# Did Lee Harvey Oswald assassinate JFK? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 9, 2007, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950 "2007-08-09T02:28:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Moirai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/96bed5/32.png) [@Moirai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moirai)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2007, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/201 "2007-08-13T23:59:12Z")
[QUOTE=Atomicktom] So, really, it’s okay to change your mind. Come over to the lone gunman side. The facts are over here. [/QUOTE] Nicely put. I avoid most of these threads, probably because I too think that some dweebus shooting Kennedy isn’t nearly exciting or exotic enough. But it appears to be true. Bummer. It’s been an education, though. Thanks, everybody (almost! 😉 ). ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/202 "2007-08-14T00:49:02Z")
[QUOTE=bdgr] It would actually be a lot easier with iron sights. Thats part of the problem with people who keep claiming that it was an easy feat to accomplish…re-reacquiring the target in a scope under that situation…a moving target with obstacles in-between is time consuming. [/QUOTE] Oswald had some stuff helping him here, though–remember, he was using a gun rest which adds more stability and will make it easier to reacquire a target. > [@](#): > > Not according to most experts, even the ones who believe he did it. If you think was an easy shot, your definitely missing something. Cite? Oswald made his shot at 45 feet. That is _15 yards_. Find out at what range recruits to any of America’s armed forces starts shooting targets out _within days of their entering initial training_, and with accuracy at that, if you really think this was a difficult shot. Now sure, there is obviously a difference between target shooting and shooting at real people who are moving, but we are talking about _15 yards_ and a target going 15 mph. We’re also talking about a rifle here, even rifles from the era of the Revolutionary War could hit people up to 300 yards away (and they did.) You don’t have to be a weapons expert to realize that 15 yards is a trivial distance when talking about shooting a rifle. The only hard thing about repeating Oswald’s feat is the fact that the experts are “trying to reproduce Oswald’s feat” as opposed to just show that what happened in general is easy to reproduce. They’re rushing against artificial time limits (5.6 seconds, an unrealistic amount of time) whereas Oswald had no preset “time limit” that he was necessarily rushing to “beat.” He probably had at least 8.5 seconds of clean shooting at Kennedy. ---
**Author:** ![BJMoose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/5fc32e/32.png) [@BJMoose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BJMoose)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/203 "2007-08-14T01:07:19Z")
Whoa, **Martin** , you need to recheck your numbers. Oswald was at least 50 feet above the ground - so no way it was a 45-foot shot. It _was_ rather close range, closer than the distance at which Marines qualify. **EJsGirl** : Thanks for the comment. I often wonder if these threads ever accomplish anything useful, and it’s nice to know that some of the lurkers are getting something out of it. ---
**Author:** ![Fiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e274bd/32.png) [@Fiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiver)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/204 "2007-08-14T02:46:37Z")
[QUOTE=BJMoose] Whoa, **Martin** , you need to recheck your numbers. Oswald was at least 50 feet above the ground - so no way it was a 45-foot shot. It _was_ rather close range, closer than the distance at which Marines qualify. [/QUOTE] That’s what I was just thinking. Oswald was on the 6th floor, right? And generally the stories of an office building are 10 feet each, so even if he was firing from right at floor level (which he wasn’t; presumably the window sill would be a couple of feet higher) that’s 50 feet, as you say. If the ground and the height of Oswald are then the legs of a right triangle, then Oswald fired down the hypotenuse. If **Martin Hyde** meant to say the distance from the Book Depository (ground floor) to Kennedy was 45 feet, then Oswald’s shot was the square root of (50^2 \* 45^2), or about 67 feet, 4 inches. Still not a difficult shot, so despite the math error his point stands. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/205 "2007-08-14T02:52:17Z")
[QUOTE=BJMoose] Whoa, **Martin** , you need to recheck your numbers. Oswald was at least 50 feet above the ground - so no way it was a 45-foot shot. It _was_ rather close range, closer than the distance at which Marines qualify. [/QUOTE] It seems this is correct, 65 feet seems to be the exact distance. One of the sources I was reading was talking about a test done at 45 feet, so I assumed that was the distance in question. We’re still only talking about 21 yards, someone who is a a novice shot should be able to hit something at 100 yard range, and for marksmanship qualification in the marines you shoot at targets at various yard ranges, up to 500 yards. This is from the Warren Commission’s report: > [@](#): > > Oswald’s Marine Training > > In accordance with standard Marine procedures, Oswald received extensive training in marksmanship. During the first week of an intensive 8-week training period he received instruction in sighting, aiming, and manipulation of the trigger. He went through a series of exercises called dry firing where he assumed all positions which would later be used in the qualification course. After familiarization with live ammunition in the .22 rifle and .22 pistol, Oswald, like all Marine recruits, received training on the rifle range at distances up to 500 yards, firing 50 rounds each day for five days. > > Following that training, Oswald was tested in December of 1956, and obtained a score of 212, which was 2 points above the minimum for qualifications as a “sharpshooter” in a scale of marksman–sharpshooter–expert. In May of 1959, on another range, Oswald scored 191, which was 1 point over the minimum for ranking as a “marksman.” The Marine Corps records maintained on Oswald further show that he had fired and was familiar with the Browning Automatic rifle, .45 caliber pistol, and 12-gage riot gun.779 > > Based on the general Marine Corps ratings, Lt. Col. A. G. Folsom, Jr., head, Records Branch, Personnel Department, Headquarters U.S. Marine Corps, evaluated the sharpshooter qualification as a “fairly good shot.” and a low marksman rating as a “rather poor shot.” > > When asked to explain the different scores achieved by Oswald on the two occasions when he fired for record, Major Anderson said: > > ``` > ... when he fired that [212] he had just completed a very intensive preliminary training period. He had the services of an experienced highly trained coach. He had high motivation. He had presumably a good to excellent rifle and good ammunition. We have nothing here to show under what conditions the B course was fired. It might well have been a bad day for firing the rifle--windy, rainy, dark. There is little probability that he had a good, expert coach, and he probably didn't have as high a motivation because he was no longer in recruit training and under the care of the drill instructor. There is some possibility that the rifle he was firing might not have been as good a rifle as the rifle that he was firing in his A course firing, because [he] may well have carried this rifle for quite some time, and it got banged around in normal usage. > > ``` > > Page 192 > > Major Anderson concluded: > > ``` > 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.** > > ``` > > When Sergeant Zahm was asked whether Oswald’s Marine Corps training would have made it easier to operate a rifle with a four-power scope, he replied: > > ``` > Based on that training, his basic knowledge in sight manipulation and trigger squeeze and what not, I would say that he would be capable of sighting that rifle in well, firing it, with 10 rounds. > > ``` > > After reviewing Oswald’s marksmanship scores, Sergeant Zahm concluded: > > ``` > I would say in the Marine Corps he is a good shot, slightly above average, and as compared to the average male of his age throughout the civilian, throughout the United States, that he is an excellent shot. > > ``` > > Oswald’s Rifle Practice Outside the Marines > > During one of his leaves from the Marines, Oswald hunted with his brother Robert, using a .22 caliber bolt-action rifle belonging either to Robert or Robert’s in-laws. After he left the Marines and before departing for Russia, Oswald, his brother, and a third companion went hunting for squirrels and rabbits. On that occasion Oswald again used a bolt-action .22 caliber rifle; and according to Robert, Lee Oswald exhibited an average amount of proficiency with that weapon. While in Russia, Oswald obtained a hunting license, joined a hunting club and went hunting about six times, as discussed more fully in chapter VI. Soon after Oswald returned from the Soviet Union he again went hunting with his brother, Robert, and used a borrowed .22 caliber bolt-action rifle.789 After Oswald purchased the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, he told his wife that he practiced with it. Marina Oswald testified that on one occasion she saw him take the rifle, concealed in a raincoat, from the house on Neely Street. Oswald told her he was going to practice with it. According to George De Mohrenschildt, Oswald said that he went target shooting with that rifle. > > Marina Oswald testified that in New Orleans in May of 1963, she observed Oswald sitting with the rifle on their screened porch at night, sighting with the telescopic lens and operating the bolt. Examination of the cartridge cases found on the sixth floor of the Depository > > Page 193 > > Building established that they had been previously loaded and ejected from the assassination rifle, which would indicate that Oswald practiced operating the bolt. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/206 "2007-08-14T03:02:12Z")
And his first shot missed the entire car…That should tell you something is not as simple or easy as you are making it out to be. The carbine he was using was worn out, and not particularly accurate even when it was new. My enfield would have been a better choice, and its older. He did fire the shots in a short period time despite him not having to He did fire one of the shots that hit trhough a tree, despite the fact that he didn’t have to And Hathcock said they couldn’t duplicate it at Quantico… These weren’t easy shots. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/207 "2007-08-14T03:16:41Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] Let’s be blunt, then. Do you think the Kennedy shot is (choose one): a - easier than Hinckley’s Reagan shot b- as easy as Hinckley’s Reagan shot c- not as easy as Hinckley’s Reagan shot [/quote] From my recolation of the hinkley shooting, from watching it on TV the day it happened…Hinkleys was pretty easy. > [@](#): > > Hinckley was also firing at “the most powerful man in the world, in broad daylight”, yet got a hit that could very easily have been fatal. If he was acting alone, why is it so difficult to believe Oswald was? Put away that strawman, I never said it was difficult to believe. > [@](#): > > Miller’s already pointed out the contradiction in your statement, in which you claim to believe Oswald shot Kennedy, but simultaneously that it was impossible for Oswald to shoot Kennedy. Can we have a decision? Can we have a cite as to where I said it was impossible for Oswald to shoot Kennedy? Because thats another strawman. I didn’t say that. Its just I find the whole “Yep, I could make that shot easy” thing tiring. You couldn’t, most people couldn’t. If Oswald did make it, it was luck. But that doesnt at all mean he didn’t do it. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/208 "2007-08-14T03:20:51Z")
[QUOTE=bdgr] Its just I find the whole “Yep, I could make that shot easy” thing tiring. You couldn’t, most people couldn’t. If Oswald did make it, it was luck. But that doesnt at all mean he didn’t do it. [/QUOTE] Do you have anything to back up this claim? What about the shot, in your opinion, makes it difficult? The idea that the shot was difficult is not based on anything that I’ve seen other than claims by conspiracy theorists which often take experts out of context or quote experts of dubious quality/validity. The claim that even expert marksmen can’t hit a target at 21 yards is so dubious it is beyond belief. If that is true then how do thousands of new armed forces recruits across the United States regularly hit targets at over 100 yards? Sure, one his shots missed _the car_. Of course, he wasn’t aiming for the car. I imagine if he was _none of his shots would miss_, but when you’re aiming for Kennedy’s head, it’s a bit easier to miss. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/209 "2007-08-14T03:30:47Z")
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde] Do you have anything to back up this claim? What about the shot, in your opinion, makes it difficult? [/quote] Moving target shooting at a downward angle with an inferior weapon through and past obsticles in a short period of time under preassure. The distance is not huge but it’s there. > [@](#): > > The idea that the shot was difficult is not based on anything that I’ve seen other than claims by conspiracy theorists which often take experts out of context or quote experts of dubious quality/validity. I’ve read a lot of statements by marksmen, but the multple statements by hathcock on the matter settle it for me. I cant think of a bigger authority on the matter and he was clear…it was not an easy shot. I also base it on the considerable experiance I have with firearms, but That doesnt mean squat here. > [@](#): > > The claim that even expert marksmen can’t hit a target at 21 yards is so dubious it is beyond belief. If that is true then how do thousands of new armed forces recruits across the United States regularly hit targets at over 100 yards? Because were talking about shooting at a stationary paper target on a flat range. The distance isn’t the problem, anyone can hit a man sized tarket at 75 yards or a hundred with a little training on a range. I can consistantly shoot a 1 inch group at twice that range with iron sights. I’ve got a friend who shot someone in the head at much much further (marine recon) Thats not the issue. > [@](#): > > Sure, one his shots missed _the car_. Of course, he wasn’t aiming for the car. I imagine if he was _none of his shots would miss_, but when you’re aiming for Kennedy’s head, it’s a bit easier to miss. Kennedys head was in the car. He aimed at kennedy and he not only missed him, he didn’t even get close…and that was when the limo was at its closest. If it was an easy shot, why did he miss? Because it wasn’t an easy shot. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/210 "2007-08-14T03:33:18Z")
On the McAdams site referenced to previously in the thread, there is a memorandum concerning some tests that the D.C. Police Department did. They had several shooters doing the tests, some of which were expert marksmen or trained police snipers, two however were individuals with some military and police background but no special rifle training or special experience with rifles. They spaced out targets at three distances (to simulate the movement of Kennedy’s car) and even the guy who had no extensive weapons training only missed the target’s head at _266_ feet (shooting from a tower) by _two inches_. This was with no prior experience using the weapon and no significant form of practice prior to its use. Oswald had been practicing with his rifle for days prior to the assassination, even specifically practicing with the bolt action to make sure he knew how to use it comfortably. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/211 "2007-08-14T03:34:54Z")
[QUOTE=bdgr] And his first shot missed the entire car…That should tell you something is not as simple or easy as you are making it out to be. [/QUOTE] Or perhaps his nerves got the better of him on the first shot. We may never know. > [@](#): > > The carbine he was using was worn out, and not particularly accurate even when it was new. My enfield would have been a better choice, and its older. On what basis do you claim the MC was ‘worn out’? > [@](#): > > He did fire the shots in a short period time despite him not having to He fired as fast as he could chamber rounds and aim. > [@](#): > > He did fire one of the shots that hit trhough a tree, despite the fact that he didn’t have to > > And Hathcock said they couldn’t duplicate it at Quantico.. > > These weren’t easy shots. No offense to Hathcock, but he’s looking at it from a sniper’s perspective and it really wasn’t. It was more like a WW1 or 2 battlefield fire. Sure, Lee had a scope. But he was not doing anything that falls under sniper doctrine. No fire and relocation, no efforts to conceal the firearm, nothing like that. Just point and shot as fast as you can load and aim. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/212 "2007-08-14T03:40:16Z")
[QUOTE=bdgr] And his first shot missed the entire car…That should tell you something is not as simple or easy as you are making it out to be. The carbine he was using was worn out, and not particularly accurate even when it was new. My enfield would have been a better choice, and its older. He did fire the shots in a short period time despite him not having to He did fire one of the shots that hit trhough a tree, despite the fact that he didn’t have to And Hathcock said they couldn’t duplicate it at Quantico.. These weren’t easy shots. [/QUOTE] I’ll ask again before I give up, and if you don’t answer, I figure I’ve successfully given you something you can’t reconcile - is Oswald hitting Kennedy a more or less difficult feat than Hinckley hitting Reagan? Weapons Oswald - rifle with scope Hinckley - .22 revolver Training Oswald - Marine Corps Hinckley - none Firing rate Oswald - 3 shots in ~8 seconds Hinckley - 6 shots in 3 seconds Range Oswald - ~285 feet Hinckley - I’m not sure, maybe 40 feet Firing position Oswald - alone in 6th-floor storeroom, weapon braced Hinckley - standing near crowd of spectators outside Washington Hilton Obstacles Oswald - trees notwithstanding, ample direct line-of-sight to Kennedy’s upper torso and head Hinckley - numerous police officers, secret service agents, James Brady, Thomas Delehanty, Timothy McCarthy Movement during critical shot Oswald - Kennedy’s limo had slowed, was travelling in a straight predictable line Hinckley - Fired at Reagan while Reagan was being shoved into a bulletproof limousine by a service agent and officers rapidly closed in to tackle Hinckley If your argument is that Oswald’s feat was so very unlikely that he could not have pulled it off, I assume you have similar feelings about Hinckley and must believe there was a conspiracy there, too. A comparison clearly indicates Hinckley’s feat was far less probable - with his sole advantage being that he was closer. Or you could just admit that maybe both Hinckley and Oswald got lucky. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/213 "2007-08-14T03:40:37Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Miskatonic] Or perhaps his nerves got the better of him on the first shot. We may never know. On what basis do you claim the MC was ‘worn out’? [/quote] Honestly, I don’t remember. I’ve read it in multiple books, both pro lone gunman and consipracy nut. If I’m off on this, I’m off, but I seem to remember it being accepted fact. > [@](#): > > He fired as fast as he could chamber rounds and aim. Which is the difficult part > [@](#): > > No offense to Hathcock, but he’s looking at it from a sniper’s perspective and it really wasn’t. It was more like a WW1 or 2 battlefield fire. Sure, Lee had a scope. But he was not doing anything that falls under sniper doctrine. No fire and relocation, no efforts to conceal the firearm, nothing like that. Just point and shot as fast as you can load and aim. Well, I dont think he was. Hathcock was marine infantryman first, and I’m sure he would have conidered that. In trying to recreate it, which he said they did at quantico, I’m pretty sure they tried everything. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/214 "2007-08-14T03:41:43Z")
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde] On the McAdams site referenced to previously in the thread, there is a memorandum concerning some tests that the D.C. Police Department did. They had several shooters doing the tests, some of which were expert marksmen or trained police snipers, two however were individuals with some military and police background but no special rifle training or special experience with rifles. They spaced out targets at three distances (to simulate the movement of Kennedy’s car) and even the guy who had no extensive weapons training only missed the target’s head at _266_ feet (shooting from a tower) by _two inches_. This was with no prior experience using the weapon and no significant form of practice prior to its use. Oswald had been practicing with his rifle for days prior to the assassination, even specifically practicing with the bolt action to make sure he knew how to use it comfortably. [/QUOTE] stationary targets. so what. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/215 "2007-08-14T03:45:38Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] I’ll ask again before I give up, and if you don’t answer, I figure I’ve successfully given you something you can’t reconcile - is Oswald hitting Kennedy a more or less difficult feat than Hinckley hitting Reagan? [/quote] I already answered this above. Hinckley was the easier shot. Are you just deliberatly trying to be annoying? > [@](#): > > Weapons > Oswald - rifle with scope > Hinckley - .22 revolver > > Training > Oswald - Marine Corps > Hinckley - none > > Firing rate > Oswald - 3 shots in ~8 seconds > Hinckley - 6 shots in 3 seconds > > Range > Oswald - ~285 feet > Hinckley - I’m not sure, maybe 40 feet > > Firing position > Oswald - alone in 6th-floor storeroom, weapon braced > Hinckley - standing near crowd of spectators outside Washington Hilton > > Obstacles > Oswald - trees notwithstanding, ample direct line-of-sight to Kennedy’s upper torso and head > Hinckley - numerous police officers, secret service agents, James Brady, Thomas Delehanty, Timothy McCarthy > > Movement during critical shot > Oswald - Kennedy’s limo had slowed, was travelling in a straight predictable line > Hinckley - Fired at Reagan while Reagan was being shoved into a bulletproof limousine by a service agent and officers rapidly closed in to tackle Hinckley > If your argument is that Oswald’s feat was so very unlikely that he could not have pulled it off, I assume you have similar feelings about Hinckley and must believe there was a conspiracy there, too. A comparison clearly indicates Hinckley’s feat was far less probable - with his sole advantage being that he was closer. Or you could just admit that maybe both Hinckley and Oswald got lucky. Again, I answered this above and you must be deliberatly trying to put words in my mouth. IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. Now, as to hinkly, As I remember it, he was less than 10 feet away with no obstructions between him and the president when he fired. All he had to do was point and shoot and people do that every day. They have nothing to do with each other. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/216 "2007-08-14T03:55:25Z")
[QUOTE=bdgr] I already answered this above. Hinckley was the easier shot. Are you just deliberatly trying to be annoying? [/quote] I don’t see how you reach that conclusion. Can you explain it? I’d like to see a cite that puts Hinckley within ten feet of Reagan (I looked for maps of the attempt but didn’t find any in a casual search). Besides, if Hinckley had an unobstructed close-range view of Reagan, why did it take the sixth shot (which was a ricochet) to get him? Heck, Oswald took three shots to get his kill, but he had more time, a better weapon, a better stance and no obstructions. > [@](#): > > IT WAS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY ACTING ALONE. I don’t believe that you believe that, though. It’s too unromantic. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/217 "2007-08-14T04:03:58Z")
[QUOTE=bdgr] Honestly, I don’t remember. I’ve read it in multiple books, both pro lone gunman and consipracy nut. If I’m off on this, I’m off, but I seem to remember it being accepted fact. [/QUOTE] You do have to be careful with such buff ‘accepted facts’ It certainly is true that by the time HSCA got their experts to look at it, it was rather worn out. Hence they used another MC to do their tests. The reason it was worn out is because it is part of the national archives, which any US citizen, with some supervision, can examine it and check it out. Give any rifle a treatment where a different person messes with almost every day for 15 years and any rifle will get ‘worn out’. But when tested for the WC, it was serviceable and accurate. > [@](#): > > Which is the difficult part But not very difficult to do when you’ve worked with the rifle. Its certainly not a bad fire rate for a bolt-action rifle for wartime firing. > [@](#): > > Well, I dont think he was. Hathcock was marine infantryman first, and I’m sure he would have conidered that. In trying to recreate it, which he said they did at quantico, I’m pretty sure they tried everything. Perhaps. But whatever his expertise, I must reject his findings based on my own experience, the demonstrations of other marksmen, and the complete lack of evidence for any other snipers. I just can’t accept his findings as being that solid. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/218 "2007-08-14T04:05:40Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] I don’t see how you reach that conclusion. Can you explain it? I’d like to see a cite that puts Hinckley within ten feet of Reagan (I looked for maps of the attempt but didn’t find any in a casual search). Besides, if Hinckley had an unobstructed close-range view of Reagan, why did it take the sixth shot (which was a ricochet) to get him? Heck, Oswald took three shots to get his kill, but he had more time, a better weapon, a better stance and no obstructions. [/quote] I watched th video on tv the day it happened…but it’s been 20 years or so. IIRC he was close up, pulled his gun and started firing as the secret service taclked him One round hit th president. Not particularly hard, but there was an element of luck to it. Maybe it’s on youtube. It doesn’t matter. > [@](#): > > I don’t believe that you believe that, though. It’s too unromantic. I’m not much of a romantic. Am I 100% certain that oswald acted alone? No. I think its possible, maybe even probable. There are things about the shooting that raise questions for me that will never be answered, like why he didn’t shoot on the approach. but absent any real evidence otherwise we have to assume thats what happened. But it wasn’t an easy shot…all I’m saying. ---
**Author:** ![bdgr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a87d85/32.png) [@bdgr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bdgr)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/219 "2007-08-14T04:10:22Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Miskatonic] You do have to be careful with such buff ‘accepted facts’ [/quote] Absolutely, and I own up to it when I do it. > [@](#): > > It certainly is true that by the time HSCA got their experts to look at it, it was rather worn out. Hence they used another MC to do their tests. The reason it was worn out is because it is part of the national archives, which any US citizen, with some supervision, can examine it and check it out. Give any rifle a treatment where a different person messes with almost every day for 15 years and any rifle will get ‘worn out’. But when tested for the WC, it was serviceable and accurate. well…theres that then. > [@](#): > > But not very difficult to do when you’ve worked with the rifle. Its certainly not a bad fire rate for a bolt-action rifle for wartime firing. It’s a fairly slow action (I’ve fired one) but it wouldn’t be difficult with iron sights. I t woud be verry difficult with a scope attached. I personally think it would have been an easier shot at that range without the scope. > [@](#): > > Perhaps. But whatever his expertise, I must reject his findings based on my own experience, the demonstrations of other marksmen, and the complete lack of evidence for any other snipers. I just can’t accept his findings as being that solid. eh…i draw the opposite conclusion. I’ve seen enough people say they had a hard time replicating it, and my previous experience with bolt action scoped rifles makes me think he’s right on in saying it was difficult. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2007, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950/220 "2007-08-14T04:12:37Z")
[QUOTE=bdgr] I watched th video on tv the day it happened…but it’s been 20 years or so. IIRC he was close up, pulled his gun and started firing as the secret service taclked him One round hit th president. Not particularly hard, but there was an element of luck to it. Maybe it’s on youtube. It doesn’t matter. [/QUOTE] It is. ![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/4jr6JYD7i54/maxresdefault.jpg)https://www.youtube.com/embed/4jr6JYD7i54?feature=oembed&wmode=opaque Remember that a lot of his bullets hit other people. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-lee-harvey-oswald-assassinate-jfk/414950.md?page=12)