Oswald's Marine Corp Rifle Scorebook

[Michael Capasse]

"...Consequently a low marksman qualification indicates a “rather poor shot”
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0018a.htm

[Steve M. Galbraith]

I've pointed this out before, but once again...

The MC marksmanship qualification shooting test requires a shooter to fire 50 rounds at targets ranging out to 500 yards. Hitting the center of the target earns 5 points. Rounds that fall further away from center merit progressively fewer points, and no points are scored if the target it completely missed. In light of this, the fewest number of hits to a target to get a specific score is to divide the score by 5.

So, the way to score 191 points with the fewest hits is to hit the center 191/5 = 38.2, or hit the center 38 times and anywhere else on the target once. That's 29 hits out of 50 shots, or Oswald hitting the target 80% of the time. And that's the *minimum possible* number of hits. Oswald almost certainly scored at least 40 hits at El Toro. A 212 would require an absolute minimum of 42.2 hits, hitting the target 86% of the time.

The WC/HSCA scenario only requires two out of three hits.

As you explain: What does that Oswald test score mean? What did it measure? Or any test score for that matter? Without the details these are essentially meaningless numbers. If you told someone from France that you scored 1000 on a SAT test they would probably ask, "What's that mean? What did it test?" For them it's just a number.

This is like saying person "A" scored X points on a test that placed him just above the middle of three standards or categories. Swell, what does that mean about his or her aptitude? It's meaningless unless you know what "X" means and what the standards meant and what the test entailed.

So you explain in detail what the test entailed, what the scores meant. That's what one would want.

Many - not all - conspiracists simply don't like to go into those details. They grab one "data point", one "Gotcha!", and think that's sufficient. It's not. It's like the "Oswald double" story. They cite the phone call from Hoover and the photo and ignore everything else we've learned over the past 60+ years.

[Zeon Mason]

But Oswald was using a semi auto 7.62 mm M1 Garand  rifle when he was doing that “rapid fire” USMC target shooting test that was NOT shooting from 72 ft height.

Operating an old bolt action MC rifle with fixed fsights zero of 200m from a  72ft height and shooting down at a target less than 100 meters away moving at 15mph ,  with a cross wind of 15-20 mph , and a tree in the way , may not not be quite the same thing?

The CBS trial shooters seem to have had quite a lot of problems and they didn’t even have a tree in the way or were required to sit on a box and then lean forward to place the rifle to rest on top of the box resting on the window ledge.

And even with the added advantage of having a white painted track clearly visible and the target itself being a red shape on a black square, there were 33 attempts required of which only one old guy was supposedly able to have made 3 shots and scored 3 hits ( but missed the head) in approx 5.1 secs.

I do not know if that one old guy who APPEARS to be shooting the rifle actually hit the target or not because there was not a secondary camera zoomed in on the target to verify holes appearing simultaneous with movement of the old guys trigger finger.

And I don’t think that old guy ever was tested again and if he did some other test by other independent media to verify he could replicate what CBS and Dan Rather CLAIM he did.

(Not sure this guy was ever interviewed or had to make statement under oath that he actually did accomplish the feat).

The theoretical position of sitting on the box by the pipes so as to remain out of LOS of Hughes film camera , was actually tested by one of this forums members, (Mr. Collins) who actually built a scale model in his garage. and posted some photos showing how the shooter leans forward holding his rifle while still  sitting on the box.

It would be not so much a question if all 3 shots could definitively be established  to be spread out over at least an 7 second period but because the closest ear witness right beneath the 6th floor TSBD shooter , Harold Norman replicated the 3 shots completed in only about 4 secs max ( via his boom click sequence in the video recordings) then there is still reasonable doubt.

And it’s even more in doubt because so many witness vast majority heard the last 2 shots so close together that it’s improbable that the head shot at Z313 could be the 3rd shot 4.8 seconds after the 2nd shot at Z224.

[Charles Collins]

But Oswald was using a semi auto 7.62 mm M1 Garand  rifle when he was doing that “rapid fire” USMC target shooting test that was NOT shooting from 72 ft height.

Operating an old bolt action MC rifle with fixed fsights zero of 200m from a  72ft height and shooting down at a target less than 100 meters away moving at 15mph ,  with a cross wind of 15-20 mph , and a tree in the way , may not not be quite the same thing?

The CBS trial shooters seem to have had quite a lot of problems and they didn’t even have a tree in the way or were required to sit on a box and then lean forward to place the rifle to rest on top of the box resting on the window ledge.

And even with the added advantage of having a white painted track clearly visible and the target itself being a red shape on a black square, there were 33 attempts required of which only one old guy was supposedly able to have made 3 shots and scored 3 hits ( but missed the head) in approx 5.1 secs.

I do not know if that one old guy who APPEARS to be shooting the rifle actually hit the target or not because there was not a secondary camera zoomed in on the target to verify holes appearing simultaneous with movement of the old guys trigger finger.

And I don’t think that old guy ever was tested again and if he did some other test by other independent media to verify he could replicate what CBS and Dan Rather CLAIM he did.

(Not sure this guy was ever interviewed or had to make statement under oath that he actually did accomplish the feat).

The theoretical position of sitting on the box by the pipes so as to remain out of LOS of Hughes film camera , was actually tested by one of this forums members, (Mr. Collins) who actually built a scale model in his garage. and posted some photos showing how the shooter leans forward holding his rifle while still  sitting on the box.

It would be not so much a question if all 3 shots could definitively be established  to be spread out over at least an 7 second period but because the closest ear witness right beneath the 6th floor TSBD shooter , Harold Norman replicated the 3 shots completed in only about 4 secs max ( via his boom click sequence in the video recordings) then there is still reasonable doubt.

And it’s even more in doubt because so many witness vast majority heard the last 2 shots so close together that it’s improbable that the head shot at Z313 could be the 3rd shot 4.8 seconds after the 2nd shot at Z224.

It would be not so much a question if all 3 shots could definitively be established  to be spread out over at least an 7 second period …

The photographic record appears to indicate an early missed shot around the mid to late Z150s. When Jerry Organ recently posted his clip of the lady’s extremely fast head snap (see the thread “A Closer Look”) combined with the other photographic evidence, it became enough to convince me. Combine that with the apparent shot around Z224 and the last shot hitting at Z313, and there is approximately 8.6 seconds for the three shots to take place.
We can all see the photographic evidence and interpret it for ourselves. We do not have to rely on witness accounts (and all of their inconsistencies) and all the various interpretations of them. The “he said, she said” arguments will continue to take place here with no end in sight. It has been over sixty years and people still choose to argue about what so and so meant when he/she said such and such. There are so many witness accounts that anyone with any kind of nutty idea can find something that they think supports their ideas.
I suggest that you look and think for yourself Zeon.

[Mitch Todd]

"...Consequently a low marksman qualification indicates a “rather poor shot”
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0018a.htm

A "poor shot" as compared to what? Also, Folsom was the officer who was "head, records branch, personnel department" and as such may not have been the best arbiter of all things marksmanship.

Again, if you look at what the "191" score actually means, Oswald was more than capable of hitting a human being consistently with a rifle. But you don't want to look at that, do you?

[Michael Capasse]

A "poor shot" as compared to what? Also, Folsom was the officer who was "head, records branch, personnel department" and as such may not have been the best arbiter of all things marksmanship.

Again, if you look at what the "191" score actually means, Oswald was more than capable of hitting a human being consistently with a rifle. But you don't want to look at that, do you?

what are you babbling now?  - Like you know better than this LT Colonel that actually used the guideline every day?
It is not my opinion nor the opinion of the WC or HSCA. (like u said it was) It was set by the USMC.  You just make stuff up.
I'll look at something else that documents what exactly the Marines accept - otherwise your opinion just doesn't mean that much.

[Dan O'meara]

It would be not so much a question if all 3 shots could definitively be established  to be spread out over at least an 7 second period …

The photographic record appears to indicate an early missed shot around the mid to late Z150s. When Jerry Organ recently posted his clip of the lady’s extremely fast head snap (see the thread “A Closer Look”) combined with the other photographic evidence, it became enough to convince me. Combine that with the apparent shot around Z224 and the last shot hitting at Z313, and there is approximately 8.6 seconds for the three shots to take place.
We can all see the photographic evidence and interpret it for ourselves. We do not have to rely on witness accounts (and all of their inconsistencies) and all the various interpretations of them. The “he said, she said” arguments will continue to take place here with no end in sight. It has been over sixty years and people still choose to argue about what so and so meant when he/she said such and such. There are so many witness accounts that anyone with any kind of nutty idea can find something that they think supports their ideas.
I suggest that you look and think for yourself Zeon.

The photographic record appears to indicate an early missed shot around the mid to late Z150s

The photographic record indicates nothing of the sort. It is the worse case of wishful thinking on your behalf.
The evidence overwhelmingly supports a first shot at z222/223.
You seem to have abandoned your initial belief of an early missed shot in the z130's. What caused you to do this?

[Mitch Todd]

what are you babbling now?  - Like you know better than this LT Colonel that actually used the guideline every day?
It is not my opinion nor the opinion of the WC or HSCA. (like u said it was) It was set by the USMC.  You just make stuff up.
I'll look at something else that documents what exactly the Marines accept - otherwise your opinion just doesn't mean that much.

Who said that Folsom "used the guideline every day?" By his own description, he oversaw the USMC's records division. That's it.

Compare Folsom to Major Anderson, who was "Assistant Head of the Marksmanship Branch, Headquarters Marine Corps." He had done "marksmanship training for approximately 18 years" and was "a distinguished rifle shot in the Marine Corps, master rifle shot, National Rifle Association of America."

So what does he have to say about Oswald's capability? Here:

Mr. SPECTER - Based on what you see of Mr. Oswald's marksmanship capabilities from the Marine Corps records which you have before you, Major Anderson, how would you characterize him as a marksman?
Major ANDERSON - I would say that as compared to other Marines receiving the same type of training, that Oswald was a good shot, somewhat better than or equal to--better than the average let us say. As compared to a civilian who had not received this intensive training, he would be considered as a good to excellent shot.

Now, an appeal to Anderson's testimony is just an appeal to authority. But so is any appeal to anything Folsom said. The difference is that Anderson is demonstrably an expert in how the Marines see rifle marksmanship. The key to understanding Oswald's capabilities with a rifle is to look at his actual scores, with an understanding of what those scores actually mean. And those scores mean that Oswald was capable of hitting the target 80% of the time or better. All you have in response is the opinion of the Chief File Clerk in Washington. Good luck with that.