Poor dishonest John. So many lies, intentional omissions, and baseless claims in one short post. Both Oswald and Whitman received similar training in the USMC. Oswald qualified as a "sharpshooter."
Speaking of intentional ommissions, "Richard",
when did Oswald qualify as a sharpshooter and what was his most recent rating before leaving the Marines?
There is no confirmation that he "had no practice in the intervening years."
Well, no rifle in the Soviet Union. Maybe a hunting trip or two with a shotgun. Other than Jeanne DeMohrenschildt's "shooting leaves in the park", do you have any evidence of any actual shooting practice in Dallas or in New Orleans? I mean, you believe that he had a rifle rolled up in a blanket for 6 weeks instead, right?
In fact, Marina indicates he did take the MC rifle to practice (no doubt another lie in the sinister plot).
She did?
Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn at any time that he had been practicing with the rifle?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he went once or twice.
I didn't actually see him take the rifle, but I knew that he was practicing.
There is no confirmation that Oswald's scope was misaligned at the time of the assassination.
So what? There's no confirmation that Oswald shot Kennedy either.
There is no confirmation that Oswald's shots occurred over 5-8 seconds.
Huh? When do you think the shots that you imagine that Oswald took occurred?
Simply because the objectives of the two crimes were different is not relevant in rebutting Caprio's nutty claim that "It is infinitely more difficult for a single person to kill with a rifle than up close with a pistol." That is the point being addressed.
So you get to make ridiculous false equivalences just because you're trying to argue with Caprio?