if like me you frequent jfk videos on youtube or elsewhere where people can make comments or post ,well then you will see many comments about a knoll shooter , or lack there of. the most often used comment by what i call lone nut advocates (or LN for short ) is that IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR WITNESS TO HAVE SEEN A PUFF OF SMOKE UNDER THE TREES AT THE KNOLL .they add to that claim their reason , and here it is . ANY SHOOTER UP THERE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN FIRING A CIVIL WAR MUSKET , AS MODERN GUN POWDER IS SMOKELES . now of course we all understand the difference between smokeLESS and no smoke at all .however it seems that LN just cant grasp it . but rifles of ww2 era such as a manlicher carcano or mauser certainly did have a plume of smoke that was / is easily visible even from distance . LETS SEE THE PROOF . but before we do i would like to thank my frend heavensfellen for providing the following video
but our lone nut friends have known for a long time that rifles and ammo of that era DID INDEED SMOKE sufficient for people to see a quite clear plume of smoke .how dod i know that ? well a weapons expert testified to it .
Mr. EDGAR. When the assassination occurred, many people in Dealey said they saw puffs of smoke coming from the direction of the grassy knoll. Do rifles or handguns emit smoke that is discernable to the human eye? Mr. LUTZ. Yes, sir; they do. Mr. EDGAR. Does that particular rifle emit any smoke when it is fired? Mr. LUTZ. During the test firings, I did not make observations concerning this particular rifle. I believe Mr. Bates may have some data on that that he could give you, sir. Mr. EDGAR. Mr. Bates. Mr. BATES. During the test firing, even though we were firing at the cotton box and the water recovery tank from a very short distance, it was possible to observe some smoke emitting from the muzzle of the weapon. Mr. EDGAR. This is going to be difficult. Can you describe what the smoke looked like? I mean it is not billowy smoke and--- Mr. BATES. No; it appeared as a very thin haze of a light or whitish type of smoke. It was very difficult to evaluate the quantity of smoke emitted during our firing, especially when using the cotton bullet-recovery box. This was due to the muzzle of the rifle being held in close proximity to the front of the box. As the rifle was fired, the expansion of the propellent gasses forced cotton to blow out of the box, partially obscuring some of the smoke. Mr. EDGAR. From the experience of the panel members, if a gun similar to this particular weapon were fired out of doors, would the smoke emanating from this type of a rifle exhibit more or less smoke than a lighted cigarette? Mr. BATES. Possibly similar. Mr. LUTZ. Possibly I could assist somewhat in that. I have fired a rifle of the same dimensions as the ones that was in the photographic display that I had. I observed, or I had another person fire it while I was observing, in bright sunlight. I found not a puff of smoke but the gray smoke in an outdoor condition being expelled from the front of the muzzle during firing of the same type of ammunition, and then I used some Italian surplus ammunition and some Swedish commercial ammunition, each of them given a considerable amount of smoke. It could be readily detected as a result of being fired from a similar rifle.