USMC Winchester A5 Springfield Marine Mount Rifle in France 1917

[Mike D]

I understand what your argument is. But, WAS the A5/'03 combo used overseas during WWII?

Mike

[Kaliman]

But Steve, what if FRANCE is an acronym for a location in the United States ?

[cplnorton]

Back up a minute. Is all this over whether or not the A5 was sent/used overseas during the war?

Mike

Not even that. Jim is saying this picture wasn't taken in France. I'm saying that picture was TAKEN IN FRANCE. That IS literally the argument. lol

I don't even want to try to argue with him on that rifle, or the fact it was used in France. lol That would be a nightmare to try to argue with him.

[Mike D]

Back up a minute. Is all this over whether or not the A5 was sent/used overseas during the war?

Mike

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

I agree. You don't have a clue as to what I am saying. Not a clue.



Note:
I tried to find that photographer in the US Census data with no luck. Maybe a little help with that exact location and date? Please advise.

[cplnorton]

This picture is missing it's critical bone fides of AEF origin - its AEF number and the accompanying dialog of name of photographer, when, where, and who therein. The weight of reasonable doubt is not only present, it is probable. No argument presented thus far refutes that statement.

Note:
More humor needed.

Jim, literally EVERY argument on why you say this pic wasn't taken in the FRANCE is answered on those tags.

Seriously guys I'm out of ideas on how to explain this too him. If anyone has any ideas on how to explain this to him I'm all ears, because I don't know how much more clear I can get than this.


Name of Photographer: Army Signal Corps


AEF number: Army Signal Corps 4337 and 4338


When: 1917


Where: FRANCE


Who: US MARINES

[cplnorton]

2) That it is missing its AEF number, lends credence to have been taken somewhere other than in France. No one has ANY documents that state this photograph was taken in France.

This picture is missing it's critical bone fides of AEF origin - its AEF number and the accompanying dialog of name of photographer, when, where, and who therein. The weight of reasonable doubt is not only present, it is probable. No argument presented thus far refutes that statement.

Ok I'm literally drawing arrows now on the pics, because you still claim there is no documentation that says this is in France, and there are no AEF Numbers.

So I'm trying to make this as clear as I can get.

The MARINES did not take this photograph. THE ARMY Signal Corps did. The ARMY signal Crops assigns their own number for pictures taken in the AEF. This picture has a AEF number for the ARMY Signal Corps.

ARMY AEF SIGNAL CORPS NUMBERS 4337 and 4338







AND Then the Photogrpaher was again the ARMY Singal Corps. AND under DESCRIPTION It says it was IN FRANCE. It SAYS it was taken in 1917.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Please don't plant that seed. Lol

It took me a minute to catch on to the humor in your response. Another good laugh!

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

He's honestly lost guys.

1) There is nothing in that pic that disqualifies it as being taken in the USA.

2) That it is missing its AEF number, lends credence to have been taken somewhere other than in France. No one has ANY documents that state this photograph was taken in France.

This picture is missing it's critical bone fides of AEF origin - its AEF number and the accompanying dialog of name of photographer, when, where, and who therein. The weight of reasonable doubt is not only present, it is probable. No argument presented thus far refutes that statement.

One of the pictures in the segment in question is a picture of the USMC publicity officer. This segment might have been targeted for a publicity piece for the Marines, and the photo in question provided by the Marines. Many questions with no answers.



Note:
More humor needed.

[Marine A5 Sniper Rifle]

Let's concentrate on identifying the grass. Is it American grass or French grass? Personally, I prefer Mexican grass, but that likely won't help solve this debate, or would it???

Mike

Thank you, Mike. I thought it was funny.

[cplnorton]

I'm honestly lost guys.

1) There is nothing in that pic that disqualifies it as being taken in France.

2) Jim doesn't have ANY documents that state this photograph was taken in the states. His only evidence he has provided says "Marines in France."


So on what grounds do you even state this picture was not taken in France? Anyone else lost in this all? I can't even follow half of his arguments as they don't make sense.

[Smokeeaterpilot]

Let's concentrate on identifying the grass. Is it American grass or French grass? Personally, I prefer Mexican grass, but that likely won't help solve this debate, or would it???

Mike

Please don't plant that seed. Lol

[Mike D]

Let's concentrate on identifying the grass. Is it American grass or French grass? Personally, I prefer Mexican grass, but that likely won't help solve this debate, or would it???

Mike

[cplnorton]

We are down to two photos, one with no AEF number and one with an AEF number. The problem didn't go away. The photo with no AEF number had to precede the one without an AEF number.

I honestly don't know what you are talking about here. Both photos have TWO numbers. So what do you even mean?

[cplnorton]

If you have anything in the photo that can qualify this as actually taken in France, or if you have any actual documents that detail this as being taken in France, please provide it. Otherwise, all you are doing is speculating.

1) Marines wore those exact Marine Unfiorms with Campaign Covers and leggings early on in France. Marines also lived in those exact tents early on in France. And I can document those rifles in France. So there is nothing in that photo that says that it couldn't have been taken in France.

2) Literally EVERY document says it was taken in France.


You keep on saying it's not taken in France, but I can't follow any of your explanations on why you think that.