Easy shot...1963--Tree no problem

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Bell Frame:

I'm always amused when people who've never been a sniper talk about how easy the shot was-shooting at a paper target is one thing-shooting at another human is another matter-I've done it and its neither easy or without a cost.

www.stoppingpower.net

I'm always amused when people who've never been a sniper talk about how easy the shot was-

I'm always amused when people claim that "Sniper" training is required in order to hit an extremely slow moving target at a range of 68 yards (204 feet) or less.

Most 12 to 13 year old's down here in S. Mississippi can accomplish that, and do, each time that dear season opens.

P.S. It cost LHO his life!

P.P.S. Shortest distance which LHO qualilfied at in the USMC was 200 yards, of which he shot in the UPPER EXPERT range of qualification.

shooting at a known distance at a stationary target is nothing like shooting at a target that's moving away from you-there's no indication Oswald had ever shot a rifle at a human target in the past-how come Carlos Hathcock couldn't do it? How come every body talks about how easy it is-talk is easy-being on the rifle when its for real isn't.

how come Carlos Hathcock couldn't do it

Because he quite obviously, not unlike others here, never bothered to figure out the actual shooting sequence, and was sufficiently ignorant of the facts as to accept the WC's shot sequence scenario and as well as believe and accept it as fact, also make an attempt to "stuff" in three shots within this fantasy.

As far as the "Bolt Action" rifle goes.

Exactly how much more time does it take to fire the first shot from a bolt action rifle, as compared with either a semi-automatic, or for that matter, a fully automatic weapon.

Answer: ZERO, assuming that a round is chambered and one is awaiting the target.

Minimum time required to operate bolt and fire weapon: 2.3 to 2.4 seconds.

Actual firing time from first shot to second shot: 5.8 to 5.9 seconds.

Did we also need/require a trained sniper for this as well??

Why Hathcock & others have failed?

Either too misguided; lost; sheeples; or just dumb to recognize that the WC shooting sequence of 3- shots & THE SHOT THAT MISSED were not fired in the 5.8 to 5.9 second time frame, and they therefore believed the WC and attempted to duplicate something which never happened to begin with.

Now, if one wishes to argue the difficult point/shot, then they need to argue the last/third/final shot which occurred in the approximate 2.3 to 2.4 second elapsed time period after the Z=313 headshot, and was also a headshot to JFK.

This "snap shot" was either quite good, or merely good due to the length in which the bent over target provided.

[Charles Black]

Tom

You are absolutely right concerning the amount of time requird to for the "first shot".....this shot was both the closest and allowed the most time for a strike ..... however the WC concluded that this shot missed....I don't agree with that either.

Before you expain it to me again, I am familiar with your shooting theory, but I just don't buy it.

I feel that "hit" #1 was to the throat and fired from the front.....hit #2 was to the back...followed in quick succession by a hit to the head, a hit to Connally, and most likely another hit to the head. Interspersed were misses from possibly both directions along with probably another Connally strike. I feel that there most likely four separate hits to JFK, 2 hits to Connally and at least two misses.

My "guess" as to shooters locations is TSBD, Dal Tex, North knoll and South knoll. I feel that the shots fired from the TSBD were primarily diversionary, but that one of these may have struck and "partially penetrated" JFK's back.

I don't believe that LHO "touched" a rifle on that date. I believe that the MC in question was purchased from Oswald by a conspirator, well in advance of 11/22.

As I stated earlier, you need not re-explain to me Your theory. I am familiar with it, but am simply not in agreement !

Charlie Black

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom

You are absolutely right concerning the amount of time requird to for the "first shot".....this shot was both the closest and allowed the most time for a strike ..... however the WC concluded that this shot missed....I don't agree with that either.

Before you expain it to me again, I am familiar with your shooting theory, but I just don't buy it.

I feel that "hit" #1 was to the throat and fired from the front.....hit #2 was to the back...followed in quick succession by a hit to the head, a hit to Connally, and most likely another hit to the head. Interspersed were misses from possibly both directions along with probably another Connally strike. I feel that there most likely four separate hits to JFK, 2 hits to Connally and at least two misses.

My "guess" as to shooters locations is TSBD, Dal Tex, North knoll and South knoll. I feel that the shots fired from the TSBD were primarily diversionary, but that one of these may have struck and "partially penetrated" JFK's back.

I don't believe that LHO "touched" a rifle on that date. I believe that the MC in question was purchased from Oswald by a conspirator, well in advance of 11/22.

As I stated earlier, you need not re-explain to me Your theory. I am familiar with it, but am simply not in agreement !

Charlie Black

You are absolutely right concerning the amount of time requird to for the "first shot".....this shot was both the closest and allowed the most time for a strike ..... however the WC concluded that this shot missed....I don't agree with that either.

Nope!

The WC "talked in tongues"/spoke in circles, etc as regards THE SHOT THAT MISSED.

They never out and out claimed exactly which shot it was, they merely claimed that Z313 was most likely/probably the last shot.

It was Posner who added to the fairy tale that it was the first shot, and supported this with the tree limb strike/glance/lost bullet, etc.

Despite what Tague had to say about when he received his scratch on the face, as well as all of the eyewitness accounts as to JFK reacting to the first shot.

Before you expain it to me again, I am familiar with your shooting theory, but I just don't buy it.

It was not offered for "sale".

Body Kidnappings and multiple assassin theories are for sale.

Truth & facts are free for those who know how to evaluate them.

P.S. Exactly why do you think the WC knew that they could get away with this/their version.

I feel that "hit" #1 was to the throat and fired from the front.....hit #2 was to the back...followed in quick succession by a hit to the head, a hit to Connally, and most likely another hit to the head. Interspersed were misses from possibly both directions along with probably another Connally strike. I feel that there most likely four separate hits to JFK, 2 hits to Connally and at least two misses.

Personally, I "feel" quite old, and have little time for those who evaluate factual evidence by what they "feel".

Hope that you have another 40+ or so years in which to continue to be lost in this subject.

My "guess" as to shooters locations is TSBD, Dal Tex, North knoll and South knoll. I feel that the shots fired from the TSBD were primarily diversionary, but that one of these may have struck and "partially penetrated" JFK's back

My "guess" would be that you have done little if any research into the subject matter, and therefore are attempting to pass a factual test with "guess"ing.

I don't believe that LHO "touched" a rifle on that date. I believe that the MC in question was purchased from Oswald by a conspirator, well in advance of 11/22.

As I stated earlier, you need not re-explain to me Your theory. I am familiar with it, but am simply not in agreement !

Then you most assuredly are not "one" of those few here who recognize factual evidence and thereafter understand the principals of verification of same.

P.S. Why not take a look at the evidence from Parkland which initially stated that JFK had a "fragment" wound of the anterior neck.

Or even better yet, call Dr. Perry and have him explain the mistake/error to you.

Or, just continue to "guess".

[Evan Marshall]

Tom

You are absolutely right concerning the amount of time requird to for the "first shot".....this shot was both the closest and allowed the most time for a strike ..... however the WC concluded that this shot missed....I don't agree with that either.

Before you expain it to me again, I am familiar with your shooting theory, but I just don't buy it.

I feel that "hit" #1 was to the throat and fired from the front.....hit #2 was to the back...followed in quick succession by a hit to the head, a hit to Connally, and most likely another hit to the head. Interspersed were misses from possibly both directions along with probably another Connally strike. I feel that there most likely four separate hits to JFK, 2 hits to Connally and at least two misses.

My "guess" as to shooters locations is TSBD, Dal Tex, North knoll and South knoll. I feel that the shots fired from the TSBD were primarily diversionary, but that one of these may have struck and "partially penetrated" JFK's back.

I don't believe that LHO "touched" a rifle on that date. I believe that the MC in question was purchased from Oswald by a conspirator, well in advance of 11/22.

As I stated earlier, you need not re-explain to me Your theory. I am familiar with it, but am simply not in agreement !

Charlie Black

pretty easy to insult and defame the dead-Carlos Hathcock was not only a superb sniper but a good guy and implying that he was too stupid understand the situation is intellecually dishonest and morally lazy

You are absolutely right concerning the amount of time requird to for the "first shot".....this shot was both the closest and allowed the most time for a strike ..... however the WC concluded that this shot missed....I don't agree with that either.

Nope!

The WC "talked in tongues"/spoke in circles, etc as regards THE SHOT THAT MISSED.

They never out and out claimed exactly which shot it was, they merely claimed that Z313 was most likely/probably the last shot.

It was Posner who added to the fairy tale that it was the first shot, and supported this with the tree limb strike/glance/lost bullet, etc.

Despite what Tague had to say about when he received his scratch on the face, as well as all of the eyewitness accounts as to JFK reacting to the first shot.

Before you expain it to me again, I am familiar with your shooting theory, but I just don't buy it.

It was not offered for "sale".

Body Kidnappings and multiple assassin theories are for sale.

Truth & facts are free for those who know how to evaluate them.

P.S. Exactly why do you think the WC knew that they could get away with this/their version.

I feel that "hit" #1 was to the throat and fired from the front.....hit #2 was to the back...followed in quick succession by a hit to the head, a hit to Connally, and most likely another hit to the head. Interspersed were misses from possibly both directions along with probably another Connally strike. I feel that there most likely four separate hits to JFK, 2 hits to Connally and at least two misses.

Personally, I "feel" quite old, and have little time for those who evaluate factual evidence by what they "feel".

Hope that you have another 40+ or so years in which to continue to be lost in this subject.

My "guess" as to shooters locations is TSBD, Dal Tex, North knoll and South knoll. I feel that the shots fired from the TSBD were primarily diversionary, but that one of these may have struck and "partially penetrated" JFK's back

My "guess" would be that you have done little if any research into the subject matter, and therefore are attempting to pass a factual test with "guess"ing.

I don't believe that LHO "touched" a rifle on that date. I believe that the MC in question was purchased from Oswald by a conspirator, well in advance of 11/22.

As I stated earlier, you need not re-explain to me Your theory. I am familiar with it, but am simply not in agreement !

Then you most assuredly are not "one" of those few here who recognize factual evidence and thereafter understand the principals of verification of same.

P.S. Why not take a look at the evidence from Parkland which initially stated that JFK had a "fragment" wound of the anterior neck.

Or even better yet, call Dr. Perry and have him explain the mistake/error to you.

Or, just continue to "guess".

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom

You are absolutely right concerning the amount of time requird to for the "first shot".....this shot was both the closest and allowed the most time for a strike ..... however the WC concluded that this shot missed....I don't agree with that either.

Before you expain it to me again, I am familiar with your shooting theory, but I just don't buy it.

I feel that "hit" #1 was to the throat and fired from the front.....hit #2 was to the back...followed in quick succession by a hit to the head, a hit to Connally, and most likely another hit to the head. Interspersed were misses from possibly both directions along with probably another Connally strike. I feel that there most likely four separate hits to JFK, 2 hits to Connally and at least two misses.

My "guess" as to shooters locations is TSBD, Dal Tex, North knoll and South knoll. I feel that the shots fired from the TSBD were primarily diversionary, but that one of these may have struck and "partially penetrated" JFK's back.

I don't believe that LHO "touched" a rifle on that date. I believe that the MC in question was purchased from Oswald by a conspirator, well in advance of 11/22.

As I stated earlier, you need not re-explain to me Your theory. I am familiar with it, but am simply not in agreement !

Charlie Black

pretty easy to insult and defame the dead-Carlos Hathcock was not only a superb sniper but a good guy and implying that he was too stupid understand the situation is intellecually dishonest and morally lazy

You are absolutely right concerning the amount of time requird to for the "first shot".....this shot was both the closest and allowed the most time for a strike ..... however the WC concluded that this shot missed....I don't agree with that either.

Nope!

The WC "talked in tongues"/spoke in circles, etc as regards THE SHOT THAT MISSED.

They never out and out claimed exactly which shot it was, they merely claimed that Z313 was most likely/probably the last shot.

It was Posner who added to the fairy tale that it was the first shot, and supported this with the tree limb strike/glance/lost bullet, etc.

Despite what Tague had to say about when he received his scratch on the face, as well as all of the eyewitness accounts as to JFK reacting to the first shot.

Before you expain it to me again, I am familiar with your shooting theory, but I just don't buy it.

It was not offered for "sale".

Body Kidnappings and multiple assassin theories are for sale.

Truth & facts are free for those who know how to evaluate them.

P.S. Exactly why do you think the WC knew that they could get away with this/their version.

I feel that "hit" #1 was to the throat and fired from the front.....hit #2 was to the back...followed in quick succession by a hit to the head, a hit to Connally, and most likely another hit to the head. Interspersed were misses from possibly both directions along with probably another Connally strike. I feel that there most likely four separate hits to JFK, 2 hits to Connally and at least two misses.

Personally, I "feel" quite old, and have little time for those who evaluate factual evidence by what they "feel".

Hope that you have another 40+ or so years in which to continue to be lost in this subject.

My "guess" as to shooters locations is TSBD, Dal Tex, North knoll and South knoll. I feel that the shots fired from the TSBD were primarily diversionary, but that one of these may have struck and "partially penetrated" JFK's back

My "guess" would be that you have done little if any research into the subject matter, and therefore are attempting to pass a factual test with "guess"ing.

I don't believe that LHO "touched" a rifle on that date. I believe that the MC in question was purchased from Oswald by a conspirator, well in advance of 11/22.

As I stated earlier, you need not re-explain to me Your theory. I am familiar with it, but am simply not in agreement !

Then you most assuredly are not "one" of those few here who recognize factual evidence and thereafter understand the principals of verification of same.

P.S. Why not take a look at the evidence from Parkland which initially stated that JFK had a "fragment" wound of the anterior neck.

Or even better yet, call Dr. Perry and have him explain the mistake/error to you.

Or, just continue to "guess".

pretty easy to insult and defame the dead-Carlos Hathcock was not only a superb sniper but a good guy and implying that he was too stupid understand the situation is intellecually dishonest and morally lazy

pretty easy to insult and defame the dead

Living or dead, anyone who makes statements as if fact, when in fact they apparantly have never bothered to check the factual evidence for themselves, is ignorant.

Uneducated persons have not been exposed to, nor have they had the opportunity to improve their knowledge.

Therefore, merely uneducated.

Those who have available to them the means and methods to secure knowledge, yet persist in making statements which have no basis or foundation in fact, and also apparantly make little effort to verify the facts, are ignorant!

Carlos Hathcock was not only a superb sniper but a good guy

and implying that he was too stupid understand the situation is intellecually dishonest and morally lazy[/b]

The knowledge has been available for many years. I personally have had the survey information in my possession since the early 1990's and recognized that Z313 was not the last shot fired during the late 1989/1990 time frame.

As to the reasoning that Mr. Hathcock could not figure this out is his problem, not mine.

Especially since he (according to others) is the one claiming that the shooting had to be the work of more than one person.

Since I have nothing regarding the reading comprehension capability of Mr. Hathcock, it is completely unknown if he could or could not read; research; and retain.

And I am extremely fond of Mr. Gump's sayings: "Stupid is as Stupid Does".

And since I also pay little attention to all of most everyone's "War Stories", and especially those stories which relate how many "mama-san's" & "papa-san's" they shot while these persons were walking across the rice paddies of South Vietnam, then reported VC as being killed, then I am not blind enough to openly and unquestionably accept the great "white feather" BS either.

Saw far too many innocent South Vietnamese civilians who were walking along minding their own affairs, only to be shot by US Forces, to accept that they all were VC, which was of course always the report.

Had the news not gotten wind of it, I am certain that Lt. Calley would have held the record for VC killed, as well as having a few extra medals awarded.

It would not be too difficult to line up a dozen or so "good ole boy" country guy's down here who can shoot the eye out of a dear at night (headlighting) at a 100+ yards.

They are most certainly "good guys", and damned good shots. Does not mean that they know crap about the assassination of JFK and the shooting sequence.

What is even better, they are usually smart enough to know that they know nothing of the facts and are not too likely to comment on things which they know nothing of.

Perhaps Mr. Hathcock should have followed along those lines.