confuses the issue with facts. After all they are trying to rate the shot right up there with the Canadian sniper who made the 2 mile shot.

I have learned a man sized target at 88y is near impossible using a scoped bolt rifle from a rested position.
I have learned that there is one person in this thread that has never shot a gun or is so incredibly incompetent with a firearm that he can't imagine someone else could hit a man sized target at 88yds.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,760 Posts
That summarizes what you have claimed for several pages.
I hope you are not a professional summarizer, because you aren't doing a very good job of it here.

You are the one elevating the difficulty
What the heck are you talking about? Why, in your mind, is accurately stating the conditions that actually existed that day according to the Warren Commission, "elevating the difficulty"?? Why do you distrust the WCR so much?

refusing to acknowledge others who have viewed the exact scene
Are you saying the Warren Commission never viewed the exact scene? Why are you refusing to acknowledge them? And what is this reasoning you're relying on--are you claiming that anyone who has visited the Book Depository is, de facto, a reliable authority on how easy it was for Oswald, in 3 shots or less, using a mil-surp rifle with fixed sights and mil surp ammo and an unusable scope, to hit the 7x9-inch moving target he was aiming at from a distance of 88 yards? How does merely looking out the window make them a ballistics and military firearms expert?

and you argue with someone who owns the exact rifle and has fire ammunition from the era through it.
Can you articulate exactly what my argument with that "someone" was? Try hard to make it an accurate "summary" this time.

You are the one making wildly exaggerated claims.
So to say that Oswald was using the equipment that the WC states he was using, equals making a wildly exaggerated claim? You're sure it wasn't just a moderately exaggerated one?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,760 Posts
Yeah, where would they possibly have gotten ammo from a year after Kennedy was assassinated
If you're referring to the Warren Commission, they are the ones who stated they were unable to get Oswald's actual gun to shoot reasonably accurately. If you're referring to claims of "countless" people in more recent times who have duplicated Oswald's "lucky shot" countless times, feel free to start citing them because so far all we have is "Just trust me, they did it." Sorry, not that gullible. Oh, and you will need to explain how they managed to duplicate the ammo Oswald used without traveling back in time to acquire a batch of it.

Jeff, I think you need to learn to shoot.
I think you need to learn how to think. I started shooting competitively at age 9.
 

·
AAAMAD
Joined
·
30,986 Posts
If you're referring to the Warren Commission, they are the ones who stated they were unable to get Oswald's actual gun to shoot reasonably accurately. If you're referring to claims of "countless" people in more recent times who have duplicated Oswald's "lucky shot" countless times, feel free to start citing them because so far all we have is "Just trust me, they did it." Sorry, not that gullible. Oh, and you will need to explain how they managed to duplicate the ammo Oswald used without traveling back in time to acquire a batch of it.


I think you need to learn how to think. I started shooting competitively at age 9.
You mean the same Warren commission that concluded that a single shooter firing from behind the President form an elevated position made the shot, and CBS was able to recreate the number of hits and inside the time.

Also the FBI ballistics lab also managed to make the shots in the desired time.



for a guy who’s been competitively shooting since 9, you don’t seem to grasp what the Warren Commission found, or ballistics....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,760 Posts
I have learned that there is one person in this thread that has never shot a gun or is so incredibly incompetent with a firearm that he can't imagine someone else could hit a man sized target at 88yds.
I have learned that there is one person in this thread that has never shot a gun or is so incredibly lacking in I.Q. that he can't imagine someone else MISSING a man sized target at 88yds
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,760 Posts
You mean the same Warren commission concluded that a single shooter firing from behind the President made the shot, and CBS was able to recreate the number of hits and inside the time.
I will take a look at it and evaluate it for credibility. Thanks
 

·
AAAMAD
Joined
·
30,986 Posts
It seems rather incredulous that you’d come here to discuss and debate the JFK shooting, so loudly tout the Warren Commisions report as justification for how hard the shot was (even though they conclude be pulled it off)

But you don’t know about the CBS or Ballistics Research recreations of the shooting.

https://danratherjournalist.org/sit...ents/1967 Warren Report Part 1 transcript.pdf


Heck here’s the actual testimony of one of the shooters who managed to pull off the shot. You might be interested to learn the WC listened to him...

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0226b.htm

https://www.discovery.com/news/2008/11/13/jfk-forensics-tech-02.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,829 Posts
I have learned that there is one person in this thread that has never shot a gun or is so incredibly incompetent with a firearm or so incredibly lacking in I.Q. that he can't imagine someone else MISSING a man sized target at 88yds
We already know he missed one shot so we don't have to imagine that. I dont believe for a minute that someone who has shot a rifle beyond 50 yds can't understand that those are shots are possible.
 

·
AAAMAD
Joined
·
30,986 Posts
We already know he missed one shot so we don't have to imagine that. I dont believe for a minute that someone who has shot a rifle beyond 50 yds can't understand that those are shots are possible.

He posted a video where 3 shooters are on record firing 3 times in 5 seconds, which is 3 seconds faster than Oswald, and 2 of them achieved as good, or better results.....


Yet he’s trying to argue how hard it is.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,760 Posts
He posted a video where 3 shooters are on record firing 3 times in 5 seconds, which is 3 seconds faster than Oswald, and 2 of them achieved as good, or better results.....
Yet he’s trying to argue how hard it is.
He is also hoping you have the sense to realize that NONE of the shooters in that video used the rifle's open sights--they used the scope--which was unusable on Oswald's gun, according to the Warren Commission. Remember them? And yet you place your faith in CBS News for accurate reporting....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,760 Posts
I dont believe for a minute that someone who has shot a rifle beyond 50 yds can't understand that those are shots are possible.
Yeah, so it's a good thing NOBODY here has said that those shots are impossible.

Look up "Straw Man Fallacy" so you can reduce the number of logical fallacies in your arguments.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,760 Posts
It seems rather incredulous...
I think "incredible" is the word you want. People can be branded as incredulous. Ideas can be branded as incredible.

Heck here’s the actual testimony of one of the shooters who managed to pull off the shot. You might be interested to learn the WC listened to him...
How does he stack up against Hathcock as an expert?

"Retired Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock is likewise skeptical of Oswald's alleged shooting feat. Hathcock is a former senior instructor at the U. S. Marine Corps Sniper Instruction School at Quantico, Virginia. He has been described as the most famous American military sniper in history. ... Craig Roberts asked Hathcock about the marksmanship feat attributed to Oswald by the Warren Commission. Hathcock answered that he did not believe Oswald could have done what the Commission said he did. Added Hathcock:

"... We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don't know how many times we tried it, but we couldn't duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did". (KILL ZONE, pp. 89-90).

IF Hathcock really said that, and if Craig Roberts is really who he claims to be, some people might trust what they say about Oswald's shooting abilities more than what some anonymous chair-dweller in an internet forum says that contradicts them.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,552 Posts
Well, we know SOMEONE shot JFK from behind using a rifle, so it had to be AT LEAST that distance to the Book Depository OR MORE if from any other building, proving the shots were possible, and were made on target, no matter what 'expert' claims otherwise.

Don't know why anyone is even arguing whether or not it's possible. It happened. FACT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,703 Posts
That is fairly accurate, in a general sort of way--there are exceptions as I bet you know. Do you disagree with the authors in the leading gun magazines (G&A, Shooting Times, Shooting Illustrated) who say that the quality of factory ammo has improved VASTLY over the past few decades?
Solids are solids. They still go bang.

Hollow point defensive or hunting ammo of today is much better than the SuperVel, and Glasser Safety slugs, etc. of the 60's and 70's.
 
281 - 300 of 330 Posts
Top