AlBStern wrote: I don't get why it would be that hard to duplicate similar conditions (aside from the pressure associated with shooting the president)

Oh please please please let's try and duplicate the conditions exactly


or maybes we could fix the scope.

Rick Reuben wrote:Galanter claims that he has seen the shooting conditions duplicated exactly:

galanter wrote:I've seen more than one demonstration of Oswalds shooting being entirely possible.

The typical pro-conspiracy evidence, however, is bunk. The shot can be made

He uses 'shot' in the singular a lot in this thread.,

Sorry, I meant to say:

I've seen more than one demonstration of Oswalds shooting being entirely possible.

The typical pro-conspiracy evidence, however, is bunk. The shots can be made.

One of the issues with bolt action is that you have to re-aim after ejecting.

other issues: sitting/crouching and shooting downwards is not the easiest position for accuracy.

his first shot would've most likely been the most accurate. he would've been loaded and ready to go and the target would've been closest. each subsequent shot would be likely be increasingly inaccurate.

If he was inaccurate enough on the first shot to hit the target in the throat, you have to wonder if it was just dumb luck on the 3rd shot. If that's the case, which is entirely plausible, the odds were very long for that to happen. Perhaps that's what happened, but no one seems to be saying that. they all seem to either write that he was a crack shot or that the shot is easy.

I saw a show that had a relative of Oswald (I can't remember what relative, and don't want to say brother...) and he took the interviewer outside and had the same type of gun with him. He said "count" and when the interviewer started counting he aimed, cocked and fired off more than 3 shots in succession in time with no problem.

He said Lee Harvey Oswald would have been even faster and an extremely accurate shot, and was fully convinced Lee had the ability as well as the motives to do it.

If Bobby hadn't of gone after organized crime, none of this would have happened...

AlBStern wrote:Does anyone find it strange that the test was conducted by unnamed "Italian weapons experts" and that there doesn't appear to be any accompanying video of the test? Why would their identities need to be kept secret?

Hey, fugghedaboutit! Vinny don't need ta tell nobody nothin'.

I think it is entirely possible and likely that he had time to fire those shots.

As for hitting a moving target, that is entirely possible as well. I've seen better shots against moving targets with my own eyes. Not as likely but still very possible. If he was shooting, he might have missed, but he didn't.

The angle of the shots, and the wounds caused, and the most viable evidence here for the "anybody-else-but-lee-harvey" idea.

Enough, already. Everyone knows Don DeLillo's novel Libra is the definitive account of the Kennedy assassination. People working for the government encouraged Oswald to do it, hoping it would be a near miss. He got off some good/lucky shots.

You guys don't still believe that JFK was a great man, do you?

Boombats wrote:

AlBStern wrote:Does anyone find it strange that the test was conducted by unnamed "Italian weapons experts" and that there doesn't appear to be any accompanying video of the test? Why would their identities need to be kept secret?

Hey, fugghedaboutit! Vinny don't need ta tell nobody nothin'.

I think you need us to manage your waste, if you get my drift.