Oh, I'm so happy that you attempted to rebut and discredit my observations.....
But Cortland Cunningham said that that is NOT the way the spent shells are removed from the 38 caliber Smith & Wesson.
Actually those are your words, not Cunningham's. Here is what he said:
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cunningham, would you show how you would eject the five expended shells?
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. yes. These are very difficult, by the way, to extract, due to the fact that the chamber has been re-chambered. And as you can see, you get on your cartridge cases a little ballooning with these smaller diameter cases in the .38 Special.
Yes, those are my words ....But they could be Cunningham's because they are simply a different way of stating that the S&W revolver is NOT UNLOADED ONE SPENT SHELL AT A TIME. IOW..I have NOT changed the meaning of Cunningham's words. He said that the spent shells in the chambers of the cylinder of the S&W are all ejected at the same time by operating the ejector rod. AND Cunningham said that the spent shells are very difficult to remove from the S&W in evidence.
1. Eisenberg asked Cunningham how he would eject the five expended shells. [There are other ways that also work.]
Now it is YOU who is reading something into Eisenberg's question that was never implied.... Eisenberg simply asked Cunningham how he would eject the five expended shells.... And yes there are other ways of removing spent shells from a S&W.... but all of them are not as simple as using the shell extractor. and the other methods require tools.... Tippit's killer was not reported to have been using any tool to remove the spent shells.
3. Another (perfectly reasonable, given the circumstances) method that LHO might have chosen to use is to extract them one at a time. This would be particularly indicative of someone who had had limited experience/instruction with a revolver. Remember that LHO's pistol training in the USMC was with their standard issue Colt .45 automatic pistol.
This silly idea is not reasonable ....Primarily because on on hand you want attribute to Lee Oswald experience that only an expert with a particular gun could have.... Namely the deadly accuracy that the gunman exhibited when he shot Tippit.....While on the other hand you want to suggest that Lee Oswald had "limited experience"
with a revolver. And citing his Marine Corp training with a Colt 45 Automatic is totally irrelevant.
I used to own a S&W .38 special revolver. So I fully understand how it works. And it was not unusual for me to extract the spent shells one at a time (especially when I first started using it).
The S&W 38 special is NOT the same gun being discussed by Cunningham..... The 38 S&W revolver in question was called A Victory Model....And the chambers were bigger diameter than the .38 Special ..... This is the reason the .38 Special ammo BALLOONED in the chamber and made the spent .38 special cartridges "Very difficult to remove"
Oh, I'm so happy that you attempted to rebut and discredit my observations.....Yes, I have noticed that a few of you have trouble getting replies. So it probably does make you happy. The reason I typically ignore is because you don't appear to listen to reason. You make up your own story and refuse to budge from it regardless of how ridiculous it is shown to be.
Yes, those are my words ....But they could be Cunningham's because they are simply a different way of stating that the S&W revolver is NOT UNLOADED ONE SPENT SHELL AT A TIME. IOW..I have NOT changed the meaning of Cunningham's words. He said that the spent shells in the chambers of the cylinder of the S&W are all ejected at the same time by operating the ejector rod... Cunningham
demonstrated that particular method. He didn't
say any of those things. That is
your interpretation of his demonstration. As I said earlier, there are other methods that work just fine.
Now it is YOU who is reading something into Eisenberg's question that was never implied.... Eisenberg simply asked Cunningham how he would eject the five expended shells.... And yes there are other ways of removing spent shells from a S&W.... but all of them are not as simple as using the shell extractor. and the other methods require tools.... Tippit's killer was not reported to have been using any tool to remove the spent shells.
I didn't claim that Cunningham said something that he didn't,
you did that. What tools would be required? Two fingers always worked just fine for me.
This silly idea is not reasonable ....Primarily because on on hand you want attribute to Lee Oswald experience that only an expert with a particular gun could have.... Namely the deadly accuracy that the gunman exhibited when he shot Tippit.....While on the other hand you want to suggest that Lee Oswald had "limited experience"
with a revolver. And citing his Marine Corp training with a Colt 45 Automatic is totally irrelevant.Shooting the two types of handguns is similar regardless of whether it is an automatic or a revolver. And LHO was reported to be quite good at shooting a pistol by his pistol instructor in the USMC. This explains the "deadly accuracy" part.
However, reloading the two different types of handguns is quite different. LHO was trained to operate the Colt .45 automatic, and I expect he would have been able to reload one of those very rapidly. But I haven't seen any evidence that LHO received any training that included reloading a revolver (he didn't even have the correct ammunition). Yes, someone who trained with a revolver would most likely use the method demonstrated by Cunningham. And repetition (in training) would enable someone to become quite proficient at it. Personally, I used to have a device that held six bullets in the same circular pattern as the revolver receiver pattern, it had a small knurled knob that twisted to release the bullets into the revolver (once they all were inserted). This allowed reloading it much faster than inserting the bullets one at a time. So, you see citing his training with a Colt .45 automatic is not irrelevant, it explains why he was accurate in shooting and perhaps not so proficient in reloading a revolver.
The S&W 38 special is NOT the same gun being discussed by Cunningham..... The 38 S&W revolver in question was called A Victory Model....And the chambers were bigger diameter than the .38 Special ..... This is the reason the .38 Special ammo BALLOONED in the chamber and made the spent .38 special cartridges "Very difficult to remove"Yes, I am aware of all of that. But actually the Victory model was a .38 special when manufactured. This particular gun was re-chambered by Seaport Traders, Inc to the slightly larger diameter size. Here is the mail coupon (CE 135):
Notice the price of this gun versus the S&W 38 special that is four line items above it. LHO apparently ordered it because it had a lower price. This is consistent with the rifle, which also was priced lower than most.
