Tacky Tacky Tacky

While I wait for lunch to arrive, I am Googling out of boredom. Having managed to open the cheesy Russian bullet can, I was looking at gun-related stuff. I came across the word "Mannlicher," which got me thinking about Lee Harvey Oswald's gun, and I started thinking it might be fun, if incredibly tasteless, to buy one like it. Here in Miami, they're probably pretty popular.

I decided against it, because my guess is, buying one of those things puts you on Big Brother's radar for life. I mean, imagine how many Klan kooks are out there right now, joking about shooting Obama with the gun that got Kennedy. I suppose Uncle Sam would be kind of irresponsible, not taking note when a person buys something like that.

Anyway, I saw some interesting stuff while Googling. First of all, the gun was not a Mannlicher anything. It was a Carcano M38/91 in 6.5mm. And while it was a bolt action, it did have a five-round clip, so the nuts who claim Oswald didn't have time to reload and fire are clearly ignorant. He never had to reload.

I saw more stuff I thought was funny. Looks like the "pristine bullet" claim is pure bullshit. The bullet was actually pretty deformed. And it was a very hard, jacketed military round, designed to stay in one piece after impact. Military bullets are supposed to penetrate and wound without expanding or falling apart. It's a Geneva Conventions thing. Tests on similar rounds show they can go through pine boards without much deformation. On top of all that, Oswald's military record says he was rated "excellent" and then "above average" with a rifle. And the gun in question is perfectly fine for shooting people at distances of around 90 yards, which is the distance from which Oswald shot Kennedy.

If the assassin had been a real pro, instead of an ex-Marine whose only expertise was in hitting the target, wouldn't he have used expanding ammunition? Why fart around and risk inflicting a minor wound, when the goal is to kill on the first shot? It's like the nuts who think FDR gave up half the Pacific fleet as an excuse to get into World War Two, a war he could easily have lost. A facially idiotic notion, yet one which refuses to die.

Highly trained shooter, decent gun with scope and five-round clip, moderate distance, plus gunrest. Nearly stationary target, sunny day. Where is the mystery? I guess the conspiracy theory survives because people know nothing about guns and ammunition. They even claim the shot was from the front, because Kennedy fell backward. Hello? Have any of these people ever shot a can full of water? Half the time it ends up closer to the shooter. And human beings have weird reflexes that complicate the matter.

I don't know why people are always determined to believe the least likely thing.

More

Wikipedia claims expanding rounds were banned by the 1889 Hague Conventions, way before Geneva.