How far was the JFK shot?


PDA






notbubba
May 31, 2006, 12:10 PM
I thought I read somewhere that it was only 90 yards.

So how far was it?

If you enjoyed reading about "How far was the JFK shot?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Biker
May 31, 2006, 12:19 PM
I thought that it was 80 yards, but I could be wrong. In any case, he wasn't far *enough* away.

Biker

JohnBT
May 31, 2006, 12:27 PM
http://www.btinternet.com/~dr_paul_lee/DealeyPlaza3.jpg

A is the shooter's location and C, D, and E are the estimated locations of JFK at the time of the 3 shots.

Carl N. Brown
May 31, 2006, 12:35 PM
It was not difficult ranges, 136 to 265 feet.
I clobbered this together from diverse sources,
the range and timing of shots follows the
Failure Analysis Associates data.
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=40628&stc=1&d=1149092429

dev_null
May 31, 2006, 12:37 PM
I guess B and G are where the Teamsters, Illuminati, Cubans, CIA, Masons, Priory of Sion, and J. Ogre Hoover in a blue dress were shooting from? :evil:

rbernie
May 31, 2006, 12:46 PM
But the real killing shot was from the sewer grate between E and F. Sheesh - everybody knows THAT. ;)

Carl N. Brown
May 31, 2006, 01:19 PM
Cigarette Smoking Man from the sewer grate with a
takedown Remington semi-auto rifle: it's true, saw it on
TV (X-Files backhistory of CSM episode).

let me guess!
B is the possible position a Grass Knoll shooter;
F is the Triple Overpass;
G is Zapruder's filming position.
(did I win anything?)


how jaded we have become



All the bogus conspiracy theories are part of a plot
to cover up the true conspirators.

c_yeager
May 31, 2006, 02:11 PM
I still love all the amazingly ignorant people that tell me how impossible it would have been for someone (even a former Marine) to make that shot with that rifle. Looking at the ranges involved I think i would stand a pretty decent chance of accomplishing this task with a pistol. Anyone with any ability with a rifle whatsoever could easily make the shots with a Carcano.

mete
May 31, 2006, 02:42 PM
Lots of BS about this. More than half of Americans alive today weren't even born when that happened .There is a major industry involved with this . Books , movies, magazine and newspaper articles etc . And every few years someone comes up with another absurd theory and it starts all over again . Get a life !! Political assassinations have been around as long as there have been politicians -it's a power thing !! Remember Julius Cesare ? he wasn't the first either !

engineer151515
May 31, 2006, 02:54 PM
I made the shot from a grassy knoll about 85 yards from the target as per instructed by Comerade LBJ. Hope this helps.

Hello Badge Man. :)

http://www.jfk-online.com/Badgeman.jpg

S&WIowegan
May 31, 2006, 03:06 PM
I was in college at the time and more Republican than Dem. but I remember the whole episode with a great sense of shock and horror. I'm as callous as the next guy but I don't find this topic funny. I understand you guys completely on this type of banter, but for me it doesn't resonate. I still remember a right wing classmate actually celebrating the death:evil:

Bob.

Rumpled
May 31, 2006, 03:09 PM
I saw a reenactment show on Discovery or History Channel or something.
They towed a convertible Lincoln with a dummy with a watermelon for a head and had two or three different shooters attempt from a tower the sequence of shots that was supposed to have occurred. Three shots in 2.something seconds?

IIRC it was repeatedly accomplished.

sigman4rt
May 31, 2006, 03:11 PM
Bob, Amen brother! The callous attitude that prevails today about this hienous crime, sickens me.

lysander
May 31, 2006, 03:15 PM
I still love all the amazingly ignorant people that tell me how impossible it would have been for someone (even a former Marine) to make that shot with that rifle. Looking at the ranges involved I think i would stand a pretty decent chance of accomplishing this task with a pistol. Anyone with any ability with a rifle whatsoever could easily make the shots with a Carcano.

Agreed. The shot was definitely not an impossible feat. I have seen a very thorough computer animation that demonstrated a single shooter could have easily fired three rounds and made three hits. The animation was effective because the designers were able to freeze the picture, or travel to any location at the Plaza, or view the entire event from the cross-hairs, etc. If I recall correctly, they used a Carcano that was very near the serial # to the one Oswald shot and they built their model around a shooter who fired three accurate rounds at distance with said rifle. They tracked and timed the shooter...then plugged those numbers in against the varying reported timeframes of the shooting. It was a solid demonstration.

But....(and I am not a tinfoil type, just a skeptic)....from the perspective of a trained shooter...I have never grasped why Oswald would have passed up on many long seconds during which he could have shot straight out of the window, at a slowly approaching target, moving on level ground, rather than waiting to take shots at a target moving away from him, heading downhill, from a relatively oblique angle. His position was high enough that he would have had clearance over the windshield to hit JFK squarely in the upper 1/3 of his body.

....like I said....just something I wonder about. For all I know he was freaking out and didn't get the gun loaded and shouldered in time.

Vern Humphrey
May 31, 2006, 03:44 PM
I guess B and G are where the Teamsters, Illuminati, Cubans, CIA, Masons, Priory of Sion, and J. Ogre Hoover in a blue dress were shooting from?

Correct. F marks the location of Boy Scout Troop 137, which was in blocking position in case Oswald, the Teamsters, Illuminati, Cubans, CIA, Masons, Priory of Sion, and J. Ogre missed (they were worried about J. Ogre -- he was having a bad hair day.):D

dev_null
May 31, 2006, 04:43 PM
Bob, Amen brother! The callous attitude that prevails today about this hienous crime, sickens me.
__________________
His helmet flew a hundred feet, his head was still inside. his buddies were all heard to say, what a helluva way to die!!!

Apparently it's not OK to joke about JFK conspiracy theories, but it is OK to joke about decapitation. :scrutiny:

Carl N. Brown
May 31, 2006, 04:50 PM
What some find "humorous" in the sense of gallows humor is not the
assassination: it is the conspiracy theorists who use selections from
the same sets of facts to prove opposing theories with thinly veiled
political agendas, and then act like you are an idiot or dupe if
you are not convinced.

Kennedy was murdered by a self-righteous left wing zealot.
And Kennedy was as mortal as the next guy.
Some cannot accept that.

The photo that supposedly shows a "badge man". it is
all fuzzy shadows.

Low-Sci
May 31, 2006, 05:08 PM
I actually wonder how much callous attitude toward an event like that is triggered by the conspiracy theory itself.

I guess the first stages of coping with tragedy are disbelief and denial, and since conspiracy theorists never exit those stages, they never move on to mourning.

So in turn, since they absolutely have to tell someone their bullcrap story, they break other people's mourning cycles with more disbelief and denial, so those people never get a chance to mourn fully either. Or at least, their process is impeded by jerks, which forces disdain into the equation.

Serendipity
May 31, 2006, 05:46 PM
Carl, Kennedy was obviously mortal. Beyond that, there were no absolutes of which you or any of the rest of us are/were privy, on that day in 1963. I particularly don't have much tolerance for the tinfoil hat crowd, myself.

I saw a rerun of a "48 Hours" special on the assassination a few years ago. There stood old blathering Dan Rather, speaking with total authority on a subject about which he knew nothing. He dismissed the eyewitness accounts of a puff of smoke by stating, again, authoritatively, that "we all know that modern rifles don't 'make' a puff of smoke." Guess old Dan never went to a range to observe the puffs of smoke that modern rifles don't make. :)

Sen. Richard Russell, a member of the Warren Commission, never believed that Oswald acted alone. Russell wasn't some tinfoil hat, John Birch nut. He only signed the report at the insistence of his old colleague, LBJ, "for the good of the country."

Just from my several thousand rounds of rifle-firing experience, I absolutely don't believe that the back of a guy's head is blown off by an entry wound from the back. Yeah, I know the "experts" demonstrated otherwise; just not my experience with centerfire rifles.

slzy
May 31, 2006, 06:34 PM
there is a whole nuther theory that a secret service agent got tangled up with his ar-15 in the caddy behind the lincoln. i will not say any more about this,except it would explain the dnts in the winshield header.

chuckles
May 31, 2006, 06:41 PM
sizy wrote: there is a whole nuther theory that a secret service agent got tangled up with his ar-15 I don't remember many AR-15s around in 63. Weren't they a later production weapon. We had them in 65 but I don't remember seeing them in 63. Obviously my age and advanced infirmity might an issue here.:D

Detritus
May 31, 2006, 06:54 PM
I don't remember many AR-15s around in 63. Weren't they a later production weapon. We had them in 65 but I don't remember seeing them in 63. Obviously my age and advanced infirmity might an issue here.

ARs were around in government service in '63 and yes the Secret service had some on inventory. so that part is possible, whether the book "Mortal Error" has any basis in fact or is just another attmpt to pump smoke, i got no idea.

Coltdriver
May 31, 2006, 06:58 PM
I visited the book repository a few years ago. You could look down at the street from the window that oswald shot from.

Easy shot. Well under 100 yards, more like 60 yards at the most. The vantage point is very good.

Hkmp5sd
May 31, 2006, 07:54 PM
The third shot was taken at 88 yards. Oswald's military records show him to be 98% accurate at 200 yards with iron sights.

nfl1990
May 31, 2006, 07:57 PM
What are we arguing about? we all know the real culprit was Joe Damaggio.

LeonCarr
May 31, 2006, 07:57 PM
88 yards is the correct distance to my knowledge.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

Frandy
May 31, 2006, 09:58 PM
Eighty - 90 yards sounds right. I was 15 when all this happened. when I was 17, I discovered that my uncle had an Arisaka and Carcano that he picked up during the war. Yup, the same rifle model as the one Oswald used. I went to the range I was shooting my Garand at and talked to the range owner. We set up 3 targets to approximate the ranges of the car Kennedy was in. I couldn't recreate the height, but I did try to get the angle. I was amazed at how accurate I was with the Carcano, shooting those three shots as fast as I could. It wasn't that hard at all. Yeah, I wasn't under stress, but I was also only a self-taught 17 year old kid who was pretty nervous. Although I always questioned the Warren report, that little exercise convinced me that Oswald could easily have done it by his lonesome.

Oh, and the spelling is DiMaggio.

notbubba
June 1, 2006, 12:17 AM
lysander

You said
"I have never grasped why Oswald would have passed up on many long seconds during which he could have shot straight"

Maybe he couldn't pull the trigger with looking Kennedy in the face.

R.W.Dale
June 1, 2006, 12:28 AM
For me my concern for the Kennedy's assination ranks right up there with my concern over president Mckinley's.

I want some kookie consparicy theries over that one:evil:

http://www.math.buffalo.edu/~sww/0history/mckinley-assassination2.jpg

Crosshair
June 1, 2006, 01:12 AM
lysander

"I have never grasped why Oswald would have passed up on many long seconds during which he could have shot straight"

One reason was given above, however since Oswald setup his sniper nest beforehand he may have thought several things. (All of these are pure speculation.)

Shooting him from the front would make it easier for people to identify his position and make him more vulnerable to fire from the Secret Service. If he waited to shoot when he did most everyone would have their backs turned to him.

Mabee he was not aware that he would have a shot over the windshield.

Since the car would have to slow down to make sharp turn, perhaps he thought he would have a better chance of hitting him after the turn was made.

If he waited to when he did he would be able to be sure of his target while the limo was comming toward him (Hate to rush and accidentally shoot some nobody instead of the president.) and have a little more time to mentaly prepare for what he was about to do once he was sure that it was JFK.

/Just my $.02

tincat2
June 1, 2006, 01:16 AM
i was in high school when jfk was shot. i have always been willing to listen to a new or refined conspiracy theory, but i don't have much trouble believing that oswald could have pulled it off alone. my evidence for this belief is not the various experiments nor simulations conducted over the years. rather i see the plain banality of evil in the tale of an unhappy nobody delivering a blow far out of proportion to his status in the society.
ostensibly, julius caesar was killed to prevent the establishment of a dictatorship. that action marked the birth of a pretty long dictatorship. the jfk assassination seems to me to have marked a passage similar in magnitude though perhaps different in direction. rome became a world center for culture, government and identity. what we are and where we go is not clear to me now, but like all who have gone before, we will find out.

LAK
June 1, 2006, 04:11 AM
Oswald made the shots from the ground floor doorway of the book depository. ;)

------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

redneck2
June 1, 2006, 06:01 AM
I still remember the day. I was in 7th grade shop class. Whole schools and society for that matter shut down for 3 days...

No doubt about a conspiracy of some sort. Why would the Warren Commission do all their deliberation in Top Secret, then lock up the findings for 100 years?

Jack Ruby is a nighclub owner, has no connection to Oswald, kills him, then dies of cancer 6 months later??

Smells worse than a hog farm at high noon.

Anyway, I've been there and it's a chip shot. Much shorter in person than it looks in pix.

Michigander
June 1, 2006, 06:20 AM
I certainly do not disagree that a marksman could have made those three shots.

But could and did are not the same.

I found this documentary (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4315024059102108031&q=kennedy+assassination) on the subject to be the most interesting I've seen.

ball3006
June 1, 2006, 09:58 AM
to the car is only about 30 yards......From the book building to the car is a little less than 100 yards.....chris3

mec
June 1, 2006, 10:14 AM
A few years later a friend who was servicing a beer delivery route in that area was on a parking lot when a caddy pulled up. window powers down and a guy wearing bermuda shorts, suspenders and a porkpie hat says, " Beah Man! {beer}, Beah Man! Can you tell me wheah JFK was shot???"

Jerry replies in a slow drawl, " Well, to the best of my recollection it was {taps his finger on the bone behind his right ear}, it was right about here."
The window powers up and the tourist drives away.

nfl1990
June 1, 2006, 04:40 PM
Oh, and the spelling is DiMaggio.

Thank you, I wasn't sure.

DamnedDirtyApe
June 1, 2006, 07:14 PM
Quote: old blathering Dan Rather, speaking with total authority on a subject about which he knew nothing.

He was there. Idiot that he is, he stationed himself on the wrong side of the overpass, but he was there. Out of eleventy-billion places on the motorcade route for an obscure radio journalist to be, he was THERE, and saw and heard much of the assassination goings-on, watched the limo speed away, and was at Parkland when JFK passed away - as though he was following a script.

Within a year, he was the CBS White House correspondent, a plum job that would typically go to someone far more experienced and part of the "in" crowd.

Within just a few more years, he was the CBS anchor. We all know the rest - ad nauseum.

Form your own conclusions.

capnrik
June 1, 2006, 09:24 PM
Smells worse than a hog farm at high noon.


True words. And the smell has lingered for almost 43 years. I went home from school that day, scared and confused.

The scared part changed with time. Now I'm more scared of some things, and less scared of others.

Confused hasn't changed much.

No doubt about a conspiracy of some sort. Why would the Warren Commission do all their deliberation in Top Secret, then lock up the findings for 100 years?

Jack Ruby is a nighclub owner, has no connection to Oswald, kills him, then dies of cancer 6 months later??



I'd pay cash money for the truthful answers to those questions.

Hkmp5sd
June 1, 2006, 09:53 PM
I'd pay cash money for the truthful answers to those questions.

How much money for this?

Ruby died of Respiratory failure four years after shooting Oswald. Guess he didn't really know anything after all.

dev_null
June 1, 2006, 11:18 PM
Ruby died of Respiratory failure four years after shooting Oswald. Guess he didn't really know anything after all.
That's easy to explain, it's because... uh... er... HEY, LOOK, THERE GOES ELVIS!

Mauserguy
June 1, 2006, 11:34 PM
Why did Oswald wait until JFK's car was pulling away from the Book Depository Building?

My guess was that it was old fashioned nerves. He was probably nervous and unsure whether he should take the shot. Once the car pulled arround the corner and began moving away, he probably took a deep breath and made tragic history. I don't think that it was anything more than he was unsure if he should do it.
Mauserguy

isp2605
June 1, 2006, 11:43 PM
It was a massive conspiracy. Not only was Oswald and Ruby old friends but I can prove that Dean Martin and Tom Landry were also known associates. After my extensive investigation I turned up a photo of the 4 of them in a photo together playing in a band. This photo was taken in 1963, long before there was Photoshop or even computers that could phony up a photo. Since there's a picture it has to be true. Also remember, it's now on the internet too so what more proof does anyone need.
Just look closely at the picture. Dean Martin in the back with the white bus driver hat? I've never seen anything to prove where else Dean Martin was on that day. The guy in the back on the far right sure looks like Tom Landry. Dallas would have been a logical location for Landry to be in Nov 1963.
I gotta go. There are helicopters hovering over my house and guys in black suits knocking on my door.

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c125/ispcapt/OSWALD.jpg

capnrik
June 1, 2006, 11:45 PM
Ruby died of Respiratory failure four years after shooting Oswald. Guess he didn't really know anything after all.



Sorry, bud. Your math isn't any better. Ruby died on January 3, 1967. If he had made it to the following November, it would have been four years. Your sarcasm, however, will stand the test of time.

That's easy to explain, it's because... uh... er... HEY, LOOK, THERE GOES ELVIS!

High Road, huh?

Serendipity
June 1, 2006, 11:54 PM
What does "98% accurate @ 200 yds." mean, and how does that relate to the subject of this thread?

Byron Quick
June 2, 2006, 12:02 AM
I would imagine it means that out of 100 rounds fired at 200 yards, that 98 of them hit the intended target.

Regarding this subject, I would assume that it's relevance is the assumption that someone who can hit 98% of the time at 200 yardss can do as good and probably better at 88 yards.

Hkmp5sd
June 2, 2006, 12:09 AM
Why did Oswald wait until JFK's car was pulling away from the Book Depository Building?

Because he would have been visible in the window (ie sitting on the ledge) trying to shoot at that angle.

Ruby died on January 3, 1967. If he had made it to the following November, it would have been four years.

Ok, ya got me. 1967-1963 = 4 (ignoring the month/date). Hate to see all of those years of calculus go to waste. :)

LAK
June 2, 2006, 03:33 AM
MauserguyWhy did Oswald wait until JFK's car was pulling away from the Book Depository Building?
If he did, it was because as it rounded the corner it was moving faster than the nine miles per hour it slowed to when it was in the kill zone.

ISP2605,

What's Oswald singing? "I'mmmm I'mm I'mmmmmmmm .. a patsy..... " To the tune of "My Delilah"?

-------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

garymc
June 2, 2006, 04:23 AM
"I visited the book repository a few years ago. You could look down at the street from the window that oswald shot from.

Easy shot. Well under 100 yards, more like 60 yards at the most. The vantage point is very good."

I also went to the building (its a museum now) and looked out the window that they allow you to look out, the one directly under the one Oswald used. It would not have been difficult at all for a reasonably good marksman with a familiar rifle.

Orthonym
June 2, 2006, 04:25 AM
1. Great Minds Think Alike; i.e., there were several bunches of folks set up to shoot JFK that day, but Oswald shot first. I mean, there were all sorts of folks who were horribly angry at him: both kinds of Cubans, Texans, jealous husbands, communists, his neighbors in Palm Beach, etc etc.
This explains the suspicious guys roisted from around the overpass, and other weirdnesses.

I can just imagine one of the other guys saying on his radio, "Fred, did you shoot"?
Fred: "unh, no."
Other guy: "Oh $h*t! An amateur! We better get outta here!"

2. Time travellers. Now this is my favorite hypothesis, and it was expounded at its best and most believable in an old Red Dwarf episode.


Oh, BTW, I was 12 when it happened, when I heard about it over the PA system in my 8th grade *American History* class.

Cosmoline
June 2, 2006, 06:47 AM
I don't deny that there were some coverups afterwards, but it seems to me the second third and fifth shooter theories are designed to hide the truth further. There's no doubt LHO made the shots alone. Shooters trying to hit JFK as he passed would have had a much more difficult time and would have been noticed by everyone. The whole setting is a lot SMALLER in real life than it seems to be on film. The sewer grate opening, for example, is so tiny a dwarf with a mini Mauser would have a hard time shooting, and even if he could get a shot off he'd be hitting the limos' underside and door not JFK's head.

But the story of LHO himself is indeed a fascinating one. Just who was playing him and to what extent we simply don't know or haven't been told. He may have been truly on his own, or he may have been given some prodding. But by whom--and to do what? I suspect those answers are the ones still under lock and key. You do have to ask yourself why the devil a communist who had renounced his US citizenship had been allowed to come back to the US from the USSR after leaving the Marines and then AGAIN allowed to come back from Mexico after trying to get into Cuba. The CIA knew about him, but how much they knew or what their plans were for him we don't know.

Hudson
June 2, 2006, 07:15 AM
It is now acknowledged that President Kennedy had several extramarital affairs. I think hindsight is 20/20 but I have always wondered why they didn’t get The First Lady in an interrogation room and squeeze her like a grape. Though at the time the Dallas phone book was easily 3.5 inches thick, it still wouldn’t have left a mark.

Working Man
June 2, 2006, 07:21 AM
It was one of Marilyn Monroe's other lovers. Perhaps Bobby wanted her all
to himself and just got tired of shairing.

Carl N. Brown
June 2, 2006, 10:20 AM
Why did Oswald wait until JFK's car was pulling away from the Book Depository Building?

As the car came down Houston toward the TSBD, the attention of most
Secret Service agents would be forward, toward the TSBD, Elm St, etc.

I was in study hall at high school when it all happened.
Some guy made an anti-Kennedy remark that hurt me personally.
I was not a big Kennedy fan, I did not buy into any of that Camelot
mythology, but he was my president and if I did not like him
the right thing to do was vote for the other guy when I came of age.
There was four days of doom, gloom and shcok after that.
I still hate it when Thanksgiving falls on 22 Nov.

I got the NYT edition of the Warren Report, the supplemental volume
of extracts from the evidence vols, Gerry Ford's Portrait of
an Assassin, etc. And I have given several studies of the assassination
a fair hearing. Too many though come off like that guy who lives
in a trailer in the desert with 30 cats and just knows that the
moon landing was faked and if you dont agree with him youre a dupe
of NASA. That leds me at times to mode.

Personally I believe that there thousands of themes going on in this,
but some themes I have identified:
- The Warren Commission did a fair but rushed job.
- True believers in Camelot will not accept JFK being murdered as any of
us lesser mortals could be murdered.
- And some elements of the American left want to do a coup d'etat
by character assassination of American institutions.
- Kennedy was the target of active plots by groups known to use
secrecy, deception and murder: anti-Castro Cubans, pro-Castro Cubans,
Cuban secret service, CIA involved in Bay of Pigs, mercenaries involved
in Bay of Pigs, Soviet Premier Kruschev, the U.S. Mafia (especially
Sam Giancana and Carlos Marcello); any investigation is going to
pick up threads of the plots and try to connect them to Oswald
or weave them into a Grand Unified Theory of the assassination.

ready4shtf
June 2, 2006, 01:55 PM
Well, I can see it from my office window as we speak. Its got to be 75y or less. Its pretty short.

As to why the president wasnt fired upon from the front...........
Its because there is no shot from that angle. The shooter would have to be hangin out the window. Notice the road curves away from the building after they drive past. A shot from the front, or a shot from directly above would both require hanging out the window. Shot from the rear was the only concealed firing option from that particular window.

Also, its interesting to note that the FBI had to sight in the scope before they could test the rifle..........

Andrew.

PS, "The most dangerous weapon is a Marine and his rifle." Straight from my fathers lips.

lysander
June 2, 2006, 02:15 PM
notbubba and crosshair...

All valid points. It may have been something just that simple. The best reason to wait IMHO would be to avoid being spotted and taking return fire...but having been to the museum...and checked out the position...it seems like it would have been VERY hard to pass up those frontal shots.

Again...it may have been something as simple as nerves.

ready4shtf...

I spent alot of time wandering around the plaza and in the building when I visited Dallas. It seems like Oswald could have fired at the motorcade straight on AND maintained concealment...without hanging out the window.

I found this webcam (http://www.earthcam.com/jfk/)shot....which provides a live view from Oswald's position.

Carl N. Brown
June 2, 2006, 02:18 PM
its interesting to note that the FBI had to sight in the scope before they could test the rifle

This sometimes is given as the theory behind a first shot miss:
the first shot through the scope missed so for the second and
third shots, he switched to the open sights or held over with
the scope. This is in the area of plausibale theory.

Again, the sheet metal scope mount could have been bent
when the gun was stored in Ruth Paine's garage, or when it was
transported in the car to the TSBD, or bent after the act,
when it was stashed behind some boxes after the shooting,
or even damaged by careless handling by the Dallas PD after
recovery. All we know for sure is that the FBI reported that
the scope had to be adjusted to hit POA when they tested it;
(but if FBI as others have said was part of the conspiracy to
frame LHO why admit the scope was out of alignment?)

ready4shtf
June 2, 2006, 02:55 PM
I dont know, I've been to that same spot in the museum also. And like I said, I can also see it from my office window. I was a never a sniper, but if I was, I wouldent engage a target that was staring straight at me when I knew I was going to get a shot from the rear (no one watching). Hell, JFK might have even seen the rifle and hit the deck before I could fire. And if not, im SURE a USSS agent would have been alert and notice they were approaching the barrel of a rifle out the window, 12:00 position...........

nfl1990
June 2, 2006, 03:04 PM
It was one of Marilyn Monroe's other lovers. Perhaps Bobby wanted her all
to himself and just got tired of shairing.

I believe that Marilyn Monroe was already dead, and that is where my comment about Joe DiMaggio comes fram as one of the theories is that the Kennedys' had her killed and DiMaggio being upset by this talked to his friends in the Mafia who contracted LHO, it is also speculated that Jack Ruby was then hired to LHO in order to tie up a loose end.

BigFatKen
June 2, 2006, 03:50 PM
But....(and I am not a tinfoil type, just a skeptic)....from the perspective of a trained shooter...I have never grasped why Oswald would have passed up on many long seconds during which he could have shot straight out of the window, at a slowly approaching target, moving on level ground, rather than waiting to take shots at a target moving away from him, heading downhill, from a relatively oblique angle. His position was high enough that he would have had clearance over the windshield to hit JFK squarely in the upper 1/3 of his body.

Like so many men on guard duty, he was nearly sleeping or not paying attention.

Hkmp5sd
June 2, 2006, 06:48 PM
Does anyone actually believe our government (Watergate, Vietnam, Iran Hostages, Iran-Contra, Monica Lewinski, 9/11, WMD in Iraq) could gather several hundred people and pull off the perfect conspiracy? No physical evidence of conspiracy or witnesses for over 40 years? Nothing buy a bunch of why-this and why-that? Not a chance.

Working Man
June 2, 2006, 07:07 PM
I believe that Marilyn Monroe was already dead....

Marilyn Monroe died 8-05-1962
JFK died 11-22-1963

Yup.... got me. I knew it was close (year or so) but I had thought he died first.

Cosmoline
June 2, 2006, 07:10 PM
I doubt anyone in the government plotted to kill JFK, but there is a possibility the CIA knew LHO was a real threat and ignored it in hopes of using him for their own unrelated spy games.

Orthonym
June 3, 2006, 01:59 AM
I have sometimes considered, that the most artistic way to murder someone you dislike, is to fail to stop someone else, who was going to do it anyway.

Yer legally clear, as long as you didn't tell anyone of your suspicions.

Morally? Unh unh.

LAK
June 3, 2006, 08:23 AM
RE: the FBI having to re-zero the rifle.

Two possible explanations. First is that the rifle was dropped in haste and knocked the scope loose in the mounts - or at least moved it off zero.

Second is that a rifle zeroed by one shooter will not necessarily shoot to the same POA for a different shooter. Because what may seem like minor differences in the way people hold a rifle can affect the way the rifle recoils or moves at the shot. A heavy trigger finger, the influence of grip etc can consistantly pull or push the shots right, left up or down.

Still, E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis sure looked alot like two tramps ;)

---------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

isp2605
June 3, 2006, 10:22 AM
RE shooting while approaching TSBD. As the vehicle was approaching there was no clear target. While approaching he would have had the windshield and Connally in front of JFK. Less of JFK would have been exposed from that angle.

LAK
June 4, 2006, 04:07 AM
..... And from the rear, the two Secret Service agents that should have been standing on the rear of the limo - among other placements - had been conveniently called off. The righthand agent standing on the rear of the limo would probably have obstructed an open shot from the rear. ;)

-------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates,org

Michigander
June 5, 2006, 06:17 AM
I dont know, I've been to that same spot in the museum also. And like I said, I can also see it from my office window. I was a never a sniper, but if I was, I wouldent engage a target that was staring straight at me when I knew I was going to get a shot from the rear (no one watching). Hell, JFK might have even seen the rifle and hit the deck before I could fire. And if not, im SURE a USSS agent would have been alert and notice they were approaching the barrel of a rifle out the window, 12:00 position........... And my understanding is that under normal circumstances, the SS would have noticed the winows open at the book depository building and would have sent someone up to investigate. Add that oddity to this oddity: And from the rear, the two Secret Service agents that should have been standing on the rear of the limo - among other placements - had been conveniently called off.

Perhaps simple oversights.

Michigander
June 5, 2006, 06:34 AM
I've also read that Jack Ruby (aka Jack Rubenstein) worked for Nixon in the 40's and 50's. Does that matter? Does that mean anything?

This FBI document (http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/RubyandNixon.jpg) from 1947 recommends that "one Jack Rubenstein of Chicago" should not be called to testify for the Committee on Unamerican Activities, for he is working for Congressman Richard M. Nixon.

LAK
June 5, 2006, 07:27 AM
Michigander
RE: LAKAnd from the rear, the two Secret Service agents that should have been standing on the rear of the limo - among other placements - had been conveniently called off.
Perhaps simple oversights.
Perhaps; in the footage I have seen of them being pulled they are shaking their heads, one throwing his hands up in the air, with puzzled looks and some inaudible verbal exchanges as the limo and motorcade continue on through Dallas.

But I'd like to know who was the originating and highest placed official issuing this simple oversighted order was. ;)

--------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

usp9
June 5, 2006, 07:44 AM
Quote; I've also read that Jack Ruby (aka Jack Rubenstein) worked for Nixon in the 40's and 50's. Does that matter? Does that mean anything?

This FBI document from 1947 recommends that "one Jack Rubenstein of Chicago" should not be called to testify for the Committee on Unamerican Activities, for he is working for Congressman Richard M. Nixon.



That is so absurd it made me laugh. Jack Ruby lived in Chicago, a diehard Democrat, worked for staunch Republican Richard Nixon from CALIFORNIA? Yeah, I'm sure that passed the smell test at GRASSY KNOLL UNIVERSITY, where everyone earns a BS.

isp2605
June 5, 2006, 09:59 AM
"And my understanding is that under normal circumstances, the SS would have noticed the winows open at the book depository building and would have sent someone up to investigate. "

I've worked presidential details on every president since Jimmy Carter. Some of those details involved very close in work. All involved detailed route planning and security. Open windows are extremely common and not checked. It would be impossible to check every open window along a route. People know where the motorcade will be traveling and they always line the route. Nothing you can do to stop that or control it. They'll be climbed on their roofs, hanging out of trees, climbed on lamp poles, standing and climbing on anything to get a better view. There's nothing you can do with that and no way to tell who is in the crowd.
It's about a week prep doing route planning and security. There are just some things you can't control along a route. You note the high threat areas but there is absolutely no way to 100% secure a route. Can't be done even when the president is just trying to get from point A to point B and we're moving along at a good clip. When he's doing a parade type motorcade, which is what was being done in Dallas, it's even more difficult because they drive slow and all the protectees are exposed. They are trying to be seen. In Dallas Kennedy had them remove the limo roof, against the USSS suggestions, because he wanted to be seen. Normally the limo would have been covered.

Hkmp5sd
June 5, 2006, 03:39 PM
In Dallas Kennedy had them remove the limo roof, against the USSS suggestions, because he wanted to be seen. Normally the limo would have been covered.


Which may or may not have made an impact as the bubble was not bullet proof. It was made to keep out rain.

In present motorcades, they do close what windows can be closed and use counter-snipers to inspect and watch the open windows.

isp2605
June 5, 2006, 04:08 PM
"In present motorcades, they do close what windows can be closed and use counter-snipers to inspect and watch the open windows."

Not along the routes. There's no way possible to post counter snipers along the complete motorcade routes nor is there any way possible to force everyone along the route to close their windows. Those motorcades can stretch for miles and run thru the heart of a city where there's no way we could ever have enough people to put them in every building or make sure every window was closed. As I posted previously, along the routes you see people hanging out of windows from businesses, homes, and wherever just to get a view. Even if the motorcade is moving along at a good clip, people still turn out just to watch it as it goes by.
The CS are placed at the airport and the stops but along the routes we sweep several times before, immediately prior, and then keep the motorcade moving. There's just too much territory to cover to have CS and teams placed along the entire route. We're lucky if we were able to have every intersection manned with cops. That was a rarity.
I've done a lot of the motorcades. I've done them for every president since Carter and some presidents I've done multiple times. Also done them for presidential candidates, foreign heads of states and other dignitaries. Due to my position prior to LE retirement I set up the route and site security and worked very closely with the USSS. Sometimes we had a week to 10 days to set up. Sometimes we only had a day to get things prepared. When they'd come in I'd bring in Troops from all around the state to make sure we had the bodies to cover what we could. Usually would be 3 or 4 of these details a year. Some years during elections it would be a lot more. Just one of the benefits (?) of living in a capital city I guess.
I'm not going to get into much more on what we did for the motorcade protection because people just don't need to know how and where we set up points or how we did it. I've ridden the pilot, sweep and lead cars many times.

edited: noticed I left out the word "retirement".

p35
June 5, 2006, 06:50 PM
FWIW, in about 1990 I was sitting in my office in downtown Portland, OR when Bush Senior's motorcade passed by right under my open 2d story window. It was a Sunday; I hadn't realized he would be there and was just doing paperwork. If I'd had a brick and been so inclined, I could have tossed it out the window and hit his limo. Of course, they use armored limos now, but I was still surprised that no one noticed.

NOTE TO THE NSA: I DON'T WANT TO THROW A BRICK AT OR OTHERWISE HARM ANYBODY!

JohnKSa
June 5, 2006, 10:59 PM
Michigander,

The document was "discovered" in the seventies by an "unnamed scholar". The FBI says it's a fake.

notbubba
June 5, 2006, 11:50 PM
p35,


Could you turn towards the lamp and speak a little more slowly.

Thanks, that last bit about a brick was hard to hear.
:neener:

LAK
June 6, 2006, 05:10 AM
USP9That is so absurd it made me laugh. Jack Ruby lived in Chicago, a diehard Democrat, worked for staunch Republican Richard Nixon from CALIFORNIA? Yeah, I'm sure that passed the smell test at GRASSY KNOLL UNIVERSITY, where everyone earns a BS.
And the now deceased Pamela Harriman, whose family go back with the "diehard republican" Bush family since the 1930s, actively ran "diehard democrat" Bill Clinton's campaign - even tossing in a few million of her own money.

Ain't it all just "so absurd"? ;)

---------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

Michigander
August 22, 2006, 06:57 AM
Challenge to lone gunman theory

Betsy Mason / CONTRA COSTA TIMES | August 21 2006 (http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/15321194.htm)

LIVERMORE - More than four decades after his death, John F. Kennedy's assassination remains the hottest cold case in U.S. history, and the clues continue to trickle in. Now Lawrence Livermore Laboratory scientists say a key piece of evidence supporting the lone gunman theory should be thrown out.

A new look at clues gleaned from studies of crime-scene bullet fragments shows they may have been misinterpreted.

"It basically shatters what some people call the best physical evidence around," said chemist Pat Grant, director of the lab's Forensic Science Center.

Grant and Livermore Lab metallurgist Erik Randich found that the chemical "fingerprints" used to identify which bullets the fragments came from are actually more like run-of-the-mill tire tracks than one-of-a-kind fingerprints.

"I've spoken with people on both sides of the conspiracy divide and there's no question but that (Randich and Grant's) work is going to be very difficult, if not outright impossible, to refute," said Gary Aguilar, a San Francisco ophthalmologist and single-bullet skeptic who has studied the Kennedy assassination for more than a decade. "It looks impregnable."

The government's claim that Lee Harvey Oswald alone killed Kennedy spawned a vitriolic debate between conspiracy theorists and lone gunman supporters that rages to this day.

In 1964, the Warren Commission, established by President Lyndon B. Johnson to investigate the assassination, concluded that Oswald fired just three shots from the Texas School Book Depository in Dallas: The first missed entirely. The second passed through the president's neck, into Texas Governor John Connally's body under his right arm, out through his chest and then splintered his wrist and wounded his left thigh. The third fatally hit Kennedy in the head.

Single-bullet theory

Even though three bullets were involved, this scenario became known as the "single-bullet theory" because it requires the second bullet to account for all the nonfatal injuries to both Kennedy and Connally.

The injuries to Kennedy's neck and to Connally happened within a split second of each other. So either the injuries to both men came from a single bullet from Oswald or from at least two bullets from more than one shooter. Oswald's rifle couldn't have fired two shots in such rapid succession.

So in order for Oswald to be the lone gunman, it had to be a single bullet.

Skeptics and believers alike say the bullets amount to the most important piece of physical evidence for the single-bullet theory. Throwing it out is like removing a leg from a four-legged table.

"Warren Commission defenders consider this evidence central to the single-bullet theory," Aguilar said.

But Grant and Randich say the bullet lead analysis was faulty. Both Randich and Grant are forensic scientists at Livermore Lab but researched the JFK case on their own time. Their work is the latest chapter in an ongoing saga.

Lead impurities

In the immediate aftermath of the assassination, the FBI analyzed five bullet fragments recovered from the limousine, the governor's wrist, the president's brain and from a hospital stretcher.

The FBI used a technique known as "neutron activation" analysis to find the precise composition of the fragments. By determining the exact amounts of impurities in the lead, such as antimony and silver, they hoped to be able to tell which fragments came from the same bullet. But the FBI decided it couldn't draw any conclusions from the results.

In 1976, the U.S. House of Representatives formed an assassination committee to investigate the deaths of JFK and Martin Luther King Jr. The move was largely a response to hundreds of books, documentaries and magazine pieces questioning the government's version of the JFK assassination, as well as public outcry following the first airing of Abraham Zapruder's home movie of the assassination on the television show, "Good Night America."

The committee called in nuclear chemist Vincent Guinn, one of the world's foremost experts on neutron activation, to reanalyze the bits of bullet lead.

Unlike the FBI, Guinn drew a very clear conclusion. He said the antimony in the fragments clearly showed they all came from two, and only two, bullets of the type used by Oswald's gun, which supports the Warren Commission's lone gunman theory.

According to Guinn, one set of fragments from the president's brain and the limousine in front of the president had around .06 percent antimony, and all came from the bullet that killed JFK. The other set of fragments from the governor's wrist and a nearly intact bullet found on a stretcher at the hospital had closer to .08 percent antimony and were pieces of the infamous "single bullet."

Based on evidence including the bullet lead, the committee concluded in 1979 that both shots had come from Oswald's gun.

They did not, however, rule out the possibility of a conspiracy. In fact, they strongly suspected a second shooter was present that day, but based on Guinn's data, any second shooter had missed the target.

Or maybe not.

"It turns out that if you really analyze the results correctly, then the results are wrong," said Grant.

Fatal flaw

Randich and Grant's study grew out of work Randich did in 2002 that exposed a fatal flaw in the FBI's use of bullet-lead evidence to connect suspects with crime scenes in thousands of criminal cases during the past three decades.

The FBI claimed that like a fingerprint, each batch of lead has a unique chemical signature, so the specific amounts of impurities in a lead bullet could match it with other bullets from the same batch. For example, if bullets at a suspect's house were found to have the same impurity signature as a bullet or fragment found at a murder scene, it was treated as evidence tying the suspect to the crime.

Randich's training as a metallurgist told him there was something wrong with this reasoning.

"I realized these people could put my sons in jail with bogus science," he said. "I thought I ought to do something about it."

By analyzing years of data kept by lead smelters, Randich found that batches are not unique, and bullets from different batches of bullets poured months or years apart could have the same chemical signature. And bullets poured from the start of a batch could differ slightly, but measurably, from those at the end.

He has testified in about a dozen cases. Because of his work, courts now reject bullet-lead analysis and the FBI no longer uses it as evidence.

JFK case problems

The JFK case has similar problems.

According to Guinn, the type of bullets used by Oswald happened to have highly variable amounts of antimony.

Guinn said the variation between bullets of this type was so great that he could use it to tell individual bullets apart, even from the same batch of lead.

Randich and Grant say that assumption is dead wrong.

They analyzed the same type of bullets and showed that within a single bullet, there is a significant variation in impurities on a microscopic scale. The range of concentrations of impurities in each bullet is large enough to make small fragments from different parts of the same bullet have very different chemical fingerprints.

Some of the fragments in the JFK case are so small that the differences in antimony could be explained entirely by this microscopic variation, instead of by differences between bullets, they said. Randich and Grant's study was published in July in the Journal of Forensic Sciences.

One to five bullets

"We don't know if there were two bullets," said Randich. "There could have been two bullets, but the lead composition data shows there could be anywhere from one to five bullets."

The bullet found on the stretcher is missing some lead, but not enough to account for all the other fragments. So there had to be more than one bullet. But Grant and Randich say there is no way to tell how many more, at least from the bullet lead.

Losing Guinn's bullet-lead evidence is a major blow to the single-bullet theory.

That evidence "knits together the core physical evidence into an airtight case against Lee Oswald," according to a 2004 paper by Larry Sturdivan and Ken Rahn in an issue of Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry that celebrated Vincent Guinn after his death. "It is, thus, the key to resolving the major controversies in the JFK assassination and putting the matter to rest," the paper said.

Rahn, an atmospheric chemist recently retired from the University of Rhode Island, stands by this statement and Guinn's research despite Randich and Grant's study.

He says he believes it is possible that microscopic variation occurs within bullets of this type, but Grant and Randich can't say for sure whether it happened in the JFK bullets because they didn't analyze those particular fragments.

Rahn thinks it is far more likely the fragments fell into two distinct groups, one with .06 percent antimony and the other with .08 percent, because they came from two distinct bullets.

This fits the Warren Commission's conclusion that Oswald was the lone shooter, and two of the three bullets he shot hit the occupants of the president's limousine, Rahn said.

Grant counters that the two groups of bullet fragments might not actually be that distinct. The margin of error associated with the antimony analysis means that, statistically, the concentrations are too close to separate into groups.

Although Randich and Grant's research doesn't solve the Kennedy assassination, it certainly does weaken the case for a lone gunman.

"In recent years, the (bullet) fragment evidence has become one of the key struts supporting the single-bullet theory," Aguilar said. "Randich and Grant have knocked this slat out from under the theory."

PinnedAndRecessed
August 22, 2006, 07:17 AM
I still remember a right wing classmate actually celebrating the death

Which is curious, because by today's standards JFK was conservative.

He appointed his little brother to the office of Attorney General and then Bobby went after organized crime.

JFK hated communism which is why he sent combat troops into Vietnam.

I had heard it said that had JFK lived today he would have been a Republican.

Vern Humphrey
August 22, 2006, 09:38 AM
Let's remember he was shot by a communist -- a man who had left America to live in Russia, and who on his return had contacts with Cuba and Mexican communists.

Michigander
August 22, 2006, 12:39 PM
Let's remember he was shot by a communist

So we're told.

So we're told.

Vern Humphrey
August 22, 2006, 12:54 PM
We're told the sun comes up in the morning. You reckon that's a lie?;)

Leanwolf
August 22, 2006, 04:13 PM
VERN HUMPHREY - "Let's remember he was shot by a communist -- a man who had left America to live in Russia, and who on his return had contacts with Cuba and Mexican communists."


In 1963, I was living in Los Angeles, had worked late the night before Nov. 22, slept late, and was shaving when I heard the news report of the assassination in Dallas. It was quite an interesting time.

That said, I do not know if there were a "conspiracy" to kill JFK, or not.

I do think, however, IF, I say again, IF there were a conspiracy, it was perpetrated by Fidel Castro.

Afterall, the Kennedy boys had "ordered" the CIA to kill Castro, for several years, and they had not succeeded. Castro, of course, knew that the Kennedy boys had ordered his assassination.

Put yourself in Fidel Castro's shoes. What are you gonna do?? Go to the cops?? Hmmmmmm.

On May 10, 1967, Richard Helms, Director, CIA, told President Lyndon .B. Johnson, about the CIA's attempts to kill Castro, on the "orders" of the Kennedy boys. Johnson had stated before -- to his aid, Marvin Watson, who later passed it on to the FBI -- that he felt there was more to the assassination than just Lee Harvey Oswald's involvement. Previous to this 1967 meeting with Helms, there is no evidence whatsoever, that Johnson knew of the CIA's assassination attempts against Castro.

Later, the President (LBJ), made himself quite explicit to television newsman, Howard K. Smith, sometime before leaving the White House eighteen months after Helm's briefing. "I'll tell you something that will rock you," Johnson said, clearly thinking of what he had learned from Helms. "Kennedy was trying to get Castro, but Castro got to him first."

(Source, "The Man Who Kept The Secrets: Richard Helms and The CIA," by Thomas Powers, Alfred A. Knopf Publ., (c) 1979.)

It's a very interesting read.

FWIW. L.W.

Vern Humphrey
August 22, 2006, 04:19 PM
Lyndon Johnson was quoted as saying Kennedy tried to get Castro and Castro got Kennedy.

Certainly Oswald was a Castro sympathizer -- he had been in New Orleans handing out leaflets for "Fair Play for Cuba."

ilbob
August 22, 2006, 04:43 PM
He appointed his little brother to the office of Attorney General and then Bobby went after organized crime.

Ironically, their father made his money as a rum runner during the prohibition, meaning he would have been going after his own family if this was true. I wonder if really he was trying to thin out the competition.

Carl N. Brown
August 22, 2006, 05:16 PM
In short, the antimony content proves -- and disproves -- nothing.

It does not prove the single bullet theory -- which to me has always
relied on the bullet paths in the wounds and the position of the two
men in the limousine relative to each other during frames Z221-Z224,
but it does not disprove it either. A few chemical analysts thought
the antimony analysis proved something; it does not. Not everyone
studying the assassination thought the antimony content was
significant to begin with. I have not mentioned it. So a piece of
evidence I did not rely on is shown to be unimportant. Good thing.

Given that the ammo used was surplus from a Greek military contract
and was made at Western Cartridge Co. of East Alton IL, how likely
is it that two bullets from the same batch would have significantly
different antimony content in the first place? Some of that ammo is
still around--the Australian reconstruction was done using ammo
from that lot.

vynx
August 22, 2006, 08:09 PM
Does anyone remember details of LBJ having some of the Warren Commission Report info. sealed off until a date in the future?

I was very young at the time but for some reason I remember something about information remaining sealed until 2025? I could easily have that date wrong. I remember asking my father why so long and he told me because by then everyone involved will be dead.

P.S. so I guess "Unitended Consequences" got it wrong. In the book it was mentioned no shooter at some Michigan shoot could copy that shot.

Hkmp5sd
August 22, 2006, 08:16 PM
Oswald, acting alone, shot JFK. Proven beyond reasonable doubt.

http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/intro.htm

gezzer
August 22, 2006, 08:29 PM
Why have they sealed the files till some date in the future?

Did the .gov take him out as a danger to the country?

He had almost got the US into a nuclear war with the USSR over Cuba.

He was sleeping with multiple partners including a Red Chinese Col.

So much for PC but if he wasn't killed IMHO he would never have been revered the way he is now.

kengrubb
August 22, 2006, 09:08 PM
Conspiracy buffs say Oswald was a patsy. I say he was a p*ssy.

From the UT Tower, Charles Whitman killed 16 people using a 6mm Remington with shots out to 500 yards on a stationary target. I believe one of the victims was hit while running at a distance of 300 yards.

JohnKSa
August 23, 2006, 02:03 AM
The neutron activation analysis was significant evidence once. Since the single bullet shot has been rigorously duplicated using the best modeling techniques available today (which weren't available years ago), there's really no need to depend on the neutron activation analysis any longer.

rangerruck
August 23, 2006, 03:35 AM
which shot?the first 3 , or the fourth?

Essex County
August 23, 2006, 12:07 PM
I heard the news walking out of my freshman algebra class. When I first saw the " Sniper Rifle " held up on TV I thought " What a poor choice ". Even at that tendwr age I had put a couple of hundred through a 9.95 Carcano. Essex

Carl N. Brown
August 24, 2006, 04:05 PM
Poor choice if I was wanting to frame someone in the eyes
of the public. If the FBI or CIA or Roswell aliens intended to
frame Oswald, doesn't anyone think they would pick a gun
with a better reputation?

This is what one of those formerly $9.95 Carcanos can do at
100 yards with my crappy handloads:
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=30693&d=1130955507
Black powder match using 50 grain FFG equivalent 777 and recycled
Italian surplus bullets.

kengrubb
August 24, 2006, 07:13 PM
Even at that tendwr age I had put a couple of hundred through a 9.95 Carcano
Shows where my mind was. I was thinking a 9.95mm Carcano would be most excellent. :D

If you enjoyed reading about "How far was the JFK shot?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!