Mr. Frazier. Yes, that's right.
Mr. Eisenberg. Would you characterize these errors as material?
Mr. Frazier. No, sir; I would not—unless you began shooting at distances well beyond your sighting-in point—then the amount of variation increases very rapidly.
Mr. Eisenberg. What would be the usual minimum distance you use for sighting-in a weapon such as Exhibit 139?
Mr. Frazier. It would vary from place to place depending upon shooting conditions, and I would say it would seldom be sighted-in for less than 150 or 200 yards.
Mr. Eisenberg. So that if the shots involved in the assassination were fired at 175 feet and 265 feet respectively, they would be shorter than the sighting-in distance and therefore not materially affected by the trajectory characteristics, is that correct?
Mr. Frazier. That is correct, yes.
Mr. Eisenberg. Now, based upon the characteristics of Exhibit 139, and the ammunition it employs, and based upon your experience with the weapon, would you consider it to have been a good choice for the commission of a crime such as the assassination?
Mr. Frazier. Yes, sir; I would.
Mr. Eisenberg. Can you explain that?