Firearms experts who say; ?I can't do it so it can't be done?, cannot be trusted

[Ross Lidell]

Doesn't hold water. The so called aggrieved-- denied everything...claiming no 'place in history'.
Besides --what does this really have to do with the topic? The theory that Oswald was pronounced guilty- therefor he is.

I made a response to John Iacolleti's comment because I don't want to be a "dodger".

Surely you have noted: On this forum, virtually every "new subject" quickly goes "off topic".

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

No games... just attempting to get you to "fess up to what you think about the Mauser's existence, if that's what you believe":

-- Some nefarious purpose?

-- A red herring?

-- An innocent coincidence?

There is no "straw man". This topic, quite rightly explores the "no expert shooter could replicate Oswald's alleged feat" argument.

It exposes the flaws in this theory.

Even if it was possible to be 100% certain of the time available for Oswald to fire the shots: A biased [does not think Oswald did it] expert shooter could intentionally perform way below his best to prove his belief that he has either declared in advance or kept secret.

There are two ways such a shooter could intentionally under-perform:

1. Slowly and clumsily operate the bolt-action of a Carcano (like Oswald's) to exceed the time limit.

2. Aim off-target and miss one, two or all the shots.

See!!!!!!!!!! It cannot be done because I could not do it. 

It can reasonably be suggested that Governor Jesse Ventura did at least #1.

Keep in mind: If Governor/Navy Seal/Pro Wrestler Jesse Ventura equals or beats Oswald's estimated shooting time... his (Ventura's) theory is destroyed and there is no point in completing the episode of "Conspiracy Theories" and broadcasting it.

In other words: Jesse Ventura had a motive to fail.

The theory that some person shot JFK as you claim is hilarious. You are unable to prove anything except you just maybe as much of a blowhard as your cousin Jesse V.  I'm starting to think you spent too much time watching your cousin's show for a guy who is bothered by it. You are failing miserably at persuading me to believe you are serious and you're Mr. Serious. What time do you have to be back in your cell? Fair question, right?

[Ross Lidell]

The theory that some person shot JFK as you claim is hilarious. You are unable to prove anything except you just maybe as much of a blowhard as your cousin Jesse V.  I'm starting to think you spent too much time watching your cousin's show for a guy who is bothered by it. You are failing miserably at persuading me to believe you are serious and you're Mr. Serious. What time do you have to be back in your cell? Fair question, right?

The theory that some person shot JFK as you claim is hilarious.

I never made the claim you "claim" I made about "some person" shooting JFK. Your sentence is close to being incomprehensible.

You are unable to prove anything except you just maybe as much of a blowhard as your cousin Jesse V.  I'm starting to think you spent too much time watching your cousin's show for a guy who is bothered by it.

Branding me as being a relative of Jesse Ventura could be considered a "straw-man" argument. Hypocrite!!!

You are failing miserably at persuading me to believe you are serious and you're Mr. Serious.

I'm not trying to persuade you that I'm "serious" or persuade you in any way.

I'm trying to get you to provide some insight into why a Mauser rifle would be on the 6th floor of the TSBD on 22 November 1963. Your lack of curiosity suggests you don't know or care to know why?

The logical mind demands an explanation as to where a declaration then leads. This a standard procedure in an investigation.

The "Mauser is suspicious/relevant" claim goes back to Mark Lane's best-selling book "Rush To Judgement" (August 1966).

Lane and other authors were either unable or unwilling to put forward a coherent, plausible explanation as to why the Mauser would be part of a JFK assassination plot.

I thought you might possess some new insight into the "whys and wherefores" of the Mauser theory backed up by evidence or even just imagination. It looks like I was overestimating your ability. However, I'm willing to be proven wrong.

What time do you have to be back in your cell? Fair question, right?

Insults rather than responding to a challenge suggests an acknowledgement of defeat.

[Rob Caprio]

This topic was inspired by another: "Oswald's rifle capability".

Naive Conspiracy Theorists demonstrate their gullibility and deceptiveness: Any attempted reconstruction of an aspect of the assassination that fails to meet time constraints is proof that it could not possibly have been accomplished by Lee Harvey Oswald.

Such as: A word-class shooter could not fire 3 shots with a rifle similar to Oswald?s Carcano in less than 6 seconds; let alone hit the target 2 out of 3 times.

As part of the debate: A video clip from Jesse Ventura?s ?Conspiracy Theories? was posted as proof that the shots attributed to Oswald by the Warren Commission could not be accomplished with the Carcano Rifle C2766. Ventura (a US military trained expert) used an almost identical firearm to attempt to equal Oswald?s feat but with an easier goal of hitting ?stationary? targets. Ventura failed to meet the time constraint, taking 11 seconds to fire 3 shots. A frustrated Jesse Ventura derided the bolt-action mechanism [tradesman blames his tools] as the reason for his failure. Ventura made the preposterous suggestion: ?If I can?t do it, no one can do it?.

I?ve seen the sequence previously and was suspicious that Ventura intentionally failed to operate the rifle to his maximum capability--to prove the story?s point. In other words: Ventura was operating below his capacity as a Marine-trained rifleman so as to reach a predetermined outcome. This is always a possibility with experts who "fail" after claiming "it's not possible".

I posted this comment, which has been avoided by Freeman [who started the topic and posted the clip] and other top intellects on this forum.

What about the possibility that Jesse Ventura... sorry, Governor Ventura: Was not trying to fire the shots as quickly as he was capable of? After all, the shooter is a former professional wrestler. Pro Wrestling is acknowledged (even by Ventura) as FAKE! Why should we trust a renowned faker?
I suggest the comment was ignored because it cannot be challenged with the usual distortions and silliness of CT believers demanding an impossible standard of proof. Showing a video clip of Ventura failing proves ?nothing?. Showing Ventura succeeding would have proved ?something?: That the type of rifle could be fired rapidly enough for Oswald to work the bolt-action and fire the shots.... in less than 6 seconds. Other aspects of the shooting sequence (on 22 November 1963) would remain ?a matter of opinions?. 

Assessing Oswald?s rifle-shooting skills ?after the event? is futile. It will annoy conspiracy theorists to be told: A lucky shot (or 2 lucky shots) was possible... however unlikely.

Sadly for you Ross, you have never shown that LHO did fire the shots on November 22, 1963. The evidence simply doesn't support this contention.

[Rob Caprio]

I'm 100% certain that Oswald probably did it.

The fact that you use "probably" confirms that you realize that there is NO supporting evidence for the claim that LHO fired three shots.

[Rob Caprio]

Mr. Oswald: I'm innocent.
Mr. Iacoletti: Okay, you can go.
Mr. Oswald: [Smirk]

Nonsense. The part you are ignoring is that the OFFICIAL evidence doesn't support the contention that LHO fired three shots.

[Ross Lidell]

Sadly for you Ross, you have never shown that LHO did fire the shots on November 22, 1963. The evidence simply doesn't support this contention.

I'm not sad, Rob. Somewhere between neutral and slightly happy.

Incidentally, you're off-topic.

What about providing "supporting evidence" (proof) that the shot's attributed to Oswald by the Warren Commission and HSCA are definitively impossible. Better still: Something that rebuts my conclusion that expert shooters (who are WC/HSCA conclusion doubters) "may not be trusted to try their best during shooting reconstructions".

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

The theory that some person shot JFK as you claim is hilarious.

I never made the claim you "claim" I made about "some person" shooting JFK. Your sentence is close to being incomprehensible.

You are unable to prove anything except you just maybe as much of a blowhard as your cousin Jesse V.  I'm starting to think you spent too much time watching your cousin's show for a guy who is bothered by it.

Branding me as being a relative of Jesse Ventura could be considered a "straw-man" argument. Hypocrite!!!

You are failing miserably at persuading me to believe you are serious and you're Mr. Serious.

I'm not trying to persuade you that I'm "serious" or persuade you in any way.

I'm trying to get you to provide some insight into why a Mauser rifle would be on the 6th floor of the TSBD on 22 November 1963. Your lack of curiosity suggests you don't know or care to know why?

The logical mind demands an explanation as to where a declaration then leads. This a standard procedure in an investigation.

The "Mauser is suspicious/relevant" claim goes back to Mark Lane's best-selling book "Rush To Judgement" (August 1966).

Lane and other authors were either unable or unwilling to put forward a coherent, plausible explanation as to why the Mauser would be part of a JFK assassination plot.

I thought you might possess some new insight into the "whys and wherefores" of the Mauser theory backed up by evidence or even just imagination. It looks like I was overestimating your ability. However, I'm willing to be proven wrong.

What time do you have to be back in your cell? Fair question, right?

Insults rather than responding to a challenge suggests an acknowledgement of defeat.

That is a wonderful argument.
Because your cousin Jesse V said it's impossible.
Why would you even care if your cousin Jesse believes, I don't?

Below is some footage from Tom Alyea. This is filmed inside the TSBD after the shooting. In the 1st part of the film, you will see an FBI agent looking out a window. As he backs up out of the window he looks surprised then changes his direction and walks toward the camera filming him. What is the agent carrying in his left hand?