FBI Evidence Proves Oswald's Ammunition was not Capable of Sufficient Accuracy to Kill JFK

[Bob Prudhomme]

Sorry, John, I didn't quite catch the names of the shooting clubs you operate, or the business name you operate under as a Registered Firearms Dealer. Could you repeat them for us?

Now you are just being childish - you know perfectly well that I didn't give them.

JL.

Perhaps you could give them to us then? I may wish to go shooting next time I go to the UK. Or purchase a firearm from you.

[Lauren Johnson]

Bob, John,

I am not at all gun knowledgeable and certainly not with regards to the MC and all the details that go with it. It is very difficult for me to summarize the argument that each of you is putting forth. I would appreciate it if you could at least summarize what is at stake here.

John, a question. You seem to be saying that the MC of 6th floor of the TSBD was used to shoot at JFK and that all three shots came from that gun?

[John Lewis]

Sorry, John, I didn't quite catch the names of the shooting clubs you operate, or the business name you operate under as a Registered Firearms Dealer. Could you repeat them for us?

Now you are just being childish - you know perfectly well that I didn't give them.

JL.

Perhaps you could give them to us then? I may wish to go shooting next time I go to the UK. Or purchase a firearm from you.

I could but I'm not going to for reasons which I'm sure are pretty obvious to anyone reading this. Of course, you'll protest that the reasons aren't obvious to you so I'll waste several paragraphs worth of time telling you which will just make the thread look untidy.

JL.

[Bob Prudhomme]

Sorry, John, I didn't quite catch the names of the shooting clubs you operate, or the business name you operate under as a Registered Firearms Dealer. Could you repeat them for us?

Now you are just being childish - you know perfectly well that I didn't give them.

JL.

Perhaps you could give them to us then? I may wish to go shooting next time I go to the UK. Or purchase a firearm from you.

I could but I'm not going to for reasons which I'm sure are pretty obvious to anyone reading this. Of course, you'll protest that the reasons aren't obvious to you so I'll waste several paragraphs worth of time telling you which will just make the thread look untidy.

JL.

You sound very experienced at this game, John. Did you really come to this forum just to get advice on a rifle you'd like to purchase?

[John Lewis]

Bob, John,

I am not at all gun knowledgeable and certainly not with regards to the MC and all the details that go with it. It is very difficult for me to summarize the argument that each of you is putting forth. I would appreciate it if you could at least summarize what is at stake here.

John, a question. You seem to be saying that the MC of 6th floor of the TSBD was used to shoot at JFK and that all three shots came from that gun?

Nope, not at all. What I am categorically not saying is that the shots (or any shots) came from that rifle.

The gist of the discussion is that Bob is saying that the shots categorically could not have come from that rifle due to the internal design of it's barrel and the size of the particular projectiles which were alleged to have travelled through it.

I am saying that he is wrong in that conclusion. Putting it simply, he asserts that the bullet (the projectile) is too small and would not be sufficiently stabilised by the barrel to fly in a straight line and would have deviated by a wide enough margin as it would be incapable of hitting JFK.

My point is that he is wrong. I know for an absolute fact that he is wrong because I have a rifle which fires a very similar cartridge with an almost identically dimensioned barrel and an essentially identical bullet to the one which Oswald is alleged to have fired yet it is perfectly accurate. Moreover, this dimensional difference between bullet size and internal barrel size is actually the norm and is even legally mandated by the proof authorities (the people who test the safety of all new arms) in 14 countries of the World including most of Western Europe.

In short; Bob is saying that the alleged shots could not have come from the rifle alleged to have been used by LHO. I am saying that his reasoning which brought him to that conclusion is incorrect.

JL.

[Lauren Johnson]

Bob, John,

I am not at all gun knowledgeable and certainly not with regards to the MC and all the details that go with it. It is very difficult for me to summarize the argument that each of you is putting forth. I would appreciate it if you could at least summarize what is at stake here.

John, a question. You seem to be saying that the MC of 6th floor of the TSBD was used to shoot at JFK and that all three shots came from that gun?

Nope, not at all. What I am categorically not saying is that the shots (or any shots) came from that rifle.

The gist of the discussion is that Bob is saying that the shots categorically could not have come from that rifle due to the internal design of it's barrel and the size of the particular projectiles which were alleged to have travelled through it.

I am saying that he is wrong in that conclusion. Putting it simply, he asserts that the bullet (the projectile) is too small and would not be sufficiently stabilised by the barrel to fly in a straight line and would have deviated by a wide enough margin as it would be incapable of hitting JFK.

My point is that he is wrong. I know for an absolute fact that he is wrong because I have a rifle which fires a very similar cartridge with an almost identically dimensioned barrel and an essentially identical bullet to the one which Oswald is alleged to have fired yet it is perfectly accurate. Moreover, this dimensional difference between bullet size and internal barrel size is actually the norm and is even legally mandated by the proof authorities (the people who test the safety of all news arms) in 14 countries of the World including most of Western Europe.

In short; Bob is saying that the alleged shots could not have come from the rifle alleged to have been used by LHO. I am saying that his reasoning which brought him to that conclusion is incorrect.

JL.

Bob, is John adequately summarizing your position?

[John Lewis]

Now you are just being childish - you know perfectly well that I didn't give them.

JL.

Perhaps you could give them to us then? I may wish to go shooting next time I go to the UK. Or purchase a firearm from you.

I could but I'm not going to for reasons which I'm sure are pretty obvious to anyone reading this. Of course, you'll protest that the reasons aren't obvious to you so I'll waste several paragraphs worth of time telling you which will just make the thread look untidy.

JL.

You sound very experienced at this game, John. Did you really come to this forum just to get advice on a rifle you'd like to purchase?

No, and at no point did I say that I did. I said I found it whilst looking for information on the rifle.

What 'game' are you referring to? This is simply a discussion about firearms and ballistics, as far as I'm concerned. I wasn't aware we were playing a game.

JL.

[Drew Phipps]

There is also this (which I've said earlier in this thread IIRC): It doesn't matter if the rifle/ammunition is "accurate enough to do the job" if in fact the rifle/ammo combination DID do the job. Oswald (or whoever) could have been aiming at Jackie, or LBJ, or Zapruder, or anything else, and still managed to shoot JFK. Let's work on eliminating the MC 91/38 with WCC ammo as the assassination weapon, as opposed to reducing the chance that a serious assassin would choose that combination.

[Michael Cross]

I have a rifle which fires a very similar cartridge with an almost identically dimensioned barrel and an essentially identical bullet to the one which Oswald is alleged to have fired yet it is perfectly accurate.

JL.

I am in no way a weapons expert, but I consider myself a critical thinker. Very similar, almost and essentially in no way make for a perfect comparison.

[Michael Cross]

Apparently related and current article:
http://kegisland.com/carcano-ammo-warnin...tizan.html