22-01-2015, 03:38 AM
If I recall correctly (and it's been a long while) what I meant was that it does not appear that the "average" inaccuracies observed in the targets at varying distances is consistent with a single rifle, and the ballistic effects, and sight/barrel effects, that you have been teaching us about here. The test results reported by the FBI don't match up, or even look remotely similar, to any of the ballistic curves that the ballistic calculator might produce for the weapon.
Are those inconsistencies the result of Frazier fudging the test to try to make the gun appear more accurate (i.e. a 4" high miss as opposed to a 36" high miss) at a longer distance, or are they evidence of multiple guns being used for the "test"?
(I might not accurately remember what I was trying to ask way back then.)
Are those inconsistencies the result of Frazier fudging the test to try to make the gun appear more accurate (i.e. a 4" high miss as opposed to a 36" high miss) at a longer distance, or are they evidence of multiple guns being used for the "test"?
(I might not accurately remember what I was trying to ask way back then.)
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."