• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

JFK assassination debate

dallasroofer said:
Got 'nother one for you boys:
Click to expand...

You want us to tell you what to do? Here is some free advice. Drop the Forest Gump imitation, it is boring and makes people laugh at you. You are all talk and no action. Where is the beef?

Ranb
 
Here is how I mounted a scope on my Carcano; to the left and rotated 90 degrees to allow use of the clip. The stock is rather slender, so the shooter can still use it right or left handed. Using it right handed requires a slight cheek contact on the stock while left handed requires the face to be pressed firmly against the stock to get the eye in back of the scope. Either way it is till easy to align the scope on the target.

carcanoaction.jpg


My Carcano is in rather rough condition, worse than Oswald’s back in 193 I think. But it is still a capable rifle in the hands of a trained marksman at short range.

So how does a 20 mph wind affect exterior ballistics? Check out http://www.biggameinfo.com/BalCalc.aspx I used the following data, 162 grain bullet with .300 BC. 2100 fps muzzle velocity, range to target 90 yards, 20 mph wind at 90 degrees. The result was that the bullet drifts 2.8 inches across the field of view at 90 yards. Earlier I said that my earlier calculations said the target speed required a lead of about 3 inches. So if the wind was blowing 90 degrees to the bullet path, then a lead of 6 inches would be good. If it was blowing 270 degrees, then no lead would be required as it would nearly cancel out target speed.

So why are you concerned about the wind again? This stuff is easy to figure out; why aren’t you figuring it out on your own? Spend more time doing research and less time fooling around in front of the camera and you will appear to be less silly.

Ranb
 
I just don't know what to do... :rolleyes:

ETA: Oh, and do you have a daughter named Miley?
 
Last edited:
I Ratant said:
The Ordnance Optics scope (I have that scope) is mounted to the left so that the user of the rifle can put the friggin' bullets in the friggin' gun!
Without the bullets in the clip, it is a single shot rifle.
The iron sights are right there, ready to use, and will put the bullet into the target at 300 meters, when the user aims at the belt-buckle of the target.
The number of CTwits that don't know and can't understand this never ceases to amaze me.
Click to expand...

One thing folks like to say is that Oswald's Carcano had a 'cheap Japanese scope'.

While it was certainly inexpensive, the description 'cheap' is used to imply it was junk.

Quite simply, Japanese didn't make junk optics.
 
My scope, and those that Howard Donahue, who tested the Oswald rifle, has on his Carcanos became unusable after just a few shots, as happened to the scope on Oswald's rifle.
The cross-hairs become displaced from the center of the field of view due to the greater recoil of the 6.5mm rifle.
The scope is intended to be used on .22 LR rifles with their minimal recoil.
The FBI in attempting to get the rifle to shoot where the scope was pointing on the Oswald rifle had to perform some mechanical changes to the mount.
The fixed sights are more than adequate for the short range in Dealey Plaza.
 
Quick question (don't forget to check out the new vid on YouTube)

What does sectional density refer to? Seems like the wind has SOME effect, right?
 
I Ratant said:
.
I've got any number of Japanese optical products which are built down to a price, at the expense of quality.
Click to expand...

I also have a number of cheap Japanese optics that broke when used. But the stuff I own really has nothing to do with the Japanese optics that were available back in 1963. Got any vintage optics like that?

Ranb
 
I have the same scope that was on the Oswald rifle.
Purchased in Culver City, in 1994.
Howard Donahue (author of 'Mortal Error') also has no regard for the quality of this scope.
 

Attachments

  • CarcanoScope.jpg
    CarcanoScope.jpg
    94.9 KB · Views: 2
  • CarcanoScope-01.jpg
    CarcanoScope-01.jpg
    89.9 KB · Views: 2
I Ratant said:
My scope, and those that Howard Donahue, who tested the Oswald rifle, has on his Carcanos became unusable after just a few shots, as happened to the scope on Oswald's rifle.
Click to expand...

How much could Oswald's scope alignment been affected when he tossed the rifle behind the boxes? It's not like he carefully laid it on the floor after he was done.
 
I Ratant said:
I have the same scope that was on the Oswald rifle.
Purchased in Culver City, in 1994.
Howard Donahue (author of 'Mortal Error') also has no regard for the quality of this scope.
Click to expand...

Have you read "Mortal Error"?
 
HeyLeroy said:
Have you read "Mortal Error"?
Click to expand...
.
Read it, called up and talked to Howard Donahue, he's sent me photos of his rifles and talked about his experiences.
I put no credence in his theory about the AD from the SS limosine.
Had that happened, the other agents in the car would have piled on the guy.
An "Oops, my bad, Jack." wouldn't have prevented his immediate arrest and detention.
That didn't happen.
Howard and Bonar Menninger were sued by the survivors of the SS agent mentioned, and lost the case.
 
I was impressed by the book. I don't say that it's the most plausible theory but I do think that it has its merits.

From what I can find, it was the book's publishers that were sued (Simon & Schuster and St. Martin's Press) originally, but the case was tossed out as it was filed too far past the statute of limitations (http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/00/hickey.lawsuit).

But as the information was reprinted, the case was re-instated, and the publisher settled: http://web.archive.org/web/20031109023919/http://www.hannibal.net/stories/020698/jfk.html
 
Thanks Ranb

Sorry, meant no offense by calling you my friend. Just an expression. Anyway, I read that there were strong gusts (up to 25 mph that day). I can't find the link, so I'll drop that contention. I'm working on another video, just about done. I'll have it for you tomorrow with hard evidence. Hope you'll watch. Thanks for your patience. -RC
 
HeyLeroy said:
I was impressed by the book. I don't say that it's the most plausible theory but I do think that it has its merits.

From what I can find, it was the book's publishers that were sued (Simon & Schuster and St. Martin's Press) originally, but the case was tossed out as it was filed too far past the statute of limitations (http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/00/hickey.lawsuit).

But as the information was reprinted, the case was re-instated, and the publisher settled: http://web.archive.org/web/20031109023919/http://www.hannibal.net/stories/020698/jfk.html
Click to expand...
.
When it comes to information on this event, there's only 4 reliable sources.
The Warren Commission Report, the Zapruder film, the House Subcommittee on Assassinations Report, and Case Closed, which looks at all of it.
The MacAdams site is the best on-line source for opinion.
ALL the rest of the literature and on-line stuff is -crap-, and should be tossed in the sewers it belongs in.
What isn't fabricated and distorted is the product of disturbed minds, and is interesting only if one cares to see how far people will go for money or chasing fantasies.
 
Case Closed was a very good book; Posner briefly mentions Donahue's book. He didn't have very much to say about it; my guess is that he didn't read it entirely. It had only been published the year before CC, and with the mountain of research he did for CC I could understand that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom