Debating about LHO marksmanship is a red herring.
A 'red herring' is a logical fallacy where a change of subject is introduced. Since we were previously talking about other issues, the only one changing the subject here is you.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html
Description of Red Herring
A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:
1.Topic A is under discussion.
2.Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
3.Topic A is abandoned.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.
The WC never established that LHO ever brought a rifle to the TSBD.
They established Oswald's MC rifle was discovered there 45 minutes after the shooting. Since when is it necessary to establish how it got it? This is misdirection of the finest kind. Name one other shooting where it was incumbent on the prosecution to establish that the accused brought the weapon to the crime scene.
Did the prosecution have to establish Hinckley brought his handgun to the scene of the Reagan attempt? How about Sara Jane Moore or Lynette Fromme's attempts on Ford?
This is a silly argument and shows how barren your arguments are. You can't argue it's not his weapon, so you must argue someone else brought his weapon to the crime scene and he didn't.
First, let's look at the evidence it was his weapon:
There's an order form that was determined to be in his handwriting for the order of a rifle from Kleins.
There's a money order that was determined to be in his handwriting to pay for the rifle.
There's business paperwork at Kleins indicating a specific rifle - bearing the serial number C2766 - was shipped to the PO Box owned by Oswald.
There's a palmprint on the weapon determined to be Oswald's.
There's fingerprints on the trigger guard determined to be Oswald's.
There's photographs of him in possession of this weapon.
Taken together, that evidence indicates Oswald ordered, paid for, owned and possessed that rifle. It was, and this is beyond dispute (although you will attempt to dispute this too), Oswald's rifle that was found on the sixth floor.
Separate from that, there's evidence his weapon was used in the assassination.
Three shells traceable to that weapon were found at the sixth floor south-east corner "Sniper's Nest" window.
Two large fragments - most likely from the head shot - traceable to that weapon were found in the limo after the assassination.
A nearly whole bullet - mostly likely the bullet that went through JFK and struck Connally - traceable to that weapon was found in Parkland hospital after the assassination.
There's testimony that indicates it was normally hidden in the Paine garage wrapped within a blanket.
There's testimony indicating Oswald brought a long package to work that day (From Frazier and his sister) and there's evidence Oswald lied in custody about bringing a long package to work that day (he claimed he didn't, and that Frazier must have been mistaken about that).
A long package was found at the depository near the sniper's nest window bearing Oswald's prints that was long enough to contain his disassembled weapon. The package was made in the recent past few days from paper normally used at the depository to prepare books for shipment.
I am curious how you explain all this away, not least about Oswald lying in custody about bringing a long package to work that day.
The only person who could provide first hand observation of Oswald walking into the TSBD that morning was Wesley Frazier and he flat out described the package that LHO carried and it was not capable of containing the broken down Mannlicher Carcano.
You've already seen the quotes; Frazier said he wasn't paying attention and it was only an estimate.
So on the one hand we've got all that evidence Oswald brought a long package to work long enough to contain HIS rifle which was found on the sixth floor (and then lied about it!); and on the other hand, we've got a couple of witnesses who estimated the length of the package as about two feet (it was actually closer to three feet).
I know what I find most reasonable here. I'd loved to hear your scenario.
I'd really love for you to marshall the evidence that can overturn the obvious and reasonable conclusion that the two witnesses estimates were incorrect, and then show all the evidence that there was anyone else on the face of the earth living at that time that fit this criteria:
(a) Knowledge that Oswald owned a rifle
(b) Knowledge that the rifle was hidden in the Paine garage wrapped in a blanket
(c) Access to the Paine garage
(d) Access to the Depository.
So far, I've come up with one name that fits all four criteria:
Lee Harvey Oswald.
Your additions (and the evidence for those additional names) are invited.
But absent any additions, then the evidence eliminates everyone else and leaves only Oswald as the person who had the knowledge and the access necessary to get the gun from its normal hiding place and transport it to the depository.
Hank
Well, let's see where the goalposts go...