Greatest Shot ever taken?


PDA






Drgong
August 24, 2008, 03:24 PM
What is in your opinion the greatest shot ever, as in the most impressive feat of shooting skill/luck.

I would say Billy Dixon shot that dropped his target at 1500 yards with a .50-90 sharps rifle.

If you enjoyed reading about "Greatest Shot ever taken?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
yesit'sloaded
August 24, 2008, 03:41 PM
I remember some guy in the 60's make an almost impossible shot with a junky old Carcano with a misaligned scope on a head sized moving target. Then there was the outlaw Kenny Wagner that was witnessed shooting a walnut off a tree with a .22 from the hip with one shot. I'm thinking this was a lucky shot too. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4129543217664527036

scrat
August 24, 2008, 04:21 PM
75 yards with an 1851. Wild Bill Hickox

memphisjim
August 24, 2008, 04:22 PM
carlos hathcock shhoting sniper through his scope

Savage Shooter
August 24, 2008, 04:24 PM
^+1^
you beat me to it.

rcmodel
August 24, 2008, 04:33 PM
Lee Harvy Oswald has got to be right up there with the best of them!

And not just one shot, but several!

rcmodel

General Geoff
August 24, 2008, 04:36 PM
Yeah, Lee Harvey Oswald, if he actually took the shots, ranks up there among the greatest riflemen who ever lived.

Treo
August 24, 2008, 05:13 PM
I once took out every target on an M-60 range at the Graf training area from 3000 meters ( I was firing a eight inch howitzer when I did it ) W/ one shot does that count? :)

rcmodel
August 24, 2008, 05:19 PM
That's pretty darn good shooting! :D:D:D

rcmodel

Griz44
August 24, 2008, 05:19 PM
So Treo, was that an 8" MOA with one shot?

Tommygunn
August 24, 2008, 05:24 PM
Yeah, Lee Harvey Oswald, if he actually took the shots, ranks up there among the greatest riflemen who ever lived.

You guys realize that the shot Oswald made from the bookstore window was hardly comparable to Billy Dixon's or anything else, really?
Heck, he missed the first shot entirely, inflicted an incapacitating shot the second time which also wounded a nontargeted individual.
Yeh, that third shot did the trick alright.
Hathaway or Dixon could of done the same thing with only one shot.



Blindfolded.

General Geoff
August 24, 2008, 05:33 PM
With a crappy carcano with a misaligned sight?

rcmodel
August 24, 2008, 06:13 PM
And reloading and shooting faster then even Hathcock could do it in a sanctioned NRA high-power rapid-fire match, with a slicked-up Model 70 bolt-gun?

Come on!

rcmodel

Treo
August 24, 2008, 06:14 PM
So Treo, was that an 8" MOA with one shot?

I've told this story a couple times. It involves a 2nd Lt. W/ a map, The FDC chief said he told the guy several times that we were not where he thought we were, before he (the FDCchief)left the track. We were firing a check round. I think we were actually farther away than 3 Klicks because that's how far off we were. Those of us on the gun line had no idea what was up until we heard " Cease fire freeze" .

Apparently there was a unit at the 60 range qualifying and the round landed in the middle of the range. It probably didn't take out every single target on the range, but it damn sure shut the range down.

rcmodel
August 24, 2008, 06:16 PM
It involves a 2nd Lt. W/ a mapThat right there is all I need to know!

rcmodel

3pairs12
August 24, 2008, 06:20 PM
Okay I know this not 1 shot but I know somebody that has ran 1500 straight doubles.

Educated Hillbilly
August 24, 2008, 06:32 PM
It has been "documented" that Daniel Boone when squirrel hunting would shoot the limb out from under the squirrel with his muzzle loader. The transferring shock supposedly killed the squirrel. He claimed he did it this way to keep from damaging the meet. If it happened this has to be right up there in the top 5.

csmkersh
August 24, 2008, 06:49 PM
While Billy Dixon's 1500 yard shot at Adobe Walls, Texas is outstanding, and while White Feather aka Gunny Hathcock's feats in 'Nam are amazing, the current distance record is held by a Canadian sniper using a 50 Cal Macmillan Tac-50 .50 caliber rifle.

The greatest string shooter is most likely Ad Toepperwein. One of Ad's first large assignments for Winchester was at the World's Fair at St. Louis in 1904. There he established his first official record by smashing 3507 21/4 inch diameter aerial composition targets without a miss. In 1906 he shot at 20,000 2¼ inch wooden blocks during a period of three days' shooting and scored 19,990 hits.

Rosstradamus
August 24, 2008, 06:53 PM
The July 1996 issue of Air Force magazine carried an article about 2d Lt. Owen J. Baggett, who was co-pilot of a B-24 shot down over Burma on March 31, 1943. While descending in his parachute, he was strafed by a Japanese Zero. He took four shots at it with his 1911, and it crashed. While a POW, he was told by another officer, Col. Harry Melton, commander of the 311th Fighter Group, that a Japanese colonel had told him the pilot had been found with a single bullet wound to the head. Melton died a prisoner and was unable to file an official report though.

NvTwist
August 24, 2008, 07:06 PM
Master Cpl. Arron Perry. - 50 Cal Macmillan Tac-50, 2430 Meters (1.5 miles), dropping an Taliban fighter during combat. 19 others taken but at closer range.

Artiz
August 24, 2008, 07:17 PM
I wanted to write this story, but I didn't remember his name so..
It's a truely GRRREAT shot. And, it's from the Canadian Forces. :D

Treo
August 24, 2008, 07:20 PM
He claimed he did it this way to keep from damaging the meet.

The practice was known as "barking" a squirrel and it was fairly common back in the day.

Atla
August 24, 2008, 07:32 PM
Look guys, Billy Dixon himself has said over and over that the shot was luck.

This should be divided into two categories. Pistol and Rifle.

For Pistol, I would say hands down Wild Bill Hickok shooting Davis Tutt/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Bill_Hickok-Davis_Tutt_shootout


At approximately 12 Noon, Hickok was seen calmly approaching the square from the north, his Colt Navy in hand. His armed presence caused the crowd to immediately scatter to the safety of nearby buildings, leaving Tutt alone in the center of the square. At a distance of about 75 yards, Hickok stopped, facing Tutt, and called out, "Dave, here I am." He cocked his pistol, holstered it on his hip, and gave a final warning, "Don't you come across here with that watch." [3]

Despite the gunfight launching Hickok to fame as a gunfighter, Davis Tutt showed courage by all accounts. Both men hesitated briefly. Then Tutt reached for his pistol. The two men quick-drew and fired a single shot each, both shooting at essentially the same time, the reports combining as one. Tutt missed. But Hickok's .36-caliber bullet struck Tutt in the heart, killing him in moments.

Wild Bill was a heckuva guy, to bad he was a Yankee though.

MFC Bastion
August 24, 2008, 07:32 PM
I thought the Canadian sniper was Cpl. Rob Furlong.

And didn't Hathcock try to recreate Oswald's shot and found it all but impossible?

Zip7
August 24, 2008, 07:41 PM
When I was about 17, one of my friends shot a flying field lark out of the sky at a range of about 30 yards with my Winchester Model 67 single shot .22 rifle.

CB900F
August 24, 2008, 07:46 PM
Fella's;

I'm voting Hathcock's shot. Keep in mind that he did not have the advantage of all the advances in firearms, cartridges, and optics that the Canadian did. He used an issue M2, loaded single shot with issue ammo, and a Unertle 8X scope on it that he finagled a mount for in the field to adapt it to the M2 action. Now, on the other hand, he did the sight in shots & then just waited for a proper target to show up later in the day. But none the less, a 2600 yard shot with an 8X scope!

900F

Webbj0219
August 24, 2008, 07:46 PM
a friend of mine told me he went on a hunting trip. they hadnt got anything all day. Just as the sun was going down and they were loading up the truck, they spotted a deer on a far off ridge. my friend decided he would take one last shot before he put his gun away. he just kinda casually took aim up above the animal cause it was soo far away, fired, then a few moments later saw it fall off the back of the ridge. was pure luck.

Friendly, Don't Fire!
August 24, 2008, 07:52 PM
My personal best shot that I recall is a crow that was well over 50 yards with a 22.

jrfoxx
August 24, 2008, 08:01 PM
The practice was known as "barking" a squirrel and it was fairly common back in the day.

Anyone actually ever seen this done? can you actually kill a squirrel by shooting the branch he's on? I'm sure it sends a preety good shock wave into him, but enough to kill? I'm pretty skeptical, but if there is some real reports of it working reliably and repeatably(I can see the rare occasion the squirrel lands on his head and snaps his neck, and aint counting that :D), I'll happily stand corrected (and maybe practice up to try it out. with so little meat on a squirrel, a method that doesnt waste any is great)

memphisjim
August 24, 2008, 08:07 PM
1/8 moa? :scrutiny:

SHOOT1SAM
August 24, 2008, 08:07 PM
I think it was my wife's first-ever shot at game when she took an almost 900# cow moose with my .35 Whelen.

Sam

cassandrasdaddy
August 24, 2008, 08:13 PM
barking squirrels is real

Mark K. C.
August 24, 2008, 08:30 PM
Thats a good story kid , but one that you want to keep to your self.

lacoochee
August 24, 2008, 08:30 PM
I've barked squirrels when the caliber I was carrying was to large to take them without destroying them, in other words no .22 on hand. I am not sure if it was my great-grandfather who told me about it or my great-aunt (a scary good shot), just know it's a common technique at east in the South. Of course at today's ammunition prices it's also a bit expensive for the little bit of meat you get in return and I will only take the shot if there is a ridge line behind the tree or at least a large trunk. (true for any caliber .22 or greater)

Treo
August 24, 2008, 08:31 PM
Barking a squirrel doesn't kill it it stuns it ( probably not 100% of the time) then either you or your dawg snaps its neck. I believe Alvin York was known to be pretty good at it.

chefman
August 24, 2008, 08:42 PM
Watched a friend shoot a cat at about 100 yds, Ruger 10/22, iron sights at night, standing in front of car with headlights on. All he had for target was two green eyes glowing- hit dead center. Surprised himself more than me.

memphisjim
August 24, 2008, 08:45 PM
thats pretty doable if you ask me
the sights on a stock 10/22 are possibly my favorite
little back notch small bright gold bead

XD Fan
August 24, 2008, 08:46 PM
I guess this is only in the lucky shot category, but I have an uncle that shot a deer up the nostril with a .22 pump action rifle. The deer was about a hundred yards from him.The deer died instantly.

Duke Junior
August 24, 2008, 11:06 PM
With a crappy carcano with a misaligned sight?

I agree. Lee Harvey Oswald's 2nd and 3rd shots under the incredible pressure and conditions ,have to be #1.
They changed the world, and the present that we live in ,for better or for worse ,were greatly created by that 8 seconds in time at 12:30 P.M.,November 22,1963 in Dallas,Texas.

RancidSumo
August 25, 2008, 01:38 AM
Last summer at my grandparents house my bro shot a bird out of the air at 93yds with my Ruger Mk1 with Federal Bulk Pack ammo. The round passed clean through the neck and killed it.

NvTwist
August 25, 2008, 02:43 AM
I would have to say that taking out a Zero with a 1911 after punching out of his plane while floating under a parachute and getting a head shot. Thats a warrior.

Meta
August 25, 2008, 03:04 AM
McMillan Tubb200 Rifle, 260 Remington, 100 Yards, one very unlucky fly.

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n26/metaphysx/107_0706.jpg

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n26/metaphysx/107_0708.jpg

jonc
August 25, 2008, 03:49 AM
.... Meta.... that may be the unluckiest shot looking from the flies POV

General Geoff
August 25, 2008, 03:51 AM
that is epic

KC0QGL
August 25, 2008, 04:14 AM
My Dad lighting a strike-anywhere match with his Win. 1906 .22. I have dried to do it too, with the same gun, I just end up brakeing the match.

Aaryq
August 25, 2008, 04:23 AM
I once had an AD with my JC Higgins 103 .22 single shot.

I was using Federal bulk .22 LR.

I was holding my rifle down range and running my suck.

I was not paying attention.

I started to cycle the bolt but the hammer dropped.

I hit the torso-sized target.

My ear pro had been removed.

I learned to wear ear pro for .22's.

I stood next to the target...it would've impacted above the top of the ribcage/collar bones in the windpipes (not a doctor).

pistolero6869
August 25, 2008, 10:46 AM
My Best (lucky) Shot was out at my sportsman club I just got a used Glock -G-21 45 acp was getting familar with it. My girl friend said what that way out there? Its a turkey at 100 yards she said hit that. I took a half a-- aim a RING! I couldnt belive it. 230 gr hard cast hand load Bingo Hey I like this Glock!!!!!

TheDriver
August 25, 2008, 11:08 AM
Probably something Simo Hayha did.

Vaarok
August 25, 2008, 11:12 AM
Whoever hit General John Sedgewick.

Wes Janson
August 25, 2008, 12:12 PM
Either the HMS Warspite, or the Scharnhorst. Scoring a hit at a kilometer is nothing compared to hitting a moving naval vessel at over 26,000 yards.

orygunmike
August 25, 2008, 12:55 PM
Situation: Gopher had been wrecking havoc on my yard for months...all methods of deterrance failed.

Solution: Resort to drastic measures and destroy the enemy at all costs.

The Day: Early morning...Pouring rain...buckets of water coming down.
I spot the varmit popping his head out of one of his many holes. I run and retrieve my Ruger Single Six .22 with open sights...and load and make ready. I sneak around the side of the house and from approximately 20 yards take aim at the mound....upon sighting the head of the critter I squeeze off a single shot. Upon investigation I find dead critter in hole.

I'm surprised you guys haven't read about this in some gun magazine.

rondog
August 25, 2008, 01:06 PM
I shot a big water moccasin through the neck once from approx. 15-20 yards away, with my old S&W Model 19 .357. He had just swam across a river and was warming himself on the beach.

Rugerlvr
August 25, 2008, 01:23 PM
The shot with the most historical import may have been the one Gavrilo Princip poked in Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

Clipper
August 25, 2008, 02:30 PM
Elmer Keith dropped an antelope wounded by his hunting partner, at 600 yards with one unsupported shot from his M-29 Smith & Wesson...

Duke Junior
August 25, 2008, 02:38 PM
The shot with the most historical import may have been the one Gavrilo Princip poked in Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

No question about that.It was practically at FTF distance however.
Even so, the after effects from those pistol shots at Sarajevo in 1914 are still reverberating today.

Drgong
August 25, 2008, 02:53 PM
yep, thats why as the OP i said the greatest shot ever taken, as the most important shot happened in 1914.

LJ-MosinFreak-Buck
August 25, 2008, 03:03 PM
My Father's friend hunts Pheasant with a .22.

jrfoxx
August 25, 2008, 03:10 PM
OOh, almost forgot this one.

I once shot a mole with a pellet gun from point blank range, as he actually stuck his snout INTO the barrell of the gun to sniff it.:what:

It isnt the shot that was difficult, but it IS pretty hard to get a critter to stick part of his head into the barrel for you.;)

bensdad
August 25, 2008, 03:21 PM
Quote:
The shot with the most historical import may have been the one Gavrilo Princip poked in Archduke Franz Ferdinand.

No question about that.It was practically at FTF distance however.
Even so, the after effects from those pistol shots at Sarajevo in 1914 are still reverberating today.

I dunno. I'd say there was a shot fired on April 19, 1775 (near Lexington) that is still reverberating today. In fact, I'd say the reverberations of that shot have saved the world from the reverberations of many shots since.

yesit'sloaded
August 25, 2008, 03:22 PM
Personal best was a raccoon at night. I didn't have my contacts in or glasses on. Single shot .22 with open sights. Maybe 30 yards. Bullet entered neck and broke spine. I still have the tail somewhere.

XDKingslayer
August 25, 2008, 03:23 PM
I have to put Hathcocks shot over Furlongs for several reasons.

Furlong took three shots to kill the target. The first missed completely, the second hit the target's backpack, and the third finally hit the target.

Hathcock's long shot was a VC kid on a bicycle carrying weapons. He didn't want to hit the kid so he intentionally hit the frame of the bike. Not a man sized target, THE FRAME OF THE BIKE! Then once the bike fell apart, the kid grabbed a weapon and Hathcock was forced to kill him. Again, a kid, not a full grown man.

Furlong missed a man sized target with two shots. Hathcock hit, maybe, a 2" wide steel tube, then a boy sized target.

Hathcock didn't make this shot with a specially built sniper rifle. He did this with your every day, off the shelf M2 Browning machine gun with a 4x scope he custom mounted on the gun.

Ever tried to hit a man sized target at 2500 yards with a 4x scope?

Ever tried to hit anything at 2500 yards with an M2?

I have. I've tried to hit man sized targets at 2500 yards with an M2 mounted in a turret with special optics and it's not easy.

Not saying Furlong's shot wasn't amazing and I'm not trying to take anything away from Furlong, but his shot doesn't hold a candle to Hathcock's.

Rugerlvr
August 25, 2008, 05:05 PM
I dunno. I'd say there was a shot fired on April 19, 1775 (near Lexington) that is still reverberating today. In fact, I'd say the reverberations of that shot have saved the world from the reverberations of many shots since.

I thought about that shot. But no one knows who fired the shot. It is largely figurative anyway, as the war began that morning, and there is no real record of who fired the first shot. It was familiarized and colloquialized by the poem by Ralph Waldo Emerson. I think that the first shot of a war which was happening, regardless of when the first shot was fired, can't be considered as great of a shot of historical import, as the shot that was fired by a known assassin from a known gun, killing a world figure, that touched off an age of modern warfare that redefined the world so completely and utterly.

Claude Clay
August 25, 2008, 08:14 PM
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/8964/voyaox7.gif (http://imageshack.us)
By claudeclay (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/claudeclay)

Treo
August 25, 2008, 08:28 PM
What about FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi's shot when he took out Vicki Weaver while she was armed W/ a deadly baby.

yakkingallover
August 25, 2008, 09:08 PM
I used to have a coke can hanging from a string off a tree branch in our backyard when I was a kid. I got to where I could ventilate that can at about 50yds standing on the back porch. Well one evening with my first shot the can dropped to the ground and when I went to investigate I had severed the pull tab the string was tied through. I then took my leprechaun,horeshoe and bb gun back inside and watched tv knowing I wasn't gonna do better that day...

Wes Janson
August 25, 2008, 11:51 PM
Hathcock's long shot was a VC kid on a bicycle carrying weapons. He didn't want to hit the kid so he intentionally hit the frame of the bike. Not a man sized target, THE FRAME OF THE BIKE! Then once the bike fell apart, the kid grabbed a weapon and Hathcock was forced to kill him. Again, a kid, not a full grown man.

Furlong missed a man sized target with two shots. Hathcock hit, maybe, a 2" wide steel tube, then a boy sized target.

Hathcock didn't make this shot with a specially built sniper rifle. He did this with your every day, off the shelf M2 Browning machine gun with a 4x scope he custom mounted on the gun.

Ever tried to hit a man sized target at 2500 yards with a 4x scope?

Ever tried to hit anything at 2500 yards with an M2?

I have. I've tried to hit man sized targets at 2500 yards with an M2 mounted in a turret with special optics and it's not easy.

Not saying Furlong's shot wasn't amazing and I'm not trying to take anything away from Furlong, but his shot doesn't hold a candle to Hathcock's.

I'm sorry, I know I wasn't there and all of that (and know that I'm about to be flamed by swarms of irate Marines), but I don't think that the claimed Hathcock shot could have concievably happened as it's been told. The best M2HB in the world, on its best day, might be a 1 MOA weapon with match ammunition. That's a circle 26.25 inches wide at 2500 yards. Hitting the frame of a bicycle, intentionally, at that distance would be more the product of sheer unbelievable, stupendous, unrepeatable luck than anything else. Perhaps it was an accident, or perhaps it was closer, or perhaps many other things. But that's the equivalent of claiming a headshot at a thousand yards with a Hi-Point: while theoretically possible, in practice utterly impossible to do on demand. Especially under field conditions, without accurate range-finding equipment, using inaccurate machinegun ammunition, through an 8x scope. I'd have to run the numbers, but at that distance the bullet drop would be severe enough that the target's distance would have to be perfectly known within no more than a yard or two in order to hit a 2" target. Let alone one that's moving.

welldoya
August 26, 2008, 12:14 AM
Naw, you're all wrong.
The best shot ever has to be when Tom Selleck (Quiqley Down Under) shot that guy driving the wagon as he was riding away. He had to be at least half a mile away. ;)

Elm Creek Smith
August 26, 2008, 12:37 AM
The best shots I ever made were:

(1) taking out a Hind helicopter frontal target at 2250 meters at Wildflecken with an M85 .50 Cal machinegun from the turret of an M60A3 during a simultaneous engagment. The Tank Crew Evaluator told me I was wasting my time as my gunner engaged 3 BMP frontals at 1500 meters. My tracers burned out just over half-way to the Hind, then the API/API-T rounds sparkled all over it. My gunner got all the BMPs in 8 seconds. (My loader was a flash!)

(2) spinning a pig offhand at 100 meters with a 4 1/2 inch Ruger Bisley Vaquero in .45 Colt. The round was a 300 grain JSP "Bear Load" from HSM.

ECS

Rugerlvr
August 26, 2008, 12:56 AM
What about FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi's shot when he took out Vicki Weaver while she was armed W/ a deadly baby.

To call that a great shot is "inexcusable." :mad:

Loomis
August 26, 2008, 01:30 AM
Twenty some years ago, I witnessed a buddy of mine take a lever action 22 rimfire with a short barrel... draw a bead on a fast flying barn swallow about 50 yards away and follow that barn swallow as it flew through a small bunch of young cedars...he slowly began to fire, very slowly working the action...and on the third shot, he F$%ING hit the dam thing just as it emerged from the other side of the cedars!

There were 4 of us there including the shooter, and we were all watching when it happened. It was dead silence for what seemed like a minute. Then the shooter said " you guys saw that right?"

As if that wasn't amazing enough by itself...The moment just before he began shooting was wierd. We were all just horsing around and showing off our shooting skills by shooting anything we could think of. You know, trying to keep a tin can hopping down the road without missing or letting it come to rest, that sort of thing.

But when he spotted that bird, and put the butt to his shoulder, everyone froze and turned to look at what he was looking at. His face was like that of a cat about to pounce. I can't describe it in words. But there was such a change in him and such freaky look of concentration that it actually took your breath away, and I remember actually thinking "he's going to do it" before he actually did it. And then he did it.

I'll never forget it.

Duke Junior
August 26, 2008, 01:32 AM
Naw, you're all wrong.
The best shot ever has to be when Tom Selleck (Quiqley Down Under) shot that guy driving the wagon as he was riding away. He had to be at least half a mile away.

Well,if we're gonna go to the movies,how about Clint Eastwood,shooting off hand, firing that shot from several football fields away and cutting the rope off from around Eli Wallach's throat in "The Good,the Bad and the Ugly?

Big Boomer
August 26, 2008, 02:28 AM
best shot taken? Well mine of course. I shot at the moon! I'll have to have an astronaut get up there to check if I hit it. But, I did take the shot!

IndianaBoy
August 26, 2008, 01:39 PM
For some reason some people don't realize that Oswald quite simply got lucky.

He was nothing special as a marksman.

1911Tuner
August 26, 2008, 02:03 PM
You guys realize that the shot Oswald made from the bookstore window was hardly comparable to Billy Dixon's or anything else, really?

+1

The distance was like...what...70 yards?

Most country boys I know who grew up shootin' table meat coulda made the Oswald/Kennedy shots with an iron-sighted Winchester .30-30 carbine.

Drgong
August 26, 2008, 02:09 PM
I still say a 1500 yard shot with a Blackpowder Sharps is up there with the perverbial shooting though the scope shot.

XDKingslayer
August 26, 2008, 02:10 PM
I'm sorry, I know I wasn't there and all of that (and know that I'm about to be flamed by swarms of irate Marines),

No, you weren't there. Neither was I. But his spotter was.

Hitting the frame of a bicycle, intentionally, at that distance would be more the product of sheer unbelievable, stupendous, unrepeatable luck than anything else.

But he did repeat it. He repeated that shot within minutes of the first. Remember, he shot the bike AND the boy.

As far as the M2, Hathcock wasn't the only sniper in Viet Nam using the M2. There were several. And people don't realize how good Hathcock was. Look at the shooting matches this guy won, including the Wimbleton Cup.

Ske1etor
August 26, 2008, 02:14 PM
The Shooter - Carlos Hathcock... AKA "White Feather"

The Shot - Pick One.

ATAShooter
August 26, 2008, 02:18 PM
2 other names that hasn't been written here yet was SGT. Alvin York and Charlie Whitman.

Friendly, Don't Fire!
August 26, 2008, 02:25 PM
Another personal favorite. I had picked out six potato-sized stones and set them up at 100 yards. I had a stainless 454 Casull (10" barrel) with a silver Leupold 4X scope (SSK mount epoxied to receiver with three scope rings). I loaded for accuracy and was consistently shooting quarter-size groups off the bench with that gun and the load I had (300 grain flat point bullets seem to strike me as the bullets that were most accurate---I'm going by memory on this as I have not had that gun for at least 15 years).

I remember hitting the first rock, and a guy with all the emblems on his roll-up hat tells me "pretty good shot, I bet you can't do it again!" Ready, aim, fire - KABOOM - Poof!

He said to me "damn you're good!" I bet you can't do it again! Knowing he was trying to put the pressure on me, I told him I could "do it" all day long, if I wanted to and proceeded to SMOKE the last four in a row. No, I take that back. The last three. The last one fell off the wood onto the ground (when I shot the rock to the left of it) and that's where I smoked it.

The guy shut up, shook his head, and walked away.

Bubbles
August 26, 2008, 02:25 PM
If you take a Sig Sauer P220 with an AWC suppressor to a rifle range you can hit a man-sized target 600 yards away. It took about five rounds to adjust for holdover and windage... and the holdover was about 45 degrees.

Grey_Mana
August 26, 2008, 02:31 PM
Best shot ever? That's easy: Apollo 11, July 20, 1969, lunar module Eagle lands on the Moon. Aldrin and Armstrong for the win!

Friendly, Don't Fire!
August 26, 2008, 03:01 PM
Back in the days when I used to drink, there were some pretty good shots taken back then.

Also, does photography count? I've taken pretty good shots with the camera!

Correia
August 26, 2008, 03:20 PM
I don't see why anybody is impressed with Lee Harvey Oswald's shooting.

70 yards, on a target moving away from you. Big whoop.

But the timing proves that it was a conspiracy! Whatever. It wasn't even that fast.

Plus the 6.5 Carcano gets a bad rap. (most people have never used one, but all the conspiracy buffs need to talk about how bad it is to prove their point) It really is a handy little gun. At 70 yards it could have been 8 MOA and still done the job.

Plus who cares if the scope was misaligned (besides conspiracy buffs) because it was a crappy tall mount, and he probably just looked under the mount and used the iron sights.

General Geoff
August 26, 2008, 03:28 PM
Hathcock said Oswald could not have made that shot, nor could he have himself.

Most country boys I know who grew up shootin' table meat coulda made the Oswald/Kennedy shots with an iron-sighted Winchester .30-30 carbine.

It would have been easier with a .30-30 lever gun with iron sights.

Drgong
August 26, 2008, 03:31 PM
what ever happened to the rifle used? Is it in the national archives, or did it get destroyed.

General Geoff
August 26, 2008, 03:32 PM
It's in the national archives under glass, for exhibit.

Correia
August 26, 2008, 03:43 PM
General, I've seen the distance, speed, and angles. I could make that shot.

And I'm no Carlos Hathcock. I'm not worthy to clean his guns.

I don't think it was that difficult of a shot, provided he looked under the scope and used the irons.

Fish Miner
August 26, 2008, 03:52 PM
My wife hit a skeet! She can barely get that big ol 12ga up but she actually hit one. last time she shot anything with the shotgun, she wanted to go out on a high note.

No offense to all the long rangers but I would rather see my wife hit a skeet then some dude shoot a bike and a kid or any other living thing :)

maestro pistolero
August 26, 2008, 03:59 PM
I stood in that window in the library in Texas where Oswald supposedly took the shot. With a scoped rifle it would have been like shooting fish in a barrel.

Correia
August 26, 2008, 04:09 PM
Anybody got a link to where Hathcock actually said that about Oswald?

I'm no Marine sniper, but 70 yards on a target that is moving away from you, at that rate of speed, and I could do that with a handgun.

And a Carcano bolt isn't that difficult to operate. They're actually relatively fast to run. Roughly about the same as a Mauser, and recoil is relatively mild.

XDKingslayer
August 26, 2008, 04:14 PM
It might be an easy shot when you're sitting at a bench or standing at that very same window.

It's a completely different shot when you're doing it from a rifle ordered from a magazine, a possibly incorrectly mounted scope, and that's all before the seriousness of shooting the President of the United States sinks in.

Corriea, I found this:

The impossibility of Oswald's alleged shooting feat was what led former Marine sniper Craig Roberts to reject the lone-gunman theory. Roberts explains as he recounts the first time he visited the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository:

I turned my attention to the window in the southeast corner--the infamous Sniper's Nest. . . . I immediately felt like I had been hit with a sledge hammer. The word that came to mind at what I saw as I looked down through the window to Elm Street and the kill zone was: IMPOSSIBLE!

I knew instantly that Oswald could not have done it. . . . The reason I knew that Oswald could not have done it, was that *I* could not have done it. (KILL ZONE: A SNIPER LOOKS AT DEALEY PLAZA, p. 5)

Retired Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock is likewise skeptical of Oswald's alleged shooting feat. Hathcock is a former senior instructor at the U. S. Marine Corps Sniper Instruction School at Quantico, Virginia. He has been described as the most famous American military sniper in history. In Vietnam he was credited with 93 confirmed kills. He now conducts police SWAT team sniper schools across the country. Craig Roberts asked Hathcock about the marksmanship feat attributed to Oswald by the Warren Commission. Hathcock answered that he did not believe Oswald could have done what the Commission said he did. Added Hathcock,

Let me tell you what we did at Quantico. We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don't know how many times we tried it, but we couldn't duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did. (KILL ZONE, pp. 89-90)

here: http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/griffith/Oswald_poor_shot.html

That's two Marine Corps snipers saying they could duplicate the shot. There is also a section in there saying that the condition of the Carcano that he used the bolt couldn't be cycled as fast as the Warren Commission said Oswald shot.

Correia
August 26, 2008, 04:20 PM
And it was still 70 yards!

The guy was a Marine. I've not met a Marine yet who couldn't hit a slowly moving target at 70 yards.

Ordered from a magazine or not, it could have been a WASR 3 with a crooked front sight post capable of 8 1/2 MOA, and he STILL could have made that shot.

Plus, like I said before the off center scope was probably not even used. The mount was high enough that the irons could still be accessed.

We've got guys taking shots a hundred times more difficult, and every bit as stressful on a daily basis all over Mesopotamia right about now, so I don't see how Oswald makes the list. As for stress, he was shooting JFK, not Jesus. You think a guy crazy enough to take a shot at the POTUS is the kind of guy that freaks out easily under stress? Heck no.

EDIT: I posted before you posted that link.

My question then, is what part could they not recreate? The range was easy. The angle was easy. The speed was relatively easy. What part could the folks at Quantico not replicate?

Basically, I'm not seeing what is so darn hard about that shot. That link is great, but it doesn't say why they couldn't do it?

Time constraints? Angle? Speed? What? Were they forced to use the crappy scope, or were they allowed to use irons.

XDKingslayer
August 26, 2008, 04:34 PM
From what I gather it's all of the above. That shot couldn't have been made in that time, with that rifle, at that range at that speed, with Oswald's ability.

If Hathcock and another Marine sniper say the shot couldn't be done, then it couldn't be done. I find it hard to argue with the guy making 2400 yard shots on a bicycle frame...

I found a little more:

“The reason I knew that Oswald could not have done it, was because I could not have done it,” said former US Marine sniper, Craig Roberts. Credited with numerous kills while serving in Vietnam , Roberts turned an objective eye on the shot heard ‘round the world. After he visited Dealey Plaza, after viewing the so-called “sniper’s lair,” on the sixth floor of the book depository, and after staring at the large oak tree overspreading much of Elm Street, Roberts said, “I walked away from the window in disgust. I had seen all I needed to know that Oswald could not have been the lone shooter.”

But Roberts, a retired police investigator, wanted to know what did happen. Not content to dismiss the improbable feat, he delved into the crime from every angle.

“First, I analyzed the scene as a sniper . . . I looked at the engagement angles. It was entirely wrong…Here, from what I could see, three problems arose that would influence my shots. First, the target was moving away at a drastic angle to the right from the window, meaning that I would have to position my body to compete with the wall and a set of vertical water pipes . . . This would be extremely difficult for a right-handed shooter. Second, I would have to be ready to fire exactly when the target emerged past some tree branches that obscured the kill zone. Finally, I would have to deal with two factors at the same time; the curve of the street, and the high-to-low angle formula—a law of physics Oswald would not have known.”

From here: http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/herman/herman16.html

The problem is that all of these are conspiracy theory sights that say there was more than one shooter or are adamant that Oswald didn't make the shot. I don't know the accuracy, but again, I find trouble arguing with two Marine snipers that may know a little more than you or I.

I have the same problem that you do. Roberts never tried to make the shot, he just looked at the window and said it couldn't be done. However, keep in mind that he is a seasoned sniper and is trained in this kind of thing, we're mere shooters. The other problem is Hathcock obviously tried the shot and couldn't do it, but doesn't give any detail. We've got half the story from one, half the other. Again, the other side of the coin is that these are two trained snipers with over 100 kills between them and we are mere shooters telling them they're wrong.

Now, the one thing I do see is that Hathcock never said Oswald couldn't make the shot. He simply said that they couldn't recreate the shot according to the FBI's investigation report. Does that prove Oswald couldn't make the shot or that the FBI's investigation is flawed? Not like they haven't botched an investigation before...

cassandrasdaddy
August 26, 2008, 04:47 PM
t was the tree like 20 years earlier?
?

Correia
August 26, 2008, 05:06 PM
I'm not disagreeing that these snipers know more than me, but from the photos I've seen from the sniper's perch, it didn't look difficult at all. So that's what I'm going on.

And one thing I will disagree with, and the high-to-low angle formula—a law of physics Oswald would not have known Moot point at that range. It is a factor of distance and gravity from the point the shot was fired, to the point of impact. 70 yards isn't enough to really screw that up. Even if it caused him to be off by a couple of inches at the range, it would be utterly irrelevant.

I can't comment on the water pipes for a right handed shooter. No idea as I've never actually been there.

Second, I would have to be ready to fire exactly when the target emerged past some tree branches that obscured the kill zone. That I don't see as being that hard either, since he cranked off multiple shots and basically got lucky. Lead car, follow through tree, fire on other side.

As for the FBI report being wrong, I've had the pleasure of being involved in federal investigations. Nothing would surprise me.

Ske1etor
August 26, 2008, 05:09 PM
All you guys arguing about being able to make the shot....

Here is a simulator that is set up exactly to the conditions of they moment that president kennedy was shot and killed in dealy plaza.

Click on the link below and scroll down until you see "Download Now". Download the game, and be amazed as you can not, I repeat CAN NOT recreate the shot... even with simulation physics.

http://www.freedownloads.be/downloaddetail/821-JFK-reloaded

XDKingslayer
August 26, 2008, 05:24 PM
Any computer game can be programmed to make you miss. I can't put any weight in it. Sorry Sek1etor.

cassandrasdaddy
August 26, 2008, 05:26 PM
or you could use this one
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2003-11-19-jfk-recreate_x.htm

or this one
http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/intro.htm

or this

1.) Oswald definitely owned the rifle found on the 6th floor of the TSBD on 11/22.

2.) He also definitely owned the handgun that was shown to have been used in the Tippit killing.

3.) Marina admits to having taken pictures of Lee with these weapons on his person.

4.) Wesley Frazier observed Oswald take a package into the Depository on the morning of November 22nd, 1963.

5.) Oswald's claim of "curtain rods" within the package cannot be supported at all. His room needed no curtains, nor rods, and NO such rods were ever found in the TSBD or at 1026 N. Beckley. Nor was LHO seen carrying any type of package (rods or otherwise) out of the building after leaving work (unannounced to anyone) after the assassination. It can therefore be reasonably assumed that no rods ever existed.

6.) Oswald was seen working on the sixth floor that morning. Co-workers sent the elevator back up to Oswald on the 6th floor shortly before the assassination.

7.) Oswald's palmprint found on Carcano rifle. .... But, of course, this print is really just a "bonus" for the DPD in linking LHO to the weapon. For even without it, it's glaringly obvious that the weapon was Oswald's. It was proved the alias, Alek/Alex Hidell, was actually Oswald himself; and the order form from Klein's to purchase the mail-order rifle was positively proven to have been in Oswald's handwriting, and sent to a Dallas P.O. Box that was used by him. Obviously, just LHO's owning the rifle doesn't prove he pulled the trigger. But doesn't just plain ordinary garden-variety logic dictate (with a pretty good percentage of probability) that it was the owner of said weapon, a Mr. Lee H. Oswald, that fired the shots on 11/22. The alternative is to believe that Oswald, for some unknown reason, handed over his Carcano to someone else for the purpose of using it. Why would he knowingly have done this idiotic act, knowing full well what might be the implications of doing so?!

8.) Not ONE SPECK of any bullets/bullet fragments/bullet shells OTHER THAN OSWALD'S 6.5 MM MANNLICHER-CARCANO were discovered anywhere in Dealey Plaza, the limousine, the TSBD, Parkland Hospital, or in the victims. This one, to me, is simply impossible for conspiracy advocates to overcome, IF there had been (as some claim) up to 3 firing teams and 6 shots fired in DP on Nov. 22nd. HOW could every single scrap of ballistics evidence be completely eradicated from the 2 (or more) non-Oswald weapons almost immediately after the event?! Couldn't have been accomplished by even Kreskin!! .... Plus: This massive task of removing all non-Oswald wounds & bullets would most certainly have had to include the many doctors who worked on BOTH the President and Gov. Connally at Parkland. PLUS it would include the multitude of people who observed the body at Bethesda (unless you subscribe to the totally-implausible accounts of body-altering and all that business aboard AF1, or elsewhere before the body got to Washington. Again, even Kreskin would be amazed by such incredible sleight-of-hand). .... ALL ballistic evidence was traced back to being consistent with the weapon owned by Lee H. Oswald. The probability of this occurring IF there were multiple guns firing at the motorcade is probably so low to be considered virtually impossible.

9.) Over 90% of the Dealey witnesses said shots came from behind the President, in the direction of the School Book Depository building. NINETY per cent plus! Now, HOW could THAT MANY people all be mistaken. Are we to actually believe the much-fewer number of 9%-10% of ear/eyewitnesses that claimed to hear shots from the front? That is illogical on its face. If 9 out of 10 people say it happened a certain way....WHY would the claims of the minority 10% be taken as gospel? Makes no sense! .... In addition, over 95% of this 90%+ claim there were EXACTLY three shots. No more, no less. And three spent shells (co-incidentally?) were found in the "sniper's nest" on the sixth floor. Now, do we ignore the overwhelming 95% of earwitnesses on this crucial point? Or do we stretch the imagination and for some reason trust the lowly number of 5% of the people who claim 4 or more shots?

10.) Oswald only ONCE made a weeknight visit to Irving. That just happened to be on Thursday, November 21, 1963. His rifle is found missing the following day.

11.) Oswald left behind, presumably for wife Marina, his wedding ring and just about every dime he had to his name ($100+), on the morning of 11/22. Logic dictates that he felt he may not return.

12.) Oswald was the only Depository employee to leave work prematurely on 11/22. Why do you suppose this was? The day was only half over.

13.) Oswald, in flight, shoots & kills DPD Office J.D. Tippit (multiple witnesses confirm it was Oswald, with very few variations of description). Once more, are we to accept the minority of people who state: "It was a larger man" or "There were two people", rather than believe the majority of people who claim, uncategorically, that OSWALD SHOT TIPPIT?! Why does the minority get such a benefit of the doubt in so many aspects of this case....while the huge, eye-popping majority (which favor the Oswald-Did-It stance) is subject to such scrutiny. By sheer numbers, wouldn't the lowly 5% or 10% on this & that be scrutinized with a far more wary eye? I certainly would think so.

14.) WHY does Oswald kill Officer Tippit IF he's innocent of another crime just minutes earlier in Dealey Plaza? Answer: He would have no such reason to do so. If the Tippit shooting isn't one of the biggest reasons to shout from the rooftops "Oswald did it!!", then I don't know what would be.

15.) Oswald, just days after acquiring his Carcano weapon, attempts to murder retired General Edwin Walker in Dallas, in April of '63, barely missing out on killing his third victim during the year 1963. Marina Oswald herself testifies that "Lee told me...he just shot Walker." The Walker bullet is proven to have come from the Oswald rifle (consistent with being fired from a 6.5 MM Carcano). ..... Another KEY fact is the Walker attempt, as I think any reasonable person looking at the case objectively would concur. For, it displays in Oswald a definite tendency toward violent action on his part during the months leading up to November 22nd. To me, it's not a wild stretch of one's imagination to think that if this guy is willing to bump off Walker, then he might just set his sights a little higher when the perfect opportunity presents itself 7 months later. The fact that Oswald was a kind of loner, oddball, and rejected authority at just about every turn in life cannot be underestimated when talking of motive. He probably hated America (in general terms) for not being able to just come and go as he pleased to Russia and Cuba whenever it pleased his self-serving self in the months just prior to November 22. As a former Marine acquaintance of Oswald's once said: "He always thought he was a little better than everyone else." This statement speaks volumes, in my opinion, when gazing into Oswald's background and possible motive in the JFK murder.

16.) It was PROVEN, no matter what anybody WANTS to believe to the contrary, that three shots COULD be fired in the allotted timeframe from the Oswald rifle. The probability that Oswald had, in fact, 8.1 to 8.2 seconds to accomplish the shooting further increases the likelihood that Lee could have performed the deed. IF you believe the first (missed) shot hit a tree branch and ricocheted to strike James Tague by the underpass at approx. Frame 160 of the Zapruder film (as I, of course, do), then the total time between shots #1 and #3 increases to more than eight seconds, much more than the minimum required of 2.3 seconds (times two) to get off the three shots.

17.) Try as the CTers might, the Single Bullet Theory has still not been proven to be an impossibility. The Zapruder film shows that the SBT is more-than-likely the correct scenario of events that day. Kennedy & Connally are reacting to their initial wounds at virtually an identical time, at Z-Frame 224. Unfortunately, that damn Stemmons sign is blocking our view during what might be a critical point on the film. It can therefore NEVER be determined by anybody whether JFK was reacting to his throat/neck wound at a frame earlier than Z224. But, based on the available evidence, the SBT (judging by the reactions of the two victims in the limo) most certainly cannot be said to be false.

18.) While viewing the Zapruder film, I cannot see how anybody can say that the BACK of President Kennedy's head is blown away as a result of the head shot. It seems quite obvious while watching and freezing the film at various post-Z313 frames, that the entire rear portion of JFK's head remains intact throughout the shooting. The RIGHT-FRONT portion of his head is blown apart. Isn't it obvious that it's the FRONTAL portion of his skull that is being displaced by the swiftly-moving projectile? And if so, doesn't this demonstrate the actions of an object that's just been struck from BEHIND, not from the front? For, if shot from the grassy knoll (front right), WHY isn't there evidence on the Z-Film of massive head damage on the President's LEFT-REAR side of the head? Bullets explode out the EXIT wounds, don't they?

19.) It was also proven that Oswald could have indeed trekked, in 90 seconds, the distance across the sixth floor and descended the 4 stories in time to have been seen on the building's second floor. Oswald was a thin, lean-enough sort of 24-year-old lad (who had by November 22nd become used to lifting heavy objects around all day long on a two-wheeled cart at his job at the Depository). To me, it doesn't seem like a fairy tale to say that he would have been able to hide the weapon quickly and then negotiate the fours flights of stairs within a 90-second timeframe and NOT be out of breath, so he could encounter Officer Marrion Baker and Roy Truly on the second floor in a relatively composed and unrattled state at 12:31-12:32 PM (CST) on November 22nd. I wonder, too, considering what had just happened outside on Elm Street, just exactly how much detailed attention Mr. Baker or Mr. Truly might have been paying to Lee Oswald's "breathing" during that very brief meeting in the 2nd-floor lunchroom. I'd be willing to bet neither paid an ounce of attention to a detail like that at that exact stressful moment. Lee was just another employee in the lunchroom for all those two knew at 12:32 PM.

----------------------------------
http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=3&topic_id=17758&mesg_id=17758&page=&topic_page=1


none are games though

XDKingslayer
August 26, 2008, 06:06 PM
or you could use this one
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/20...recreate_x.htm

or this one
http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/intro.htm

or this

First and foremost drop all computer simulations. They can only do what they are programmed to do. If you program them to miss they will miss. If you program them to hit they will hit. They can not and never will be able to compensate for the human factor. A computer will never get nervous shakes, slap a trigger or jerk a shot.

Now, as far as the others, they're no different than what I've linked to. They're just the opposite side of the spectrum.

Now, I'm not a conspiracy theory loon. I think we landed on the moon. I don't think there were aliens kept at Area 51. There is never any proof.

There is no proof Oswald didn't make the shot either. All we really have is one sniper that didn't shoot that shot say he couldn't make the shot himself and another reputable sniper saying they tried to mimic the shot and couldn't do it.

If Carlos Hathcock came to me and said the sky was green I would believe him. However, like I said, he said that they mimiced what the FBI reported and that the shot couldn't be made.

There are two factors there being left out. The FBI report being flawed and just stupid dumb luck on the part of Oswald.

If the rifle was as bad as reported, if the shot line up was as bad as reported, if Oswald's shooting skills were as bad as reported then it wasn't the Greatest Shot Ever Taken.

It was the luckiest.

General Geoff
August 26, 2008, 06:15 PM
If it was indeed Oswald who made the shot (under any circumstances), it may have been luck but it was still by many definitions the Greatest Shot Ever Taken, with the possible exception of the "Shot Heard 'Round the World" from the Battle of Lexington & Concorde. Not great as in required skill, but great as in magnitude and aftermath.

mpmarty
August 26, 2008, 06:34 PM
"Master gunny repeat after me: It couldn't have been done, I couldn't do it"
Yes Sir!

See, Oswald didn't do it. Orders from higher authority say so.

I got ya all beat. Large Slow Target pulled behind a small single engine aircraft. All these guys around me taking turns shooting at the large slow target and then It's my turn. I show em, one burst and the target drifts down into the ocean as the tow plane flies away. 1957, West coast of the US, live fire exercise w/ Quad Fifty on Half Track.

yhtomit
August 26, 2008, 07:26 PM
The greatest shot in history:

My friend Dennis, firing my S&W 625 at the range: "Are you sure these sights are adjusted? I just fired all 6, and not a single one hit the target."

Me: (casually) [BAM] -- One shot, perfect bullseye, one of the few I've ever made. "Yep. I think they're OK."

It was more luck than I wish it was, but the effect was perfect ;) Also, to be fair, Dennis has shot, but is not "a shooter" (not that I am), and had not fired a revolver before. I suspect he was shooting straighter that I did the first time ;)



Of course, I didn't have an maladjusted Carcano around, I would have done even better.

timothy

Noxx
August 26, 2008, 07:47 PM
A couple of weeks ago I pulled my personal best shot, a bowling around 70yds with a S&W 642 1-7/8". I have no plans to attempt such a thing again, I'd let my friends tell that story for a while before I screw it up.

mgregg85
August 26, 2008, 07:51 PM
I vote hathcock

Wes Janson
August 26, 2008, 09:41 PM
But he did repeat it. He repeated that shot within minutes of the first. Remember, he shot the bike AND the boy.

As far as the M2, Hathcock wasn't the only sniper in Viet Nam using the M2. There were several. And people don't realize how good Hathcock was. Look at the shooting matches this guy won, including the Wimbleton Cup.

The biographies put out claim that the shot was repeated, but that's irrelevant. Yes, he was indeed an amazing, world-class shot, but the best shooter in history can't make a shot that's more or less physically impossible within the given constraints. The best shooter alive, shooting a Ruger 10/22 at two thousand yards, will lose every time to a rookie with a benchrest rifle.

I have no doubt that it's possible to hit something at that distance with that platform, but I argue that it's not just not possible to intentionally do so twice in a row, under the claimed circumstances of a deliberate warning shot. Aspects are undoubtedly true, but the whole story as told is simply not believable.

cassandrasdaddy
August 26, 2008, 09:43 PM
some of those fellers will pull your leg chuck yeager told one on tv about shooting a hole in his prop and being able to see it

General Geoff
August 26, 2008, 10:08 PM
I have no doubt that it's possible to hit something at that distance with that platform, but I argue that it's not just not possible to intentionally do so twice in a row, under the claimed circumstances of a deliberate warning shot. Aspects are undoubtedly true, but the whole story as told is simply not believable.

I think that platform and the shooter could have definitely hit a person-size target at that range, but not the bike frame. That part was just luck, whether or not he was aiming for it.

akodo
August 26, 2008, 11:05 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62gvoKyODu4

penn and teller "rapidfire" a Mannlicher-Carcano then shoot a melon to show head direction move TOWARD the entrance wound as the exit wound acts as a jetblast or rocketblast

akodo
August 26, 2008, 11:16 PM
also, got to mention Nick Ranstad who got a 2100 hit on a taliban with an M82 IIRC, and while it does fall a few yards short of the Canadian's record, Ranstad did it in a single shot, while the Canadian took 3 shots to actually connect.

Treo
August 27, 2008, 12:01 AM
I've been trying to think of a witty way to say this and I can't come up W/ one so here goes;

The Idea that the is some all encompassing government conspiracy to cover up the facts of the Kennedy assasination, a cover up that's spanned 45 years W/out being discovered, requires far more faith in our government's competence than I have. In my opinion a government that could pull that off would already have your guns.

Duke Junior
August 27, 2008, 12:05 AM
I've been trying to think of a witty way to say this and I can't come up W/ one so here goes;

The Idea that the is some all encompassing government conspiracy to cover up the facts of the Kennedy assasination, a cover up that's spanned 45 years W/out being discovered, requires far more faith in our government's competence than I have. In my opinion a government that could pull that off would already have your guns.
__________________

That was witty enough.Oswald did it all by his lonesome.
There's not one shred of evidence linking those shots directly to another person in all those 45 years.
The sad sack hapless loner did pull off the crime of the century.
All by himself.

MachIVshooter
August 27, 2008, 02:02 AM
I'm with Correia. Nothing impossible about Oswald's shooting. I can't remember the program, but they recreated the assasination using a platform elevated to six stories and the correct vehicle (Lincoln, right?). Anyway, they used a melon for the head and then pulled the car on a line at the same speed that Kennedy's vehicle had been moving. The shooter was, IIRC, an experienced marksman and they used the correct M91/38 Carcano with scope. He pulled it off.

I own 4 Carcano's (M1891, M91/38, M91/38 Cavalry and M38 7.35mm). All of them are reasonably accurate and, if the clips are in good condition, cycle reliably and quite quickly. It's really not the inferior design people say (regurgitate) that it is. They're just not terribly strong when compared to a Mauser-type action; The Carcano's that were chambered in 8x57JS did beat themselves to death.

I've never visited the Daley Center or done any research on the assassination, but a 70 yard shot on a slow-moving target just isn't that hard. Heck, I've shot running praire dogs further than that from a truck window with a 16" AR-15 and a cheap 3-9 scope.

Mt Shooter
August 27, 2008, 02:06 AM
hmmm, what about Walt Whitman

cassandrasdaddy
August 27, 2008, 02:19 AM
i saw the same tv show mach IV i want to say it was 60 mins almost 20 years ago.

saspic
August 27, 2008, 03:00 AM
I throw my vote behind the shot(s) that started the Revolutionary War. Known or unknown, it changed history more than anything. Think about it-we could be Canada!:eek:

I'd rank the Kennedy assasination second. I saw a television program of more recent vintage where they recreated the magic bullet shot, down to ballistic gelatin targets with simulated skeletons. I think they were made of metal.
The result was identical to what really happened, with 2 exceptions, the second of which explained the first.

1) The bullet did not actually penetrate the Connally analogue's thigh, though it did hit it!

2) The bullet hit TWO of "Connally's" ribs instead of just one. After having already gone through the President's body, this is just random luck in my opinion. At any rate, the extra deceleration from hitting an extra rib explains why there was no penetration of the thigh. Supposedly the actual bullet just fell out of the Governor's leg later anyhow.

In my book, the case is shut. There was one gunman.

XDKingslayer
August 27, 2008, 11:36 AM
I'm with Correia. Nothing impossible about Oswald's shooting. I can't remember the program, but they recreated the assasination using a platform elevated to six stories and the correct vehicle (Lincoln, right?). Anyway, they used a melon for the head and then pulled the car on a line at the same speed that Kennedy's vehicle had been moving. The shooter was, IIRC, an experienced marksman and they used the correct M91/38 Carcano with scope. He pulled it off.


What was missing from their evaluation?

I agree that Oswald made the shot. What I have a problem with is all the evaluations. Each and every one of them is the same. They all leave something out.

The ones that say Oswald didn't make the shot all leave out something. One sniper didn't even attempt the shot, just looked at the area and said it can't be done. Hathcock said it couldn't be done according to the FBI investigation, but we don't know the details of that investigation.

The ones that do show it being possible all leave something out too. Everything is recreated but never recreated exactly the way Oswald's shot was. Never. In the recreation Mach mentioned they were shooting from a platform. Oswald didn't shoot from a platform. He shot from a window and his shot was partially blocked by drainage pipes. They never use the same rifle and we all know how much war relic rifles will differ in accuracy depending on the abuse they've seen.

They use skilled marksmen. Oswald wasn't a very good shot by Marine Corps standards. He qualified Sharpshooter and Marksman. When he qualified Marksman he only passed by 1 point.

Oswald made the shot. But it wasn't skill. He not only missed Kennedy on his first shot he missed the vehicle completely. He missed a land barge Lincoln at 70 yards.

It was the luckiest shot ever taken. I think that's been my point all along. That's what the evidence from both sides point to. He was essentially, a non-shooting goof ball that luckily offed a President.

Friendly, Don't Fire!
August 28, 2008, 06:40 PM
Just for fun...
I remember when one of the three stooges slammed the butt of a gun on the ground and a duck (or goose) fell from the sky.

Claude Clay
August 28, 2008, 07:52 PM
and leave us not forget Elmer Fud.........
bang, phftt
bang, phftt
phftt, bang.

yo, quicksdraw..

jon_in_wv
September 21, 2008, 02:43 AM
Today on the range two guys showed up with their Savage Action Target rifles with the GIANT scopes. They were shooting at 100 yards and one started saying, "hey you have a fly on your target." the other guy shoots and they just start celebrating, "You got him!" I though it was BS until I went down range and you could see the nicely splattered fly guts and a 6mm hole in the middle. I have to say I was impressed. Those guns are so accurate I give credit to the rifle on that one though. Personally, I think the sniper in Afghanistan who took out 4 enemy at 1000 yards, two of them through a window get the nod from me. He was either Australian or British?

RNB65
September 21, 2008, 02:53 AM
The sparrow I killed from across the back yard with open sights on a Daisy Red Ryder when I was 8 years old was without question the greatest shot ever taken. It was sitting on a pine tree branch about 10 feet off the ground and I braced the gun on the rim of a 50 gal drum we used to burn trash. Distance was about 100ft or so and I nailed the little sparrow perfectly. One shot, one kill. :)

starboard
September 21, 2008, 05:45 AM
I once shot a 98/100 prone with an ancient heavy barrel .22, peep + hood sights. I think they called it Olympic style shooting, but this was under the auspices of high school ROTC. As I recall, we were trying to qualify for military-style marksmanship ratings with a combination of prone, kneeling, and standing scores. Ah, the good old days. I can't imagine the litigation/pussification climate has allowed any such school programs to remain.

12-34hom
September 21, 2008, 06:13 AM
WDM Bell, his feats of marksmanship are legendary.

12-34hom

Haemon
September 22, 2008, 12:34 AM
On the contrary, starboard. The high school I teach at has a small (about 10-12 member) but dedicated rifle team. They shoot 50ft. indoor bullseye. Some have their own rifles, but if they don't the team provides a nice Anschutz. I wonder where they got the money for those -- musht have been a lot of car washes!

Stevie-Ray
September 22, 2008, 01:45 AM
The greatest string shooter is most likely Ad Toepperwein. One of Ad's first large assignments for Winchester was at the World's Fair at St. Louis in 1904. There he established his first official record by smashing 3507 21/4 inch diameter aerial composition targets without a miss. In 1906 he shot at 20,000 2¼ inch wooden blocks during a period of three days' shooting and scored 19,990 hits. I consider Tom Frye's record of 100,004 out of 100,010 far better, with his brace of Remington Nylon 66s. It's certainly in the running for my pick of best shooting feat.

Duke Junior
September 22, 2008, 02:47 AM
Greatest Shot ever taken?
What is in your opinion the greatest shot ever, as in the most impressive feat of shooting skill/luck.

I would say Billy Dixon shot that dropped his target at 1500 yards with a .50-90 sharps rifle.

See the original post.The OP is talking about one shot,not strings or in Karamojo Bell's case ,his career body of work.
I still go with Lee Harvey Oswald's second shot under the utmost tremendous pressure, shooting at the most powerful person in the world from distance,taking out JFK and Governor Connolly with one round.
11/23/1963, 12:30 P.M., CST, Dallas,Texas.3 shot elapsed time, bolt action Mannlicher-Carcano:8.3 seconds.
Case closed,IMHO.

Stevie-Ray
September 23, 2008, 01:07 AM
See the original post.The OP is talking about one shot,not strings I am, and even in what you quoted, it says the most impressive feat of shooting. Hitting a thrown 2.25" wooden block with a .22 rifle would be a hell of a shot, every time. Hitting it 100,004 times out of 100,010 would be considered damn near impossible. Far more impressive than LHO, which I don't even consider for this.

Tacbandit
September 23, 2008, 01:32 AM
The whole Oswald thing never happened...not by himself...Too many objectives in too little time, at distances too great to pull them off with that Carcano...

Greatest single shot:Canadian sniper - 50 Cal Macmillan Tac-50, 2430 Meters

But the greatest shooter of all times, would probably be Carlos Hathcock USMC
because of the number of outstanding shots he made:scrutiny:

Duke Junior
September 23, 2008, 01:36 AM
The whole Oswald thing never happened...not by himself...Too many objectives in too little time, at distances too great to pull them off with that Carcano...

Who were the other folks involved ,Tacbandit?
The world has been waiting 45 years to find out.
Give us your headline scoop!:D


But the greatest shooter of all times, would probably be Carlos Hathcock USMC
because of the number of outstanding shots he mad

And again the OP is talking about ONE SHOT, not a body of work.

And you cannot fire 3 shots in 8.3 seconds with the bolt action Carcano?I can.But probably would not hit 2 out 3 like Oswald under that incredible pressure.

graygun
September 23, 2008, 01:50 AM
That small amount of 8mm footage shwed ,to me, that the last round to hit JFK could not have come from LHO. There are many things that "the world" will never know but are known to some.

Tacbandit
September 23, 2008, 02:00 AM
On your second point, you're correct...I realize we're talking about one shot. I
just threw that in, as an aside. How astute, on your part to see that...
Ahh, my headline scoop...That's the one we're all waiting for, alright. Obviously I can't prove that, any more than you can prove that Oswald did pull
it off alone. However, fact shows that he wasn't that remarkable of a marksman to begin with. So, your saying it's so, doesn't carry any more weight than my saying it's not...However, all facts considered, and also
considering we're talking about the "greatest" shot ever taken..."if" he was the
lone shooter,(:neener:) he wouldn't have the greatest shot, he'd be the "luckiest" shot...Hey, we've all got our own opinions...That's what we're sharing tonite. The harsh, cold reality of it all is that we'll never really know...
:cool:

Duke Junior
September 23, 2008, 02:03 AM
That small amount of 8mm footage shwed ,to me, that the last round to hit JFK could not have come from LHO. There are many things that "the world" will never know but are known to some.

Well,it was his rifle,his prints on it,his place of work,he ran from the building,he killed Officer J.D Tippett in front of 6 witnesses within the next hour,no trace of any other firearm other than the Carcano have every been found,not a single tread of tangible evidence to another person after 45 years.
I could go on but it's boring and silly.
Lee Oswald,all by himself pulled off the crime of the century.
Accidentally ,being in the 'right' place at the right time and having enough skill.Go to the 6th floor in Dallas.Check it out.
Lots of people here on THR could make those shots.
Really.
And Tacbandit you have no evidence of any other shooters at all.I've got a caseload on Oswald.
But we'll have to agree to disagree.Not enough bandwidth for this discussion.
But do go ,if you can to the 6th floor.It wasn't that hard to make the shots.It was the pressure of shooting at the POTUS that makes it remarkable.:)

Tacbandit
September 23, 2008, 02:10 AM
Duke Junior:
"And you cannot fire 3 shots in 8.3 seconds with the bolt action Carcano?I can.But probably would not hit 2 out 3 like Oswald under that incredible pressure."



Precisely...No doubt we could fire the rifle that quickly...It's not about how fast
you pull the trigger...It's about how precise the bullet placement is...Like I said before, too many objectives, in too little time, for a so-so shooter like Oswald.:scrutiny:

Tacbandit
September 23, 2008, 02:15 AM
Duke Junior,
I truly do see your side of it. And hey...I'm cool with that...We see it differently, and that certainly doesn't make me right...Agree to disagree...
I like it. You're right...Too much to cover, not enough room here...:)

Wes Janson
September 23, 2008, 02:16 AM
OTOH, individuals have been known, on rare occasion, to rise to the challenge and perform incredible actions under stress. Jim Cirillo's famous shootout against three robbers, for instance. Statistically, every once in a while someone rolls the die and comes up lucky.

Duke Junior
September 23, 2008, 02:19 AM
Precisely...No doubt we could fire the rifle that quickly...It's not about how fast
you pull the trigger...It's about how precise the bullet placement is...Like I said before, too many objectives, in too little time, for a so-so shooter like Oswald.

Oswald was so-so if he was on street.But as a so-so Marine he still was better than 9 out 10 civilians.And he was in the calculating frame of mind where he had lost his wife,was a failure, had nothing to lose and was in the position to do it.
Read Marina and Lee by Patrcia MacMillan about the events leading to Dallas and you may start to believe.
I gotta convert you.:D
Hey,I didn't see Post # 133 while I was slowly rolling this one out.Typing skills are not very agile.
Thanks for that message.Peace.

BruceRDucer
September 23, 2008, 07:05 AM
/

I once took out every target on an M-60 range at the Graf training area from 3000 meters ( I was firing a eight inch howitzer when I did it ) W/ one shot does that count?
__________________
-----TREO

That's well-armed, and your precision is admirable.

ErikS
September 23, 2008, 07:28 AM
And you cannot fire 3 shots in 8.3 seconds with the bolt action Carcano?I can.But probably would not hit 2 out 3 like Oswald under that incredible pressure.
Actually, it's totally possible to fire 3 shots from a Carcano even in less than 6 seconds. Just watch the movie "JFK", they attempt to prove it isn't possible, but if you time the time they do it in, they do it in 5.6seconds :) And that was an actor doing it, not an experienced shooter.

The problem isn't doing it within the timeframe, it's actually hitting something.
To put this in perspective, the english army used to have a drill they called "the mad minute", in which the rifleman was required to hit a target 300metres away with 15 shots in 60 seconds, with a bolt action Enfield. That's 3 hits in 8 seconds at 300 metres distance. And this was the requirement, the upper level was 30-35 shots a minute, one shot every 2 seconds. That's 3 aimed shots at 300metres in 4 seconds.
And this was 50 years before Oswald.
And yes, I know an Enfield isn't a Carcano, but it was a bolt action.

ErikS
September 23, 2008, 07:33 AM
As for an amazing sniper shot, I'd like to mention this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDSwdZNbaGY)
Maybe not the best ever in history, but it's an amazing shot, and it's on video. :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Greatest Shot ever taken?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!