JFK Conspiracy Theories IV: The One With The Whales

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's where No Other and most JFK CTers fail. The USMC is not a social club, it is a combat force. Every Marine gets the same basic training not matter what their actual job will be, and NOBODY becomes a Marine if they can't shoot well enough the meet the basic scores for the USMC.

Period.

Then, as a Marine, you still have to qualify with your weapon. If you don't your life sucks until you re-test and make the scores. During this time you have become a problem for your platoon Sergeant, and at least one Lt. So when you're not cleaning the latrine, having your personal area inspected, and extra PT you're at the range getting your skills in order.

If Oswald doesn't qualify with his weapon he gets his walking papers and a bus ticket home. He qualified...every time...
 
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0332a.htm
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0332b.htm

The scorebook was for the shooter in training to record his own results.
Oswald recorded those results.
When he shot for the record, his score was recorded by others.
But in basic training, he recorded his own score.

Please note the verbiage from the scorebook cited above:

PURPOSE OF SCORE BOOK

The score book is prepared in such form that the shooter can accurately record windage and elevation used, what he should have used, and the results of his firing.

INSTRUCTIONS:

(a) CALLING THE SHOT. -- After each shot, the shooter places a dot in the column headed "call," indicating where he thinks the shot has hit.
. . .
(e) The shooter will do all of his own recording. (emphasis added throughout).

That scorebook contains results recorded by Oswald. The original poster is correct. Oswald was not shooting for the official record at that point. Oswald was being taught to shoot, and there was no reason for him to falsify his shooting results.

If the original poster thinks it furthers his argument to claim that Oswald was a congenital liar who would lie about nearly everything, let him. He still needs to prove it. And he's doing himself no favors, as I pointed out that means any denials Oswald made in custody concerning his own guilt shouldn't be granted any credence.

Hank
 
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0332a.htm
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0332b.htm

The scorebook was for the shooter in training to record his own results.
Oswald recorded those results.
When he shot for the record, his score was recorded by others.
But in basic training, he recorded his own score.

Please note the verbiage from the scorebook cited above:

PURPOSE OF SCORE BOOK

The score book is prepared in such form that the shooter can accurately record windage and elevation used, what he should have used, and the results of his firing.

INSTRUCTIONS:

(a) CALLING THE SHOT. -- After each shot, the shooter places a dot in the column headed "call," indicating where he thinks the shot has hit.
. . .
(e) The shooter will do all of his own recording. (emphasis added throughout).

That scorebook contains results recorded by Oswald. The original poster is correct. Oswald was not shooting for the official record at that point. Oswald was being taught to shoot, and there was no reason for him to falsify his shooting results.

If the original poster thinks it furthers his argument to claim that Oswald was a congenital liar who would lie about nearly everything, let him. He still needs to prove it. And he's doing himself no favors, as I pointed out that means any denials Oswald made in custody concerning his own guilt shouldn't be granted any credence.

Hank

Hank - thank you, I stand corrected.

I was going to post a description of the qualifying process so readers w/o military or competition experience would understand the process, but I'll hold off on doing so.
 
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0332a.htm
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0332b.htm

The scorebook was for the shooter in training to record his own results.
Oswald recorded those results.
When he shot for the record, his score was recorded by others.
But in basic training, he recorded his own score.

Please note the verbiage from the scorebook cited above:

PURPOSE OF SCORE BOOK

The score book is prepared in such form that the shooter can accurately record windage and elevation used, what he should have used, and the results of his firing.

INSTRUCTIONS:

(a) CALLING THE SHOT. -- After each shot, the shooter places a dot in the column headed "call," indicating where he thinks the shot has hit.
. . .
(e) The shooter will do all of his own recording. (emphasis added throughout).

That scorebook contains results recorded by Oswald. The original poster is correct. Oswald was not shooting for the official record at that point. Oswald was being taught to shoot, and there was no reason for him to falsify his shooting results.

If the original poster thinks it furthers his argument to claim that Oswald was a congenital liar who would lie about nearly everything, let him. He still needs to prove it. And he's doing himself no favors, as I pointed out that means any denials Oswald made in custody concerning his own guilt shouldn't be granted any credence.

Hank
Thanks for clearing that up HSienzant. I did Army basic in '86 (damn, has it really been 30 years?) and we never self scored, even in practice. But then again, we were using pop-up silhouette targets, so the scoring had to be done in real time by Mk. 1 Eye-Ball.
 
That scorebook contains results recorded by Oswald. The original poster is correct. Oswald was not shooting for the official record at that point. Oswald was being taught to shoot, and there was no reason for him to falsify his shooting results.
Nothing but speculation regarding his falsifying scores, if a shooter is trustworthy, then why have others do the recording when it is official? If anybody believes this vindicates LHO as anything more than an average rifleman, then they are suspending disbelief.
 
Here's where No Other and most JFK CTers fail. The USMC is not a social club, it is a combat force. Every Marine gets the same basic training not matter what their actual job will be, and NOBODY becomes a Marine if they can't shoot well enough the meet the basic scores for the USMC.

Period.

Then, as a Marine, you still have to qualify with your weapon. If you don't your life sucks until you re-test and make the scores. During this time you have become a problem for your platoon Sergeant, and at least one Lt. So when you're not cleaning the latrine, having your personal area inspected, and extra PT you're at the range getting your skills in order.

If Oswald doesn't qualify with his weapon he gets his walking papers and a bus ticket home. He qualified...every time...
Who said he did not qualify? His average scores speak for themselves...
 
Who said he did not qualify? His average scores speak for themselves...

Luckily for Oswald it was an easy shot, and it's consistent with his scores:

1 - Miss

2 - Low

3- bullseye

Hardly stellar shooting. It just got the job done.

Unlucky for JFK, but a professional could have killed just about everyone in the car.
 
Nothing but speculation regarding his falsifying scores, if a shooter is trustworthy, then why have others do the recording when it is official? If anybody believes this vindicates LHO as anything more than an average rifleman, then they are suspending disbelief.

A bullseye at the third attempt is BELOW average.
 
You mean the self recorded, nobody else looking bulls eye? If nothing else this shows that LHO had difficulty shooting under pressure.

It does not.

Most every shooter, including professionals, have a reaction curve when in a real live fire shooting incident.

At the moment the shooting unfolds there's a time lag between muscle memory taking over and the initial settling in - in hunting it's usually referred to as "buck fever," but it's demonstrably true in the initial moments of a lethal force encounter.

The most eloquent description I ran across in reviewing LE otj shoots was the officer who couldn't believe what was happening, got into gear, missed with his first rounds but stopped the target before he was hit.

This is what he told me: "I know I missed, but then I remembered the rules." The rule being, Front Sight, Squeeze.

A guy lying in wait really isn't so much different, and LHO had ample hunting experience w/ his older brother even before he joined the Corps, so the fact that it took him more than one shot to get his self appointed job done isn't anything out of the ordinary.
 
You mean the self recorded, nobody else looking bulls eye? If nothing else this shows that LHO had difficulty shooting under pressure.

Nope. That would be the bullet through the head of JFK bulls eye.

You know, the one with hatloads of witnesses recorded in both still and movie format. That one. The one which is the topic of this thread. Which we are supposed to be discussing.
 
LHO's Marksmanship

At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter how "likely" LHO was to successfully pull off the shots. The fact of the matter is that the hard evidence indicates he did pull them off.

It's really whether you believe a complex and cold-blooded frame up to hide the true killer(s) of the POTUS, unlike has ever been known to occur before or since, or you believe that it didn't happen/couldn't realistically happen that way.

If you believe the latter, all that really matters is that Oswald was good enough *that day* even if he would have missed the next 99 times he tried it.
 
Nothing but speculation regarding his falsifying scores,

Thank you for that admission. Yes, it is only speculation that Oswald falsified his scores. Perhaps we can close the books on that now.


if a shooter is trustworthy, then why have others do the recording when it is official?

Uhmm, because they are now shooting for the record? While someone may feel no temptation to fudge a result on an unscored school practice exam (it's to your own benefit to score it honestly, and learn from your mistakes), they could very well feel it necessary to fudge an official self-scored result. So a neutral party scores the official tests. Do they do it differently where you come from?

If anybody believes this vindicates LHO as anything more than an average rifleman, then they are suspending disbelief.

With all due respect, you haven't told us your qualifications to be making this assessment.
Here's one expert's take on the difficulty of the shooting in Dealey Plaza:
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/zahm.htm

== quote ==
Mr. SPECTER. Now taking a look at Commission Exhibit No. 902, which as the record will show, has been introduced into evidence to depict the shot which struck President Kennedy in the head at a distance from the rifle in the window to the part of the President's body being 265.3 feet. Assuming the same factors about using a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle and pointing it down Elm Street as shown on Commission Exhibit No. 347, would a marksman of Mr. Oswald's capabilities using such a rifle with a 4-power scope be able to strike the President in the back of the head? Would Mr. Oswald possess the capability to complete such a shot which did, in this situation, strike the President in the back of the head?
Sergeant ZAHM. Yes; I think that aiming at the mass of what portion of the President is visible at that distance and with his equipment, he would very easily have attained a hit, not necessarily aiming and hitting in the head. This would have been a little more difficult and probably be to the top of his ability, aiming and striking the President in the head. But assuming that he aimed at the mass to the center portion of the President's body, he would have hit him very definitely someplace, and the fact that he hit him in the head, but he could have hit, got a hit.
Mr. SPECTER. So you would have expected a man of Oswald's capabilities at a distance of 265.3 feet to strike the President someplace aiming at him under those circumstances?
Sergeant ZAHM. Yes.
Mr. SPECTER. And within the range of where you would expect him to hit him, would that include the President's head?
Sergeant ZAHM. Yes.
Mr. SPECTER. And how would you characterize that shot with respect to whether it was difficult or not difficult? (Discussion off the record.)
Mr. SPECTER. Let's go back on the record. May the record show that Sergeant Zahm has questioned the appearance of the "photograph through rifle scope" which appear on Exhibits Nos. 895 and 902. And as the record will show, there are only four photographs on Exhibit No. 895 whereas there are eight on Commission Exhibit No. 902, so that necessarily the photograph through the rifle scope is much smaller as it is depicted on Exhibit No. 902, and I want you to bear that in mind, Sergeant Zahm, in answering the question as to whether you consider the shot at a distance of 265.3 feet to be difficult or not difficult; or characterize it for me in your own words.
Sergeant ZAHM. I consider it still an easy shot, a little more difficult from the President's body position and increase in distance of approximately 40 feet, but I still consider it an easy shot for a man with the equipment he had and his ability.
Mr. SPECTER. Assuming that there were three shots fired in a range of 4.8 to 5.6 seconds, would that speed of firing at that range indicated in the prior questions be within Mr. Oswald's capabilities as a marksman?
Sergeant ZAHM. Yes.
Mr. SPECTER. What effect if any would the alinement of the street have on the moving vehicle in the way that it is shown on the picture, Exhibit, No. 348?
Sergeant ZAHM. This is a definite advantage to the shooter, the vehicle moving directly away from him and the downgrade of the street, and he being in an elevated position made an almost stationary target while he was aiming in, very little movement if any.
Mr. SPECTER. How would the fact that the street had a 3° decline affect the difficulty of the shot.
Sergeant ZAHM. It would make it easier because Oswald was in an elevated position, and therefore if the car was traveling on a level terrain, it would apparently--he would have to keep adjusting by holding up a little bit as the car traveled. But by going downgrade this just straightened out his line of sight that much better.
== unquote ==
 
A guy lying in wait really isn't so much different, and LHO had ample hunting experience w/ his older brother even before he joined the Corps, so the fact that it took him more than one shot to get his self appointed job done isn't anything out of the ordinary.
Your comparison of hunting (LHO did hunting with a shot gun and not a rifle. He stated this while being interrogated) to assassinating the most powerful man in the world is unique but then again I have not killed a person so I am not qualified to challenge your assessment other than hunting and assassinations are interesting bedfellows.
 
Thank you for that admission. Yes, it is only speculation that Oswald falsified his scores. Perhaps we can close the books on that now.
non sequitur




Uhmm, because they are now shooting for the record? While someone may feel no temptation to fudge a result on an unscored school practice exam (it's to your own benefit to score it honestly, and learn from your mistakes), they could very well feel it necessary to fudge an official self-scored result. So a neutral party scores the official tests. Do they do it differently where you come from?
Morals



With all due respect, you haven't told us your qualifications to be making this assessment.
Here's one expert's take on the difficulty of the shooting in Dealey Plaza:
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/zahm.htm

== quote ==
Mr. SPECTER. Now taking a look at Commission Exhibit No. 902, which as the record will show, has been introduced into evidence to depict the shot which struck President Kennedy in the head at a distance from the rifle in the window to the part of the President's body being 265.3 feet. Assuming the same factors about using a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle and pointing it down Elm Street as shown on Commission Exhibit No. 347, would a marksman of Mr. Oswald's capabilities using such a rifle with a 4-power scope be able to strike the President in the back of the head? Would Mr. Oswald possess the capability to complete such a shot which did, in this situation, strike the President in the back of the head?
Sergeant ZAHM. Yes; I think that aiming at the mass of what portion of the President is visible at that distance and with his equipment, he would very easily have attained a hit, not necessarily aiming and hitting in the head. This would have been a little more difficult and probably be to the top of his ability, aiming and striking the President in the head. But assuming that he aimed at the mass to the center portion of the President's body, he would have hit him very definitely someplace, and the fact that he hit him in the head, but he could have hit, got a hit.
Mr. SPECTER. So you would have expected a man of Oswald's capabilities at a distance of 265.3 feet to strike the President someplace aiming at him under those circumstances?
Sergeant ZAHM. Yes.
Mr. SPECTER. And within the range of where you would expect him to hit him, would that include the President's head?
Sergeant ZAHM. Yes.
Mr. SPECTER. And how would you characterize that shot with respect to whether it was difficult or not difficult? (Discussion off the record.)
Mr. SPECTER. Let's go back on the record. May the record show that Sergeant Zahm has questioned the appearance of the "photograph through rifle scope" which appear on Exhibits Nos. 895 and 902. And as the record will show, there are only four photographs on Exhibit No. 895 whereas there are eight on Commission Exhibit No. 902, so that necessarily the photograph through the rifle scope is much smaller as it is depicted on Exhibit No. 902, and I want you to bear that in mind, Sergeant Zahm, in answering the question as to whether you consider the shot at a distance of 265.3 feet to be difficult or not difficult; or characterize it for me in your own words.
Sergeant ZAHM. I consider it still an easy shot, a little more difficult from the President's body position and increase in distance of approximately 40 feet, but I still consider it an easy shot for a man with the equipment he had and his ability.
Mr. SPECTER. Assuming that there were three shots fired in a range of 4.8 to 5.6 seconds, would that speed of firing at that range indicated in the prior questions be within Mr. Oswald's capabilities as a marksman?
Sergeant ZAHM. Yes.
Mr. SPECTER. What effect if any would the alinement of the street have on the moving vehicle in the way that it is shown on the picture, Exhibit, No. 348?
Sergeant ZAHM. This is a definite advantage to the shooter, the vehicle moving directly away from him and the downgrade of the street, and he being in an elevated position made an almost stationary target while he was aiming in, very little movement if any.
Mr. SPECTER. How would the fact that the street had a 3° decline affect the difficulty of the shot.
Sergeant ZAHM. It would make it easier because Oswald was in an elevated position, and therefore if the car was traveling on a level terrain, it would apparently--he would have to keep adjusting by holding up a little bit as the car traveled. But by going downgrade this just straightened out his line of sight that much better.
== unquote ==

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=36#relPageId=311&tab=page

(WH8_Folsom pages 303 through 311 Full testimony) but here is a snippet.

Mr. ELY. You are referring, are you not, to the page designated 22 in Oswald's score book?
Colonel FOLSOM. Right-well, 22 as opposed to 23. He got out in the three ring, which is not good. They should be able to keep them-all 10 shots within the four ring.
Mr. ELY. And even if his weapon needed a great deal of adjustment in terms of elevation or windage. he still would have a closer group than that if he were a good shot?
Colonel FOLSOM. Yes. As a matter of fact, at 200 yards, people should get a score of between 48 and 50 in the offhand position.
Mr. ELY. And what was his score?
Colonel FOLSOM. Well, total shown on page 22 would be-he got a score of 34 out of a possible 50 on Tuesday, as shown on page 22 of his record book. On Wednesday, he got a score of 38, improved four points.
Do you want to compute these?
Mr. ELY. I don't see any point in doing this page by page. I just wonder, after having looked through the whole score book, if we could fairly say that all that it proves is that at this stage of his career he was not a particularly outstanding shot.
Colonel FOLSOM. No, no, he was not. His score book indicates-as a matter of fact-that he did well at one or two ranges in, order to achieve the two points over the minimum score for sharpshooter.



Lt. Col A.G. Folsom explains what this personal score book is designed to accomplish and he speaks to LHO scores both on the range and in the classroom (aptitude tests Reading Vocabulary and some Math).
 
I'm going to take this thread off moderated status, but please remember to post within the bounds of your Membership Agreement.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha
 
Oswald shot well enough to become a Marine and stay a Marine. The USMC was an is not the US Army, where they can shuffle you off to somewhere and hide you until your enlistment is up. If you can't shoot - you're out.

Oswald worked air traffic control, he wasn't a grunt.

In the months and weeks before the assassination he would go down to the river and shoot bottles, and he would go to a firing range. He shot more between August and November than he had during the last full year of his time in the Corps. The more you shoot the better you get.

It was an easy shot from the 6th floor, anybody with that rifle could have made it.
 
Oswald shot well enough to become a Marine and stay a Marine. The USMC was an is not the US Army, where they can shuffle you off to somewhere and hide you until your enlistment is up. If you can't shoot - you're out.

Oswald worked air traffic control, he wasn't a grunt.

In the months and weeks before the assassination he would go down to the river and shoot bottles, and he would go to a firing range. He shot more between August and November than he had during the last full year of his time in the Corps. The more you shoot the better you get.

It was an easy shot from the 6th floor, anybody with that rifle could have made it.

Yes and he missed one shot, got a wound with the second and finally hit with the third.
 
Yes and he missed one shot, got a wound with the second and finally hit with the third.

The shot only seems to be difficult, requiring a skilled shooter, in the eyes of somebody who needs a conceit for it to be a conspiracy.
 
The shot only seems to be difficult, requiring a skilled shooter, in the eyes of somebody who needs a conceit for it to be a conspiracy.

Absolutely those shots could have been made with iron sights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom