Jump to content
The Education Forum
Mervyn Hagger

"Bubble Top' - was it bullet proof?

Recommended Posts

Question: Was the bubble top bullet proof?

If it was, or even if it would have only deflected bullets from their original trajectory, then it presents a problem for a premeditated conspiracy, unless the conspiracy included the person who ordered its removal and possibly the person who removed it.

Follow-up question: What if the bubble top had not been removed?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Question: Was the bubble top bullet proof?

If it was, or even if it would have only deflected bullets from their original trajectory, then it presents a problem for a premeditated conspiracy, unless the conspiracy included the person who ordered its removal and possibly the person who removed it.

Follow-up question: What if the bubble top had not been removed?

 

No, it was not.  It was made of plexiglas.  It would have deflected a bullet however, and created a lot of noise when a bullet shattered it.  

27201BB800000578-3017463-This_June_1961_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pamela Brown said:

No, it was not.  It was made of plexiglas.  It would have deflected a bullet however, and created a lot of noise when a bullet shattered it.  

27201BB800000578-3017463-This_June_1961_

Hi Pam.

So if it had not been removed then there could not have been a guarantee that aimed shots would find their mark?

Mervyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Hi Pam.

So if it had not been removed then there could not have been a guarantee that aimed shots would find their mark?

Mervyn

Yes.  If any of the six pieces had been in place, the assassination would not have been successful, imo.  Ironically, the weather in the am was rainy and it was not until the last minute, supposedly, that the SS decided to leave the limo completely open.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually it may or may not have deflected a shot. When I was the training sgt for the swat team in Detroit we did a lot of research on shooting thru glass and other barriers  and with the bullet technology of 1986 we reached the conclusion that to reliably get inside a car we needed a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with rifle slugs or a .308 rifle AND when bullet of any caliber hit curved tempered glass the results were often unpredictable and potentially dangerous to bystanders!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Question: Was the bubble top bullet proof?

If it was, or even if it would have only deflected bullets from their original trajectory, then it presents a problem for a premeditated conspiracy, unless the conspiracy included the person who ordered its removal and possibly the person who removed it.

Follow-up question: What if the bubble top had not been removed?

 

Not really Mervyn, You are assuming that the conspiracy unfolded exactly as planned, and exactly as the Warren Omission says it did. There were plenty of ways to kill JFK that day. And he was going to be killed whether they could pin it on LHO or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Hi Pamela,,

Was the bubble top used with any frequency? Are there any pics of it in use?

Yes, regularly.  There are a lot of photos.  Here are a few: https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=jfk+limo+bubbletop&FORM=HDRSC2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Not really Mervyn, You are assuming that the conspiracy unfolded exactly as planned, and exactly as the Warren Omission says it did. There were plenty of ways to kill JFK that day. And he was going to be killed whether they could pin it on LHO or not.

Hi Mike. I am not assuming anything. The fact of the matter is that JFK was shot in his car. That is the only fact you have. Everything else is speculation in which LBJ might have been shot, or Earl Warren might have been shot or anyone else anywhere might have been shot. But the only fact that exists is that JFK was shot in his car in Dallas. So my point is, if that bubble top had not been removed then all of the rest of the speculative ideas would be null and void, if he was not shot when he was shot and where he was shot. Who shot him is another matter. Mervyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Evan Marshall said:

Actually it may or may not have deflected a shot. When I was the training sgt for the swat team in Detroit we did a lot of research on shooting thru glass and other barriers  and with the bullet technology of 1986 we reached the conclusion that to reliably get inside a car we needed a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with rifle slugs or a .308 rifle AND when bullet of any caliber hit curved tempered glass the results were often unpredictable and potentially dangerous to bystanders!

Hi Evan. You hit the nail on the head. Without that bubble top removed, a bullet of the type that hit JFK in the head might have hit him, or it might not have hit him. But the sound of ricocheting bullets hitting the bubble top would have given the driver a chance to step on the gas and get out of harm's way. It seems to me that it was essential to remove the bubble top for a good chance of killing JFK. Mervyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Hi Mike. I am not assuming anything. The fact of the matter is that JFK was shot in his car. That is the only fact you have. Everything else is speculation in which LBJ might have been shot, or Earl Warren might have been shot or anyone else anywhere might have been shot. But the only fact that exists is that JFK was shot in his car in Dallas. So my point is, if that bubble top had not been removed then all of the rest of the speculative ideas would be null and void, if he was not shot when he was shot and where he was shot. Who shot him is another matter. Mervyn

You can't get to the truth without speculation. That is the scientific method. You take a hypothesis and then try to disprove it. We know that LHO did not do it. So spaculation, hypothesis, and the testing of theories is the only path to the truth.

Your conclusion that the bubble top would have foiled the plan to Assassinate JFK that day is speculation that I find unsustainable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Michael Clark said:

You can't get to the truth without speculation. That is the scientific method. You take a hypothesis and then try to disprove it. We know that LHO did not do it. So spaculation, hypothesis, and the testing of theories is the only path to the truth.

Your conclusion that the bubble top would have foiled the plan to Assassinate JFK that day is speculation that I find unsustainable.

Hi Mike. You make a statement that LHO "did not do it". That is your opinion based upon no demonstrable evidence. It is a theory held by some. You could not take that into a court of law because an army of people would disagree with you. If you read what I wrote, you will see that I posed two questions. It was answered by others who stated that bullets may or may not have hit JFK. Mervyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Hi Mike. You make a statement that LHO "did not do it". That is your opinion based upon no demonstrable evidence. It is a theory held by some. You could not take that into a court of law because an army of people would disagree with you. If you read what I wrote, you will see that I posed two questions. It was answered by others who stated that bullets may or may not have hit JFK. Mervyn

Mervyn, you stated...

"...even if it would have only deflected bullets from their original trajectory, then it presents a problem for a premeditated conspiracy, unless the conspiracy included the person who ordered its removal and possibly the person who removed it." ....

You did more than ask questions. You made the above  and subsequent arguments which are fallicies by the nature of the assumptions iimbedded in them.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Mervyn, you stated...

"...even if it would have only deflected bullets from their original trajectory, then it presents a problem for a premeditated conspiracy, unless the conspiracy included the person who ordered its removal and possibly the person who removed it." ....

You did more than ask questions. You made the above  and subsequent arguments which are fallicies by the nature of the assumptions iimbedded in them.

Michael

Michael, I began by asking two related questions. No conclusions. No speculation. I asked questions. Others added the "may or may not" part in reply. Therefore, based ONLY on my two questions that began this thread (nothing to do with as LHO guilty or not guilty), and the fact that JFK was killed by a bullet to the head in Dallas while sitting in his car, others said that maybe and maybe not that a bullet would have hit JFK in the manner that it did. What I added was that the added noise factor, while keeping in mind that an obstruction has now been placed in front of the shooter, would have alerted the driver that something untoward was occurring. So no speculation, and no assumption. Just questions asked by me and answered by others. The question is unrelated to LHO. Mervyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×