The Path of a Pistol

 For some odd historical reason....both the JFK and RFK shootings fascinate me.....from various angles. 

A couple of years ago, I sat and asked myself....from the Sirhan Sirhan shooting of RFK....where did the pistol in question come from?  

So there's at least a hundred varieties of the story over the Iver Johnson .22 caliber revolver.

For the record, Iver Johnson is known for making weapons, motorcycles, and bikes. Yes, a rather odd grouping.

Oddly enough, you can show that three Presidents or potential Presidents....shot by one of their pistols (RFK, FDR and McKinley). 

This pistol that Sirhan Sirhan had? 

The original sale occurred in 1965....brand new....it was bought by a guy with the last name Hertz.....who owned a business in the region of Pasadena.  History records that there were riots in 1965, and this guy got all fearful of trouble....so he bought the pistol.  This period of ownership was short because his wife 'found' the gun (in some file cabinet or drawer of the business).  

Now, I should state this fact about Hertz....he was a WW II vet, retired Lt Col from the US Army, and had some kind of heart attack around this point of the 1965 riots.  (He was born in 1897)

The wife apparently wanted the pistol 'gone'.   You can interpret this in various ways.  

The wife gives the gun to her daughter.  History doesn't really record why she trusts the daughter over the husband.....it just happens that way.  My impression is that the daughter is at least mid-to-late 40s.

For whatever reason....the daughter really doesn't hold the weapon long.  She ends up giving (not selling) the gun to the next door neighbor.  

The neighbor, apparently within a short period of time....sells the gun, to a Mr. Munir Bishara Sirhan, the actual brother of Sirhan Sirhan.

Why the sale?  Well....basically, the neighbor had some kind of car problem and needed quick cash to finance the repair.  No one ever says the amount of money involved (this was 1966).  

For whatever reason....the brother loans the cheaply made gun over to Sirhan.  There's never much of a reason given

Had Sirhan ever fired the gun?  You can't find any documented evidence of this happening.  You would think that he knew something about pistols but no witnesses were ever brought up to say that.  

One odd thing, when you bring up 'trusting' the Iver Johnson 22 pistol....most owners and people who have fired it....will say that it's cheaply made.....prone for breakage, and not a great dependable weapon.  

History and Wilson

 History records that in the summer of 1919....the war is over and recovery is underway, and President Wilson fully intends to run in November 1920 for a third term as President.

It's not something that is openly discussed much by historians...because the 3rd campaign never happened.

Why the stroke?  This goes to an interesting problem he had....in getting the Treaty of Versailles passed by the Senate.  There was almost no clear discussion between Wilson and the Republicans in the Senate.  There was a two-member edge for the Republicans (49-47).  Remember....there's not fifty states in existence at this point.

The Republicans simply weren't buying into the Versailles Treaty business.  

Wilson decided in mid-summer of 1919....he had to get the Republicans bent over this treaty approval.  So a schedule was developed, and he was to tour the western part of the United States over an entire month.  

There were nine states with a split situation (1 x Republican and 1 x Democratic Senator).  His intention was to put public pressure on these Republicans in these states (California, Utah, Oregon, Idaho, Utah, Missouri, NM, Wyoming, and Nebraska).  

It was a rather warm year, and the trip via the train....with the constant travel and stress....triggered Wilson to arrive back in DC in mid-September....in a weakened state.  On 2 October....Wilson had a stroke.  From that point on, he would never be at the physical stamina level to accomplish anything.  For all practical purposes....Wilson allows his wife to run the meetings and everyone is led to believe 'any day now'....he'd recover (never the truth).

It takes about a hundred days for the Senators to realize the situation.  

No one willing to testify or swear of his poor health?  Well....this is the odd part of the story.  There's not a single person in the inner circle or cabinet who had the guts to make a public statement or swear to anything.

The election came in November 1920, and President Wilson quietly exited....dying in Feb 1924.  Physically, he never recovered.

Fixing or resolving the health concerns for the President?  People will say that the Constitution changed, but frankly....until you get the inner circle to react....no one will ever be removed because of ill health (mentally or physically).

Had Wilson never gone to this western tour in 1919?  Well....you can make the case that without the stress.....he would have been in decent health, run in 1920, and easily won the election.  Yes, he would have been President all the way to 1924.  

So history has a funny way of taking twists and turns.  

Just An Odd Thing About the Rittenhouse Case

 These three 'victims' that the prosecutor hypes over?

Well....individual number one, convicted felon (domestic abuse, assault and battery, illegal weapon possession, and false imprisonment).  Dead.

Individual number two, convicted felon (felony burglary, violated probation, illegal weapon possession).  He's still alive (at least presently).

Individual number three, convicted felon (sexual offenses, failure to maintain accurate record on sex offender record).  Dead.   To be honest, this goes to a Arizona episode, with 11 counts of child molestation.  An odd thing here about the end of this case, from the Arizona court.....they said the guy should be totally restricted from contact with anyone under the age of 18.  Rittenhouse?  He was seventeen at the time of the shooting.....so if this joker had just listened to the court and avoided contact....he'd be alive today.

Mention of the background here of the three by the prosecutor?  No.

If the jury knew of the past records?  Yes, it'd probably influence them to some degree.

So my question is.....if you went out that night and canvased the demonstration crowd (say around one-hundred people).....how many had felony records?  Just those three?  Ten-percent of the hundred?  Fifty-percent of the hundred? 

What's the magnet here?  Apparently, there aren't that many Lutherans, Boy Scouts, Mennonites, or former Army people with Silver Stars or Purple Hearts.  It just begs the question....what kind of characters are showing up?