Rifle No. "C2766"
David Von Pein
www.ctka.net/2008/bugliosi_review.html
I've taken a look at James DiEugenio's lengthy review of Vincent
Bugliosi's 2007 JFK book, "Reclaiming History". And although I completely
disagree with almost everything Jim has written in his review, I must say
that I did enjoy reading it.
DiEugenio is 100% wrong about a whole bunch of conclusions he has reached
with respect to the way John Kennedy died in 1963. There can be no doubt
about that fact.
Jim, possibly, could best be categorized as a "hair-splitter". And then,
to borrow a phrase from my favorite of all authors (Mr. Bugliosi, of
course), after Jim has split the hairs to a fine pulp, he then proceeds to
"split the hairs", until the end result is a great- big mess of
unanswerable questions and totally-incoherent plots and reasoning. (IMHO,
that is.)
And here's just one of several examples of this (again, IMO, that is):
In his critique of Vince Bugliosi's book, Mr. DiEugenio seems to imply
that many, many different Mannlicher-Carcano Model 91/38 rifles (like Lee
Harvey Oswald's) were manufactured with the exact same serial number
(C2766)....which, according to Robert Frazier of the FBI (via his Warren
Commission testimony) is not the case at all.*
* = And by way of footnote, when ordinary common sense is applied to this
topic (i.e., the main REASON for "serial numbers" to be stamped on
rifles--or ANY piece of merchandise for that matter) it seems fairly
obvious to me that Frazier would be correct when it comes to the fact that
Oswald's "C2766" MC 91/38 rifle was the ONLY weapon of that exact TYPE and
MODEL to have been stamped at ANY factory with that unique serial number.
Because, isn't the #1 reason to put specific serial numbers on products
this one: So that the product in question has its own UNIQUE identifying
mark on it for later easy tracing and/or identification?
If that's not the main reason for all of the long serial numbers I see on
a lot of products I own...then what is the #1 reason to have serial
numbers on these things? ....
SERIAL NUMBER (Merriam-Webster definition) -- "A number indicating place
in a series and used as a means of identification."
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/serial%20number
SERIAL NUMBER (Wikipedia) -- "...A unique number assigned for
identification which varies from its successor or predecessor by a fixed
discrete integer value."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_number
But, let's assume for the sake of argument that there were/are several
different MC 91/38 rifles with the exact same serial number on them of
"C2766"....my next logical question (based on the totality of evidence in
THIS Kennedy murder case) is this one:
So what?
Since we know beyond every speck of a doubt that the major pieces of
bullet evidence in the JFK case (CE399, CE567, CE569, and the three shells
found under the Depository's 6th-Floor window) can be irrevocably tied and
linked to CE139 (i.e., the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that is in evidence in
this case with serial number C2766 on it, and with Oswald's prints on it,
to boot), what difference does it really make if OTHER rifles of the same
make and model also sported the exact same serial number?
Do the conspiracy theorists who like to occasionally bring up this
argument about possible "other rifles with the same serial number" somehow
think that any of those OTHER rifles bearing a "C2766" identifier (which,
btw, nobody has ever produced, at least as far as I know) would have had
the EXACT SAME RIFLING/STRIATION MARKS that the barrel of CE139 possesses?
It's really a huge non-issue in the first place.
Also:
The theorists who think there might be something "conspiratorial" or
"shady" connected with the issue of the Carcano serial numbers have a
pretty big "How Did They Do This, And When?" hurdle to climb (it seems to
me) when it comes to the detailed documentation of the "C2766" rifle that
was shipped by Klein's Sporting Goods Co. in Chicago to "A. Hidell" of
"P.O. Box 2915; Dallas, Texas" on March 20, 1963.
Do some CTers actually think that Klein's shipped a DIFFERENT rifle with
the serial number "C2766" to "Hidell"/Oswald?
In other words, via this make-believe "conspiratorial" episode I'm
concocting here just for the sake of concocting it, Klein's would have
shipped a rifle with the number C2766 on it to Oswald in March 1963 (which
we know they did, via the internal Klein's document linked below), but the
rifle that ended up in evidence in the JFK murder case (CE139) is a
DIFFERENT rifle from the one that Klein's mailed to Hidell/LHO....but they
both JUST HAPPENED to have the exact same serial number on them.
Because, lacking the above type of "coincidental" scenario, where can the
CTers take this type of argument at all? I guess they'd have to believe
that Klein's was "in" on a cover-up involving the rifle too. And,
apparently, the document shown below (Waldman Exhibit No. 7) is a total
"fake" of some kind, with the "C2766" that appears on this document being
written in after the assassination, in trying to link the weapon to
Oswald:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0364a.htm
But when we get back into the world of "Reality" and "Common Sense", it's
fairly obvious (even to a half-blind individual) that CE139 is, indeed,
the very same "C2766" rifle that Klein's mailed to Lee Harvey Oswald's
post-office box in March of '63.
To believe otherwise is to dive into the bottomless pit of conspiracy-
oriented absurdity....a pit that has been dug by the conspiracy theorists
themselves.
===============================================
Jim DiEugenio discusses Bugliosi's book on "Black Op Radio":
www.blackopradio.com/black389a.ram
www.blackopradio.com/black389b.ram
Related links:
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/d85fa965035f8722
www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3200858-post.html
===============================================
Anthony Marsh
>
>
> www.ctka.net/2008/bugliosi_review.html
>
>
>
> I've taken a look at James DiEugenio's lengthy review of Vincent
> Bugliosi's 2007 JFK book, "Reclaiming History". And although I completely
> disagree with almost everything Jim has written in his review, I must say
> that I did enjoy reading it.
>
> DiEugenio is 100% wrong about a whole bunch of conclusions he has reached
> with respect to the way John Kennedy died in 1963. There can be no doubt
> about that fact.
>
> Jim, possibly, could best be categorized as a "hair-splitter". And then,
> to borrow a phrase from my favorite of all authors (Mr. Bugliosi, of
> course), after Jim has split the hairs to a fine pulp, he then proceeds to
> "split the hairs", until the end result is a great- big mess of
> unanswerable questions and totally-incoherent plots and reasoning. (IMHO,
> that is.)
>
> And here's just one of several examples of this (again, IMO, that is):
>
> In his critique of Vince Bugliosi's book, Mr. DiEugenio seems to imply
> that many, many different Mannlicher-Carcano Model 91/38 rifles (like Lee
> Harvey Oswald's) were manufactured with the exact same serial number
> (C2766)....which, according to Robert Frazier of the FBI (via his Warren
> Commission testimony) is not the case at all.*
>
The problem is more complex than that. Other models and other rifles
made at other factories could have the same serial number. So what?
> * = And by way of footnote, when ordinary common sense is applied to this
> topic (i.e., the main REASON for "serial numbers" to be stamped on
> rifles--or ANY piece of merchandise for that matter) it seems fairly
> obvious to me that Frazier would be correct when it comes to the fact that
> Oswald's "C2766" MC 91/38 rifle was the ONLY weapon of that exact TYPE and
> MODEL to have been stamped at ANY factory with that unique serial number.
>
Sounds good, but it kinda sidesteps the issue.
> Because, isn't the #1 reason to put specific serial numbers on products
> this one: So that the product in question has its own UNIQUE identifying
> mark on it for later easy tracing and/or identification?
>
Sure, but old barrels get recycled. And you are talking about the
manufacturing process not the exporting process.
> If that's not the main reason for all of the long serial numbers I see on
> a lot of products I own...then what is the #1 reason to have serial
> numbers on these things? ....
>
>
> SERIAL NUMBER (Merriam-Webster definition) -- "A number indicating place
> in a series and used as a means of identification."
>
> www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/serial%20number
>
>
>
> SERIAL NUMBER (Wikipedia) -- "...A unique number assigned for
> identification which varies from its successor or predecessor by a fixed
> discrete integer value."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_number
>
Yeah, unique to that brand and model.
>
>
>
>
> But, let's assume for the sake of argument that there were/are several
> different MC 91/38 rifles with the exact same serial number on them of
> "C2766"....my next logical question (based on the totality of evidence in
> THIS Kennedy murder case) is this one:
>
> So what?
>
> Since we know beyond every speck of a doubt that the major pieces of
> bullet evidence in the JFK case (CE399, CE567, CE569, and the three shells
> found under the Depository's 6th-Floor window) can be irrevocably tied and
> linked to CE139 (i.e., the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that is in evidence in
> this case with serial number C2766 on it, and with Oswald's prints on it,
> to boot), what difference does it really make if OTHER rifles of the same
> make and model also sported the exact same serial number?
>
> Do the conspiracy theorists who like to occasionally bring up this
> argument about possible "other rifles with the same serial number" somehow
> think that any of those OTHER rifles bearing a "C2766" identifier (which,
> btw, nobody has ever produced, at least as far as I know) would have had
> the EXACT SAME RIFLING/STRIATION MARKS that the barrel of CE139 possesses?
>
> It's really a huge non-issue in the first place.
>
Correct. It's just that we get a little annoyed when the government lies
about everything.
> Also:
>
> The theorists who think there might be something "conspiratorial" or
> "shady" connected with the issue of the Carcano serial numbers have a
> pretty big "How Did They Do This, And When?" hurdle to climb (it seems to
> me) when it comes to the detailed documentation of the "C2766" rifle that
> was shipped by Klein's Sporting Goods Co. in Chicago to "A. Hidell" of
> "P.O. Box 2915; Dallas, Texas" on March 20, 1963.
>
> Do some CTers actually think that Klein's shipped a DIFFERENT rifle with
> the serial number "C2766" to "Hidell"/Oswald?
>
Some probably do.
> In other words, via this make-believe "conspiratorial" episode I'm
> concocting here just for the sake of concocting it, Klein's would have
> shipped a rifle with the number C2766 on it to Oswald in March 1963 (which
> we know they did, via the internal Klein's document linked below), but the
> rifle that ended up in evidence in the JFK murder case (CE139) is a
> DIFFERENT rifle from the one that Klein's mailed to Hidell/LHO....but they
> both JUST HAPPENED to have the exact same serial number on them.
>
One theory I suppose could be that Klein's shipped the CARBINE C2766 to
Oswald while the short rifle C2766 was used for the assassination. But
the HSCA wear pattern analysis rules that out.
> Because, lacking the above type of "coincidental" scenario, where can the
> CTers take this type of argument at all? I guess they'd have to believe
> that Klein's was "in" on a cover-up involving the rifle too. And,
> apparently, the document shown below (Waldman Exhibit No. 7) is a total
> "fake" of some kind, with the "C2766" that appears on this document being
> written in after the assassination, in trying to link the weapon to
> Oswald:
>
Why not? Or someone was spying on Klein's.
Brokedad
>
> But when we get back into the world of "Reality" and "Common Sense", it's
> fairly obvious (even to a half-blind individual) that CE139 is, indeed,
> the very same "C2766" rifle that Klein's mailed to Lee Harvey Oswald's
> post-office box in March of '63.
>
> To believe otherwise is to dive into the bottomless pit of conspiracy-
> oriented absurdity....a pit that has been dug by the conspiracy theorists
> themselves.
>
> ===============================================
>
> Jim DiEugenio discusses Bugliosi's book on "Black Op Radio":www.blackopradio.com/black389a.ramwww.blackopradio.com/black389b.ram
>
> Related links:www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/d85fa965035f8722www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3200858-post.html
>
> But when we get back into the world of "Reality" and "Common Sense", it's
> fairly obvious (even to a half-blind individual) that CE139 is, indeed,
> the very same "C2766" rifle that Klein's mailed to Lee Harvey Oswald's
> post-office box in March of '63.
>
(David Von Pein")
================================================================
Probably quite obvious to a "Parrot".
However, for those who actually conduct research, then the problem is
one of immense porportion.
And, as usual, you continue to demonstrate exactly how little you
actually know in regards to the assassination and the evidence.
1938 and beyond:
1. The Model 38 was first put out in the 7.35mm caliber.
2. Later, the caliber was changed to the 6.5mm caliber and became
known as the Model 91/38*
*with this change, multiple "ORIGINAL" weapons were created which
would have had the serial# C2766, as the weapon was produced at
multiple arms manufacturing plants.
The weapon has been specifically identified with four different plant
manufacturing stamps on it. Therefore, at minimum, there could be as
many as 4 of the weapons which were originally produced with the C2766
serial number.
Add to that the fact that many of the initial issue 7.35mm caliber
weapons were returned to the factory and re-barrelled in the 6.5mm
caliber, and absolutely no one knows exactly how many of these weapons
were possibly given the serial number which was originally issued on
the 7.35mm caliber.
3. Along with the Model 91/38, the TS Carbine (36-inch length true
carbine) was also produced in both calibers.
Which by the nature of the various plants, produced another quantity
of weapons which were of the f6.5mm caliber and also bore the serial#
C2766.
4. Then, not unlike the Model 91/38 Short Rifle, many of the Model 38
TS Carbines (7.35mm caliber) were later converted to the 6.5mm caliber
as well.
5. Along with all of this, came the Cavalry Carbine, which although
diffferent in design, had the exact same barrel length as the 36-inch
length Carbine, and which was also produced in the 6.5 as well as
7.35mm calibers as well.
======================================================
6. Now, we can back up to pre-1938 in which thousands of 36-inch
length TS Carbines as well as thousands of Cavalry Carbines were
produced, which again gives us multitudes of weapons with the serial
number C2766.
7. With that stated, we can now consider the thousands of Long Rifles
which were also produced at multitudes of factories, and which weapons
had the barrels cut-down to produce the Model 91/28 Carbine.
Many of which weapons would have also born the C2766 serial number.
=======================================================
With that stated, there could easily be several dozen weapons floating
around in which the barrel length creates either the 36-inch length
Carbine or the 40-inch Model 91/38 Short Rifle.
Lastly, the order which LHO completed and mailed in is for the
virtually useless Model 91/28 Carbine.
This weapon was once a "Long Rifle" which was made with "progressive
twist" rifling.
Beginning in 1928, literally thousands of these old Long Rifles" had
their barrel shortened to the Carbine Length and were converted to the
Model 91/28 Carbine.
Due to removal of several inches at the forward end of the rifle
barrel, which contained the final and full rifling "twist", these
weapons were highly inaccurate at anything other than the shortests of
ranges.
Along with the fact that the older powder designs had added
considerably to the actual barrel/rifling corrosion and wear.
=========================================================
So Mr. Von Pein, not unlike most other items, you know little of
nothing about the importance, or lack thereof in attempting to prove
to anyone that the rifle recovered on the sixth floor of the TSDB is
actually the weapon that LHO ordered and received from Klein's
Sporting Goods.
He ordered a worn out Long Rifle which had been cut down to a 36-inch
length Carbine. (Model 91/28 Carbine)
JFK was killed with an excellent quality Model 91/38 Short Rifle.
Anthony Marsh
Pretty accurate so far, but the difference is not JUST in barrel length.
The advertised CARBINE had a variable rear sight. The short rifle they
sent him had a fixed rear sight.
> Lastly, the order which LHO completed and mailed in is for the
> virtually useless Model 91/28 Carbine.
>
> This weapon was once a "Long Rifle" which was made with "progressive
> twist" rifling.
>
The picture shows a real CARBINE with variable rear sight.
> Beginning in 1928, literally thousands of these old Long Rifles" had
> their barrel shortened to the Carbine Length and were converted to the
> Model 91/28 Carbine.
>
Exactly the type of problem that might cause a second M-C used that day
to produce keyholing bullets.
> Due to removal of several inches at the forward end of the rifle
> barrel, which contained the final and full rifling "twist", these
> weapons were highly inaccurate at anything other than the shortests of
> ranges.
> Along with the fact that the older powder designs had added
> considerably to the actual barrel/rifling corrosion and wear.
>
Oswald rifle was found to shoot high and to the right at closer distances.
> =========================================================
>
> So Mr. Von Pein, not unlike most other items, you know little of
> nothing about the importance, or lack thereof in attempting to prove
> to anyone that the rifle recovered on the sixth floor of the TSDB is
> actually the weapon that LHO ordered and received from Klein's
> Sporting Goods.
>
By looking at the progression of ads that Klein's had placed in the
American Rifleman and taking into account the ad lead time, I think we
can see that Klein's knew that it was running out of the Carbines in
late January 1963 and was starting to substitute with the the long rifles.
Brokedad
>
> read more �- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Anthony!
Not unlike Mr. Von Pein, in event that you actually knew what you were
talking about then it could be a worthwhile conversation.
The "Fixed" rear sight did not come into being until 1938.
Therefore, every single Carcano of the literally thousands produced prior
to this date, had the variable rear sight.
That happens to be one of the primary means in differentating between the
Model 91/28 Carbine (which is merely a cut-down Long Rifle) and a true TS
Carbine which was designed with the shorter barrel.
The Model 91/28, being an old Long Rifle, has the "variable" rear sight
which can be adjusted to a distance of 1,000 yards.
The true TS Carbine is only adjustable to, if recalled correctly, 500
yards.
That happens to be a primary means of telling them apart and also happens
to be how one can state that the Klein's ad which LHO ordered a rifle from
Klein's, shows the Model 91/28 piece of junk which was once a Long Rifle
and was cut down to the Model 91/28 Carbine length.
Lastly, ALL of the weapons have a "fixed" V-notch rear sight that is an
integral part of the overall sight. The "variable"/adjustable rear sight
is merely for ranges which exceed those for which the weapon was factory
sighted.
Lastly, unless you were there when the weapon was shipped from Klein's,
then you have no more idea as to exactly what Model weapon Klein's
shipped, than do I or some cow in the pasture.
"The picture shows a real CARBINE with variable rear sight." (Anthony
Marsh)
The "picture" shows the Model 91/28 Carbine which was once a Long Rifle
and beginning in 1928 was cut down in length to create the 36- inch length
Carbine, which was a piece of junk for accuracy due to the removal of a
considerable amount of the rifle barrel from the muzle end of the weapon.
Which by the way, removed the final portion of the barrel which had the
"full gain" twist which was necessary to impart full spin and stability to
the bullet. So, in effect, one had a "progressive gain" twist barrel in
which the most important part of the "twist" was now removed. And, which,
other than extremely short ranges, made the weapon worthless for accuracy.
Now Anthony!
Continue to impress us with your knowledge, such as:
"Oswald rifle was found to shoot high and to the right at closer
distances." (Anthony Marsh)
You continue to post this, even though you apparantly have absolutely no
shooting knowledge.
"High and to the Right", just may be "Low and to the Left" for anyone
shooting the weapon. That happens to be one of the problems with any
"fixed sight" weapon, as there is no means by which to compensate for the
"shooter error" which is carried into the equation by the actual manner in
which a persons establishes his stock to shoulder and check to stock
firing position.
Impress us some more Anthony!
Anthony Marsh
450-1500 meters. See the Carcano Home Page for more details.
http://www.rememuseum.org.uk/arms/rifles/armisrc/arm108.jpg
This shows the rear sight. Notice the similarity to the Klein's ad.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/AR_DEC62_75.gif
Notice that the ad says only 36" overall.
Compare that to the ad from April which uses the same picture
and now says only 40" overall.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/AR_APR63_55.gif
> The true TS Carbine is only adjustable to, if recalled correctly, 500
> yards.
>
All TS were 450-1500 meters. They used the metric system in Italy.
> That happens to be a primary means of telling them apart and also happens
> to be how one can state that the Klein's ad which LHO ordered a rifle from
> Klein's, shows the Model 91/28 piece of junk which was once a Long Rifle
> and was cut down to the Model 91/28 Carbine length.
>
Oswald could not know that from the ad, which did not specify the year
of manufacture.
> Lastly, ALL of the weapons have a "fixed" V-notch rear sight that is an
> integral part of the overall sight. The "variable"/adjustable rear sight
> is merely for ranges which exceed those for which the weapon was factory
> sighted.
>
> Lastly, unless you were there when the weapon was shipped from Klein's,
> then you have no more idea as to exactly what Model weapon Klein's
> shipped, than do I or some cow in the pasture.
>
>
> "The picture shows a real CARBINE with variable rear sight." (Anthony
> Marsh)
>
> The "picture" shows the Model 91/28 Carbine which was once a Long Rifle
> and beginning in 1928 was cut down in length to create the 36- inch length
> Carbine, which was a piece of junk for accuracy due to the removal of a
> considerable amount of the rifle barrel from the muzle end of the weapon.
> Which by the way, removed the final portion of the barrel which had the
> "full gain" twist which was necessary to impart full spin and stability to
> the bullet. So, in effect, one had a "progressive gain" twist barrel in
> which the most important part of the "twist" was now removed. And, which,
> other than extremely short ranges, made the weapon worthless for accuracy.
>
> Now Anthony!
>
> Continue to impress us with your knowledge, such as:
>
> "Oswald rifle was found to shoot high and to the right at closer
> distances." (Anthony Marsh)
>
That is exactly what the FBI agents found when they test fired Oswald's
rifle.
> You continue to post this, even though you apparantly have absolutely no
> shooting knowledge.
>
Tons.
> "High and to the Right", just may be "Low and to the Left" for anyone
> shooting the weapon. That happens to be one of the problems with any
> "fixed sight" weapon, as there is no means by which to compensate for the
> "shooter error" which is carried into the equation by the actual manner in
> which a persons establishes his stock to shoulder and check to stock
> firing position.
>
You are talking about the foremost firearms expert at the FBI.
Brokedad
===================================================================
> You are talking about the foremost firearms expert at the FBI.
>
===================================================================
Nope!
I am talking about you and your complete lack of knowledge in regards to
rifle marksmanship.
Just exactly WHY? do you think that all US Military issue rifles are made
with an adjustable rear sight?
It is because virtually everyone of is is different to some extent and
therefore we each hold the rifle differently and take up a completely
different sight picture.
The factory issue Model 91/38 Short Rifle was factory "Zeroed" at 200
meters. With a completely fixed front, as well as rear sight, this leaves
the only variable being the human eye as placed into vertical and
horizontal alignment across the V-notch of the rear sight to the top of
the front sight.
Every human takes up a slightly different "sight picture" as a result of
having to lean their head to the right, take up a "spot-weld" on the
stock, and thereafter attempt to get their eye in a perfect alignment,
horizontally as well as vertically with the fixed sights on the weapon.
Due primarily to variations in arm lengths as well as facial features, few
humans take up the "exact same" sight picture. As well as few can get
their eye in the ABSOLUTE three sight alignment, with the fourth point of
alignment being a target.
So! I could care less as to where target impact landed for anyone, as I
happen to know enough that for someone else who takes up a slightly
different sight picture, that bullet impact could just as easily have been
low and to the left.
You truly need to learn something about sighting a rifle!
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/simmons.htm
Mr. EISENBERG. Do I understand your testimony to be that this rifle is
as accurate as the current American military rifles?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. As far as we can determine from bench-rest firing.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you consider that to be a high degree of
accuracy?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, the weapon is quite accurate. For most small arms,
we discover that the round- to-round dispersion is of the order of
three-tenths of a mil. We have run into some unusual ones, however,
which give us higher values, but very few which give us smaller
values, except in selected lots of ammunition.
Mr. McCLOY. You are talking about the present military rifle--will you
designate it?
Mr. SIMMONS. The M-14.
If you knew anything, then you would also know that the M14 was the
basis for some of our best sniper rifles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M14_rifle
The M14 also provides the basis for the M21 and M25 sniper rifles.
====================================================================================
The "Rifle" did not fire HIGH AND TO THE RIGHT!
The persons firing the weapon, fired the weapon from a sight picture
alignment which caused the bullet to strike High and to the Right.
English
I don't disagree with you but I may add that differences in the
variations in the optics of human eyes also may require an adjustable
sight.
If you look at exhibits 548 and 549,, there is a difference between
shooters.
One would expect the rifle to shoot high at the ranges that Frazier
tested the rifle - initial tests were at 15 and 25 yards.
Strangely, I can find no reference to tests using the iron sights in
Frazier's testimony.
Mr. EISENBERG - Have you been able to confirm that the serial number
on this weapon is the only such number on such a weapon?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, it is.
I don't think he did, really.
Anthony Marsh
There you go again. Making up false claims for me when you've lost the
argument.
> It is because virtually everyone of is is different to some extent and
> therefore we each hold the rifle differently and take up a completely
> different sight picture.
>
Nonsense. The rear sight is adjustable for RANGE. To change the zero
distance.
> The factory issue Model 91/38 Short Rifle was factory "Zeroed" at 200
> meters. With a completely fixed front, as well as rear sight, this leaves
> the only variable being the human eye as placed into vertical and
> horizontal alignment across the V-notch of the rear sight to the top of
> the front sight.
>
> Every human takes up a slightly different "sight picture" as a result of
> having to lean their head to the right, take up a "spot-weld" on the
> stock, and thereafter attempt to get their eye in a perfect alignment,
> horizontally as well as vertically with the fixed sights on the weapon.
>
> Due primarily to variations in arm lengths as well as facial features, few
> humans take up the "exact same" sight picture. As well as few can get
> their eye in the ABSOLUTE three sight alignment, with the fourth point of
> alignment being a target.
>
All of that mumbo jumbo is irrelevant to the issue of the Carcano
trajectory. Bullet manufacturers can and do bolt the rifle down for test
firing and make measurements of its flight characteristics.
> So! I could care less as to where target impact landed for anyone, as I
> happen to know enough that for someone else who takes up a slightly
> different sight picture, that bullet impact could just as easily have been
> low and to the left.
>
You are talking about the leading firearms expert at the FBI and trying
to place the blame on him instead of the rifle, as if HE was responsible
for the rifle consistently high and to the right. You don't know what
you are talking about.
> You truly need to learn something about sighting a rifle!
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/simmons.htm
>
> Mr. EISENBERG. Do I understand your testimony to be that this rifle is
> as accurate as the current American military rifles?
> Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. As far as we can determine from bench-rest firing.
> Mr. EISENBERG. Would you consider that to be a high degree of
> accuracy?
> Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, the weapon is quite accurate. For most small arms,
> we discover that the round- to-round dispersion is of the order of
> three-tenths of a mil. We have run into some unusual ones, however,
> which give us higher values, but very few which give us smaller
> values, except in selected lots of ammunition.
> Mr. McCLOY. You are talking about the present military rifle--will you
> designate it?
> Mr. SIMMONS. The M-14.
>
Again, you display your ignorance. As Dave Emary of Hornady wrote he can
get 5" groupings at the proper zero distance. The problem is the bullet
rise at closer distances, which for the Mannlicher-Carcano is much
higher than the M-14.
6.5 mm Carcanos were equipped with a wide variety of sights. Early
model M91 series rifles had adjustable sights with a fixed battle zero
sight. Most models of rifles made just before or during WWII had fixed
sights. The exception to this was the M41 model. From a user standpoint
the WWII era Carcano’s sights are the model of effectiveness and
simplicity. The early model M91 version rifles with the fixed battle
sight being at 300 meters was probably not the greatest decision but
reflected the trend of that time. With this sight setting the rifles
would have a maximum height of trajectory of approximately 15” – 17” at
a range of 175 to 200 yards, depending on barrel length. I suspect more
than one Austrian soldiers life was spared in WWI because someone shot
over his head.
The Italians apparently realized that a 300-meter battle zero was a
bit impractical and with the introduction of the M38 models went to a
200 meter battle zero. This zero results in a maximum height of
trajectory of 5.5” – 6.5” at a range of approximately 100 yards,
depending on barrel length.
The Carcano rifles are capable of outstanding accuracy. With the
exception of a military issue type load in the short carbines they are
very pleasant to shoot from a recoil standpoint. Because of the above
mentioned sight picture for the Carcano, front sight in the bottom of
the rear sight notch, it is very important to have a consistent
stock-cheek weld for consistent accuracy. It is often very helpful to
use a carbide lamp or a sight black product to blacken the sights, which
improves contrast and sight picture.
With .264” bullets the best results I have ever been able
to obtain are with the Hornady 160 gr RN. Most rifles will shoot groups
with this bullet in the 3” - 5” range at 100 yards for 5 shots. I will
occasionally get a group under 3”.
With the Hornady .2675” bullet I have been able to consistently shoot
my M41 under 2” at 100 yards with numerous groups around 1.5”. I have
with my accuracy marked M38 Short Rifle shot groups under 1” at 100
yards with the norm being 1.5” – 2.0”. With the Cavalry and T.S. model
rifles I can typically shoot groups in the 2.0” – 3.0” range. The
accuracy shooting with the carbines is somewhat limited by the very
short sight radius.
>
> If you knew anything, then you would also know that the M14 was the
> basis for some of our best sniper rifles.
>
Apples and oranges.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M14_rifle
>
The M14 has a very flat trajectory. The Mannlicher-Carcano does not.
Apples and oranges.
> The M14 also provides the basis for the M21 and M25 sniper rifles.
> ====================================================================================
>
BFD. You constantly bring up sniper rifles as if you personally know
something about them. A recent show on our best sniper noted that for a
dead center hit at 1,000 yards the bullet would fall 30 inches.
> The "Rifle" did not fire HIGH AND TO THE RIGHT!
>
> The persons firing the weapon, fired the weapon from a sight picture
> alignment which caused the bullet to strike High and to the Right.
>
>
Slander. These were the top firearms experts at the FBI.
Anthony Marsh
Documents received from Italian intelligence about the Carcano were kept
secret. And notice in some testimonies how many times they had discussions
off the record.
Bud
You are talking Powerball odds that Crescent firearms or Klein`s would
have two Carcano rifles with the same serial number. A person spending his
whole life might find two Carcanos with the same serial number. Note that
when Klein`s inventoried the boxes of Carcanos, they didn`t even bother
with the letter prefix in front of the serial number, knowing full well
how unlikely it would be to get two rifle with just the same numbers.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11277&relPageId=66
> The weapon has been specifically identified with four different plant
> manufacturing stamps on it. Therefore, at minimum, there could be as
> many as 4 of the weapons which were originally produced with the C2766
> serial number.
Even if true, which isn`t shown, the chances of any other C2766 ending
up in America is slim. The chances of two such rifles ending up in
Crescent or Klein`s inventories is mindbogglingly remote. Hard to imagine
even with effort, with an intent to frame, that someone could find the
necessary rifle with the matching serial number to do such a thing.
Actually, it`s pretty simple. Crescent Firearms had a Carcano rifle with
the serial number C2766. They had a transaction with Klein`s Sporting
Goods, and then Klein`s had a Carcano rifle with the serial number C2766.
Klein`s did a transaction with Oswald, and then Oswald had a Carcano rifle
with the serial number C2766. Don`t get yourself all bungied up with
models, it only confuses a simple matter. there is just no reasonable
alternative but to conclude that it was the same rifle throughout all the
transactions. This form shows that there was a change made, and Klein`s
did receive the some of same 91/38 model Carcano that was found in the
TSBD.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11277&relPageId=63
("Changed to Beretta Terni M91/38 EFF")
David Von Pein
>>> "Hard to imagine even with effort, with an intent to frame, that someone could find the necessary rifle with the matching serial number to do such a thing." <<<
And this is a very strange argument for Mr. Purvis to be making in the
first place. Purvis thinks that CE139 is the real murder weapon of
JFK. He doesn't think there was anything underhanded about the way
Oswald obtained Rifle C2766 from Klein's.
At least I don't think he thinks there is anything covert or
underhanded about it. But, then again, with so many theories flying
around loose like confetti in a tornado...who knows?
Perhaps I'm wrong and Purvis thinks that somebody miraculously got
ahold of a second MC 91/38 rifle with #C2766 on it and then did a
switcheroo of some kind. And maybe somebody also faked Waldman Exhibit
No. 7, to boot:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0364a.htm
Or -- Maybe Purvis is just spitting out impossibly-complicated C2766
rifle scenarios just for the heck of it, and/or just for the sake of
pumping his own chest with respect to his vast knowledge about these
Italian-made firearms....even though the entire topic is a completely-
moot one.
Ya think?
(I do.)
Brokedad
>
> > > But when we get back into the world of "Reality" and "Common Sense", it's
> > > fairly obvious (even to a half-blind individual) that CE139 is, indeed,
> > > the very same "C2766" rifle that Klein's mailed to Lee Harvey Oswald's
> > > post-office box in March of '63.
>
> > (David Von Pein")
> > ================================================================
>
> > Probably quite obvious to a "Parrot".
>
> > However, for those who actually conduct research, then the problem is
> > one of immense porportion.
>
> > And, as usual, you continue to demonstrate exactly how little you
> > actually know in regards to the assassination and the evidence.
>
> > 1938 and beyond:
>
> > 1. �The Model 38 was first put out in the 7.35mm caliber.
> > 2. �Later, the caliber was changed to the 6.5mm caliber and became
> > known as the Model 91/38*
>
> > *with this change, multiple "ORIGINAL" weapons were created which
> > would have had the serial# C2766, as the weapon was produced at
> > multiple arms manufacturing plants.
>
> � �You are talking Powerball odds that Crescent firearms or Klein`s would
> have two Carcano rifles with the same serial number. A person spending his
> whole life might find two Carcanos with the same serial number. Note that
> when Klein`s inventoried the boxes of Carcanos, they didn`t even bother
> with the letter prefix in front of the serial number, knowing full well
> how unlikely it would be to get two rifle with just the same numbers.
>
>
> � � � � ("Changed to Beretta Terni M91/38 EFF")> He ordered a worn out Long Rifle which had been cut down to a 36-inch
> > length Carbine. (Model 91/28 Carbine)
>
> > JFK was killed with an excellent quality Model 91/38 Short Rifle.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
("Changed to Beretta Terni M91/38 EFF")>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As one who has a birth certicicate which states(by it's dates) that I
was 18 years old, when in fact I was 15 years old, I truthly have
little trust in "perfectly" executed documents.
And, as stated, were I to accept as fact everything written, then I
should be looking aor a "T-38" which happens to be a Jap Rifle.
Lastly, although the "Terni" plant happens to be one of the plants of
manufacture of the Model 91/38, there is no such reference in any
known place (other than this questionable form) to a "Beretta Terni"
weapon, and in fact, no such weapon exist.
*First off, the arms manufacturer BERETTA made all of the Carcano's.
The "Terni"; Brescia; Gardone: etc; etc; etc; merely references the
name of the city in which the Beretta Plant which produced the weapon
was located.
The main Beretta Arms Plant was located at Gardone,/aka Gardone Val
Trompia, the home of the Beretta familyl.
This happens to be the ONLY plant which was allowed to stamp the word
"BERETTA" on those weaons which it manufactured, as it was a means of
demonstration that this weapon came from the "true" Beretta home plant/
aka the first plant to produce arms.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardone_Val_Trompia
It is located in the Trompia valley. It is well-known for being the
base of the major small arms manufacturer Fabbrica d'Armi Pietro
Beretta.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although reportedly produced at only three plants*,6.5mm Model 91/38
Carcano's have been found with the following markings:
1. TERNI
2. RE TERNI (same plant as #1 above)
3. BRESCIA
4. FNA BRESCIA (same plant as #3 above)
5. BERETTA GARDONE
6. BERETTA (same plant as #5 above)
7. GARDONE VAL TROMPIA (apparantly same plant as #5 & #6 above)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now! In event that you and or Von Pein believe that Kleins's ordered
ONLY "BERETTA TERNI" Carcano rifles, then good look finding one with
that stamping.*
*One would most probably have to make their own, as no such stamping
ever existed.
Furthermore, if one is stupid enough to believe that Klein's was so
insistent in their order that they wanted ONLY Model 91/38's that were
produced in the TERNI factory, then one would most probably believe in
the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy as well.
Lastly, in event that you want to know why Klein's ceased to order to
Model 91/24 (junk) carbines which LHO ordered, and which Klein's
paperwork demonstrates was sent to him, then ask and, provided that I
am not having a "bad hair day", then I will also explain the reasoning
behind the order change.
Anthony Marsh
I'm not here to referee or defend either of you guys, but I don't see
why you are going off on Bud. He is only pointing out that the
difference in model does not matter as far as which weapon was actually
used. And don't blame him for what various official documents say. One
CIA document talks about the MAUSER found in the TBSD which was traced
to Klein's.
> *One would most probably have to make their own, as no such stamping
> ever existed.
>
There are some discrepancies in the stampings and Riva was supposed to
remove most markings.
> Furthermore, if one is stupid enough to believe that Klein's was so
> insistent in their order that they wanted ONLY Model 91/38's that were
> produced in the TERNI factory, then one would most probably believe in
> the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy as well.
>
No one postulated that.
Klein's could not specify. They took whatever Crescent sent them.
> Lastly, in event that you want to know why Klein's ceased to order to
> Model 91/24 (junk) carbines which LHO ordered, and which Klein's
> paperwork demonstrates was sent to him, then ask and, provided that I
I don't think that you have any proof that Klein's shipped Oswald the
carbine. The paperwork does not show that.
> am not having a "bad hair day", then I will also explain the reasoning
> behind the order change.
>
One problem was that initial customers were complaining about the
quality of the Carcanos they had bought.
Anthony Marsh
>
>
>>>> "Hard to imagine even with effort, with an intent to frame, that
someone could find the necessary rifle with the matching serial number to
do such a thing." <<<
>
>
>
> And this is a very strange argument for Mr. Purvis to be making in the
> first place. Purvis thinks that CE139 is the real murder weapon of
> JFK. He doesn't think there was anything underhanded about the way
> Oswald obtained Rifle C2766 from Klein's.
>
Well, he does seem to think that Klein's shipped Oswald the carbine serial
number C2766 and that he used the short rifle serial number C2766 on
11/22/63.
> At least I don't think he thinks there is anything covert or
> underhanded about it. But, then again, with so many theories flying
> around loose like confetti in a tornado...who knows?
>
Like many of the WC defenders here he wants to make his claim to fame by
thinking up some bizarre conspiracy theory that still allows Oswald to be
the lone nut.
> Perhaps I'm wrong and Purvis thinks that somebody miraculously got
> ahold of a second MC 91/38 rifle with #C2766 on it and then did a
> switcheroo of some kind. And maybe somebody also faked Waldman Exhibit
> No. 7, to boot:
>
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0364a.htm
>
>
> Or -- Maybe Purvis is just spitting out impossibly-complicated C2766
> rifle scenarios just for the heck of it, and/or just for the sake of
> pumping his own chest with respect to his vast knowledge about these
> Italian-made firearms....even though the entire topic is a completely-
> moot one.
>
> Ya think?
>
He's bluffing and blustering.
> (I do.)
>
Anthony Marsh
I have no doubt that there is a carbine serial number C2766 in the sands
of Ethiopia. But I have yet to see side by side any two Carcanos of any
type with the same serial number.
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11277&relPageId=66
>
>> The weapon has been specifically identified with four different plant
>> manufacturing stamps on it. Therefore, at minimum, there could be as
>> many as 4 of the weapons which were originally produced with the C2766
>> serial number.
>
> Even if true, which isn`t shown, the chances of any other C2766 ending
> up in America is slim. The chances of two such rifles ending up in
> Crescent or Klein`s inventories is mindbogglingly remote. Hard to imagine
> even with effort, with an intent to frame, that someone could find the
> necessary rifle with the matching serial number to do such a thing.
>
I think his theory is that Klein's shipped Oswald the carbine serial
number C2766 and someone else provided him with the short rifle serial
number C2766, or Klein's faked the records.
Anthony Marsh
Yes, but Crescent did include the letter prefix in their inventory so
they knew what they had received and what they were shipping to Klein's.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11277&relPageId=58
C2766 was in carton number 3376:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11277&relPageId=62
> ("Changed to Beretta Terni M91/38 EFF")
>
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11277&relPageId=63
BTW, why is one of the serial numbers on box #18 blacked out?
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11277&relPageId=68
It appears that 2766 was in box 25 (unfortunately Rex scanned that page
upside down).
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11277&relPageId=70
Bud
> Budwrote:
>
> >>> But when we get back into the world of "Reality" and "Common Sense", it's
> >>> fairly obvious (even to a half-blind individual) that CE139 is, indeed,
> >>> the very same "C2766" rifle that Klein's mailed to Lee Harvey Oswald's
> >>> post-office box in March of '63.
>
> >> (David Von Pein")
> >> ================================================================
>
> >> Probably quite obvious to a "Parrot".
>
> >> However, for those who actually conduct research, then the problem is
> >> one of immense porportion.
>
> >> And, as usual, you continue to demonstrate exactly how little you
> >> actually know in regards to the assassination and the evidence.
>
> >> 1938 and beyond:
>
> >> 1. The Model 38 was first put out in the 7.35mm caliber.
> >> 2. Later, the caliber was changed to the 6.5mm caliber and became
> >> known as the Model 91/38*
>
> >> *with this change, multiple "ORIGINAL" weapons were created which
> >> would have had the serial# C2766, as the weapon was produced at
> >> multiple arms manufacturing plants.
>
> > You are talking Powerball odds that Crescent firearms or Klein`s would
> > have two Carcano rifles with the same serial number. A person spending his
> > whole life might find two Carcanos with the same serial number. Note that
> > when Klein`s inventoried the boxes of Carcanos, they didn`t even bother
> > with the letter prefix in front of the serial number, knowing full well
> > how unlikely it would be to get two rifle with just the same numbers.
>
>
> Yes, but Crescent did include the letter prefix in their inventory so
> they knew what they had received and what they were shipping to Klein's.
Yah, but my point was that when they checked off the rifles they
received, they didn`t bother with the letter prefix, because they realized
just how unlikely it would be to get two rifles with the same number, let
alone two rifles with the same number and same letter prefix (which is
what it seems Purvis is suggesting).
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=112...
>
> C2766 was in carton number 3376:
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=112...
>
> > ("Changed to Beretta Terni M91/38 EFF")
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=112...
>
> BTW, why is one of the serial numbers on box #18 blacked out?
Likely because you can`t erase pen. There are 25 serial numbers
represented for that box.
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=112...
>
> It appears that 2766 was in box 25 (unfortunately Rex scanned that page
> upside down).
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=112...>> He ordered a worn out Long Rifle which had been cut down to a 36-inch
Bud
That isn`t a requirement. Only that the person who wrote that thought it
was identifier for the weapons they were to receive.
> *First off, the arms manufacturer BERETTA made all of the Carcano's.
> The "Terni"; Brescia; Gardone: etc; etc; etc; merely references the
> name of the city in which the Beretta Plant which produced the weapon
> was located.
>
> The main Beretta Arms Plant was located at Gardone,/aka Gardone Val
> Trompia, the home of the Beretta familyl.
> This happens to be the ONLY plant which was allowed to stamp the word
> "BERETTA" on those weaons which it manufactured, as it was a means of
> demonstration that this weapon came from the "true" Beretta home plant/
> aka the first plant to produce arms.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardone_Val_Trompia
>
> It is located in the Trompia valley. It is well-known for being the
> base of the major small arms manufacturer Fabbrica d'Armi Pietro
> Beretta.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Although reportedly produced at only three plants*,6.5mm Model 91/38
> Carcano's have been found with the following markings:
>
> 1. TERNI
> 2. RE TERNI (same plant as #1 above)
> 3. BRESCIA
> 4. FNA BRESCIA (same plant as #3 above)
> 5. BERETTA GARDONE
> 6. BERETTA (same plant as #5 above)
> 7. GARDONE VAL TROMPIA (apparantly same plant as #5 & #6 above)
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Now! In event that you and or Von Pein believe that Kleins's ordered
> ONLY "BERETTA TERNI" Carcano rifles, then good look finding one with
> that stamping.*
But the 91/24 did often have Terni stamped on them, and the 91/24 was
what Kleins had been previously ordering. Also, Klien`s had been getting
the carbine, which could explain why they refer to Oz`s C2766 91/38 as a
carbine when it isn`t. The folks writing these forms might not have had as
much knowledge about the history, stamping, model classification and
nomenclature of this foreign weapon as you have, and were just referring
to these weapons using terms they knew them by.
> *One would most probably have to make their own, as no such stamping
> ever existed.
>
> Furthermore, if one is stupid enough to believe that Klein's was so
> insistent in their order that they wanted ONLY Model 91/38's that were
> produced in the TERNI factory, then one would most probably believe in
> the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy as well.
>
> Lastly, in event that you want to know why Klein's ceased to order to
> Model 91/24 (junk) carbines which LHO ordered, and which Klein's
> paperwork demonstrates was sent to him, then ask and, provided that I
> am not having a "bad hair day", then I will also explain the reasoning
> behind the order change.
Probably because they were ordering these rifles for hunting rifles, and
the 91/24 wasn`t accurate.
Brokedad
>
> > It is located in the Trompia valley. It is well-known for being the
> > base of the major small arms manufacturer Fabbrica d'Armi Pietro
> > Beretta.
>
> > �Although reportedly produced at only three plants*,6.5mm Model 91/38
> > Carcano's have been found with the following markings:
>
> > 1. �TERNI
> > 2. �RE TERNI (same plant as #1 above)
> > 3. �BRESCIA
> > 4. �FNA BRESCIA (same plant as #3 above)
> > 5. �BERETTA GARDONE
> > 6. �BERETTA (same plant as #5 above)
> > 7. �GARDONE VAL TROMPIA (apparantly same plant as #5 & #6 above)
>
>
> > Now! �In event that you and or Von Pein believe that Kleins's ordered
> > ONLY �"BERETTA TERNI" Carcano rifles, then good look finding one with
> > that stamping.*
>
> � But the 91/24 did often have Terni stamped on them, and the 91/24 was
> what Kleins had been previously ordering. Also, Klien`s had been getting
> the carbine, which could explain why they refer to Oz`s C2766 91/38 as a
> carbine when it isn`t. The folks writing these forms might not have had as
> much knowledge about the history, stamping, model classification and
> nomenclature of this foreign weapon as you have, and were just referring
> to these weapons using terms they knew them by.
>
> > *One would most probably have to make their own, as no such stamping
> > ever existed.
>
> > Furthermore, if one is stupid enough to believe that Klein's was so
> > insistent in their order that they wanted ONLY Model 91/38's that were
> > produced in the TERNI factory, then one would most probably believe in
> > the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy as well.
>
> > Lastly, in event that you want to know why Klein's ceased to order to
> > Model 91/24 (junk) carbines which LHO ordered, and which Klein's
> > paperwork demonstrates was sent to him, then ask and, provided that I
> > am not having a "bad hair day", then I will also explain the reasoning
> > behind the order change.
>
> � Probably because they were ordering these rifles for hunting rifles, and
> the 91/24 wasn`t accurate.
You come up with a lot of "probably" answers. Which are "Probably"
incorrect.
The Model 91/24's were blowing up.
Bud
You have evidence that Klein`s customers were complaining about
their rifles blowing up? Or do you think that is probably what
happened?
Anthony Marsh
Slight exaggeration. A few rifles have blown up, but not just 91/24s.
Also 91/38s.
Anthony Marsh
That is NOT what they were complaining about.