Greatest Shot ever taken?

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
Best shot ever? That's easy: Apollo 11, July 20, 1969, lunar module Eagle lands on the Moon. Aldrin and Armstrong for the win!
 
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!
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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 :)
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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...
 
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.
 
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
 
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/dc...pic_id=17758&mesg_id=17758&page=&topic_page=1


none are games though
 

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.
 
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top