I never said I could not acquire a target with a scope.
What I said is that it takes longer to acquire a target with a scope than it does with open sights.
We are talking 2.3 seconds to cycle a bolt, acquire the moving target, compensate for a scope that’s not zeroed in, and pull the trigger. At 88 yards a scope is not really needed. An 88 yard shot can be easily done with open sights and the target alignment with the sights is much faster.
And again, we are not talking about a guy that gets in lots of range time (Oswald), who was a minimal shooter to begin with, using a scope that was not properly zeroed.
I just got these results from a Bing search: Question: Was Oswald’s scope properly zeroed? Bings Answer: According to the FBI, Oswalds rifle scope was so misaligned that they had to place metal shims under the scope in order to be able to zero-in the rifle. And no shims were ever found among Oswalds possessions.
He supposedly got some range time in before the assassination. He then should have known the scope was off and how much to compensate for for so many yards.
Oswald was a minimal shooter, meaning he only scored the entry level of marksman in the Corp. He likely seldom went to the range to get used to handling weapons. He likely qualified in the Corp with the M1 Garand, which was a much better weapon than the Carano. Boot camp training of the era used man sized targets for qualifying. The assassination required hitting a target the size of a volley ball.
An experienced shooter, once he realized the scope could not be zeroed, would have thrown the damn scope away and used open sights, shimmed the scope or simply got a better rifle.
What I said is that a practice person with a properly set up scope.
Is as fast or faster the iron sights.
Just because you can not do does not mean cannot.