Timing the shots....2.3 seconds?

[Charles Black]

quote SA George Hickey who was riding in the follow up vehicle immediately behind the limo during the shooting sequence:

"completely different from the first report and were in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them."

The following is a recent post which I made at Lancer Forum.

This may be surprising to some.

To those of the forum who may not be well versed or experienced with firearms and their operation, it is difficult to describe how tedious and time consuming it is to reacquire a moving target through a scope. It is extremely difficult to even reacquire a stationary target.

I have a lot of experience yet am not ashamed to say that I cannot operate the bolt of a premium rifle in first class condition, and reacquire a moving target (head size) in even close to 2.3 seconds. This is merely getting it in the scope, not setting and firing!

For those of you who are interested enough to experience this phenomenon, take a pair of binoculars and focus on any airplane in flight (any altitude)

Now remove the binoculars from your eyes and replace them as quickly as possible. Now try to reacquire the airplane. Do it again and have someone time you.

Oswald was not known to be well coordinated, athletic, or a good shot. I feel that I am all three and can't come close to 2.3 seconds.

I find it extremely disturbing.

Actually I find it unbelievable that a Secret Service Agent, who stood in the car only a few feet behind the Presidential Limo, with a military automatic rifle

in his hands, and stated that the shots were"...in such rapid succession that there seemed practically no time element between them" is not believed.

Why is his statement even questioned? I would say that he is about as acute and well trained as anyone could wish an eye and ear witness to be. What witness could be found with better credentials.

Just briefly thinking of the above....can anyone justify the conclusions of the HSCA and WC?

If you can, you certainly must have much better insight than I!

Charlie Black

[Charles Black]

It was brought to my attention via Email that it would have been much faster had the shooter used the iron sights rather than the scope.

Although this is true, I feel that if the shooter were truly a Marksman, as he must have been to make the alledged shot with either set of sights, and he had planned to shoot the U.S. President, I feel that it was an important enough event that he would have decided well ahead of time which sights he would use.

If my presumption is true, and had he planned to use the iron sights rather than the scope, he no doubt would have removed the scope, because at best, it is a hinderance. I therefore feel that he intended to use the scope, and most likely did so.

With the most important shot of his life in the balance, he must have given it forethought.

Charlie Black

Charlie Black

[Thomas H. Purvis]

quote SA George Hickey who was riding in the follow up vehicle immediately behind the limo during the shooting sequence:

"completely different from the first report and were in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them."

The following is a recent post which I made at Lancer Forum.

This may be surprising to some.

To those of the forum who may not be well versed or experienced with firearms and their operation, it is difficult to describe how tedious and time consuming it is to reacquire a moving target through a scope. It is extremely difficult to even reacquire a stationary target.

I have a lot of experience yet am not ashamed to say that I cannot operate the bolt of a premium rifle in first class condition, and reacquire a moving target (head size) in even close to 2.3 seconds. This is merely getting it in the scope, not setting and firing!

For those of you who are interested enough to experience this phenomenon, take a pair of binoculars and focus on any airplane in flight (any altitude)

Now remove the binoculars from your eyes and replace them as quickly as possible. Now try to reacquire the airplane. Do it again and have someone time you.

Oswald was not known to be well coordinated, athletic, or a good shot. I feel that I am all three and can't come close to 2.3 seconds.

I find it extremely disturbing.

Actually I find it unbelievable that a Secret Service Agent, who stood in the car only a few feet behind the Presidential Limo, with a military automatic rifle

in his hands, and stated that the shots were"...in such rapid succession that there seemed practically no time element between them" is not believed.

Why is his statement even questioned? I would say that he is about as acute and well trained as anyone could wish an eye and ear witness to be. What witness could be found with better credentials.

Just briefly thinking of the above....can anyone justify the conclusions of the HSCA and WC?

If you can, you certainly must have much better insight than I!

Charlie Black

For those who may lack the experience, it is/was referred to as a "Snap Shot", and one usually did not waste time with the scope and any attempt at target acquisition utilizing the scope.

"Tunnel Vision" often makes one think in only single directional avenues without benefit of "alternative" answers.

It can be created by hypoxia as well as a mere inability to recognize alternative solutions.

And, since the target was laying/leaning well forward, there just so happened to be an approximately 2-foot length lineal target, which even within the 2.3 to 2.4 seconds and utilizing the iron sights of the rifle, one most certainly should have hit from less than 100 yards distance.

Therefore, if one assumes that the round most certainly "should" have struck the target, then one can also assume that the fact that it struck at the base of the neck to traverse downwards (upwards through the skull) may have almost as much to do with luck of the shot as well as experience of the shooter.

Especially when LHO could shoot in the upper range of EXPERT at ranges of 200 yards, when firing from a fixed position, as well as the fact that the USMC Range Qualification also requires a "Rapid Fire" shooting station as well.

P.S. It was approximately 5.6 to 5.8 seconds from shot#1 to shot#2 (aka Z313).

Anyone see any major problems with shooting given this parameter??