Thomas H. Purvis Posted April 13, 2008 Author Share Posted April 13, 2008 Mr. Purvis,You must love your avatar photo...... You must love your avatar photo Why not ask Mr. Simkin, since he is the one who selected it of several sent! Exactly who "selected" your photo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted April 13, 2008 Author Share Posted April 13, 2008 Mr. Purvis,You must love your avatar photo...... You must love your avatar photo Why not ask Mr. Simkin, since he is the one who selected it of several sent! Exactly who "selected" your photo? My personal preference would have been this one. Photo by: SFC Joe Gonzales Team Photographer U.S. Army Sport Parachute Team (The Golden Knights) Which photo also happened to have been utilized for an SF Recruitment Poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted April 13, 2008 Author Share Posted April 13, 2008 Mr. Purvis,You must love your avatar photo...... You must love your avatar photo Why not ask Mr. Simkin, since he is the one who selected it of several sent! Exactly who "selected" your photo? My personal preference would have been this one. Photo by: SFC Joe Gonzales Team Photographer U.S. Army Sport Parachute Team (The Golden Knights) Which photo also happened to have been utilized for an SF Recruitment Poster. And, I also happen to have a fondness for this one with Apollo XIII Commander (Navy Captain) James Lovell, for the President's Council on Physical Fitness as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted April 13, 2008 Author Share Posted April 13, 2008 Mr. Purvis,You must love your avatar photo...... http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...cs&forum=21 Correct me if incorrect! Is this not you who has suddenly decided that your purported shooting qualifications makes you some form of Expert on the assassination of JFK? At least you appear to be the "real thing" in regards to the "Scout Sniper" MOS, as opposed to this forum's old "wannabee Scout Sniper". So! Why not add something of relevance here? Example: Exactly how accurate is a relatively good condition Model 91/38 6.5mm Carcano Rifle, when coupled with quality WCC Ammo? OH! I forgot, that too was long ago done by experts: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/simmons.htm Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, the weapon is quite accurate. For most small arms, we discover that the round- to-round dispersion is of the order of three-tenths of a mil. We have run into some unusual ones, however, which give us higher values, but very few which give us smaller values, except in selected lots of ammunition. Mr. McCLOY. You are talking about the present military rifle--will you designate it? Mr. SIMMONS. The M-14. Well then, how about the difficulty of the shots: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/zahm.htm Sergeant ZAHM. Well, from my own experience, and it is true that the higher powered telescopes are used in the particular type of firing we are doing right now, deliberate slow fire at extreme ranges of 600 and 1,000 yards. We use 12-power to 20-power telescopes. These are unsuitable for moving targets or closer ranges from unsteady positions, because the power of the telescope tends to magnify the shooter's movements and makes a hold more difficult. In the lower-powered telescope such as four-power telescope at closer ranges ranging from 50 to 200 yards, this is an ideal type of weapon for moving targets or type of telescope for moving targets, and for the closer ranges, things being inherent in the focus of the scopes when you get in too close, the higher power type scopes tend to blur out to a certain degree. Sergeant ZAHM. Four-power being a reasonably low-power scope, it has a fairly broad field of view. By this we mean it covers a reasonable amount of area out at about 100 yards, about I think probably around 30 feet or so. Using the scope, rapidly working a bolt and using the scope to relocate your target quickly and at the same time when you locate that target you identify it and the crosshairs are in close relationship to the point you want to shoot at, it just takes a minor move in aiming to bring the crosshairs to bear, and then it is a quick squeeze. Mr. SPECTER. Would you characterize it as easy, difficult, or how would you characterize it to use a scope, a four-power scope in rapid fire? Sergeant ZAHM. A real aid, an extreme aid. Sergeant ZAHM. I would say in the Marine Corps he is a good shot, slightly above average, and as compared to the average male of his age throughout the civilian, throughout the United States, that he is an excellent shot. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now! Sergeant ZAHM. I became engaged in competitive shooting in 1952, and I became a distinguished rifleman in 1953. I fired the national matches from 1952 through to date about eight times. This is annually. I won the President's match in 1953 at the national matches and the Leech Cup in 1952, and the Marine Corps Cup in 1957. There are some others. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And that happens to be a "Shooter"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted April 13, 2008 Author Share Posted April 13, 2008 Back to the relevance of the "headshots"! http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag3.htm Recommended reading! Especially if one has some new "light" shined upon the subject matter. (Which by the way I did not share with Dr. Aguilar in our correspondences of long ago) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now