Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When I say "I believe" that's a qualifier; I am not asserting a FACT. So it' can't be a lie. If it's wrong, it's a mistake. If I had made an unequivocal statement that NRA donated $10,000 to Zimmerman's fund, then you could call me a liar. I didn't do that. I made a qualified statement, which certainly meant that it was my belief/opinion, not factual. Try learning something new today like what constitute a lie.
ANYWAY, my "belief" was wrong about it being NRA which was seeking to make the $10,000 donation; however, a gun group in Texas was in fact seeking to make a $10,000 donation. NRA simply decided to make money by providing a hoodie in its online store in re the hoodie worn by Martin. How silly of me to think NRA would give that money to Zimmerman. NRA just sought to make money off Martin's death.
Always good to follow up one lie with another. The NRA hoodies were released in 2011, before the Zimmerman/Martin shooting.
Quote:
The National Rifle Association was taking heat for selling a hooded sweatshirt with a hidden pocket for a gun. Some critics mistakenly believed the NRA started selling them after Trayvon’s death, but the $59.95 “concealed carry hooded sweatshirt” was introduced late last year.
Useless flame thread full of anti gun crowd harping on non-points or inaccuracies.....
Awesome... please close this.
I am not "anti gun"......I don't care how many guns you own. Your business as far as I'm concerned. I have no "delusions" that all the privately owned guns out there can be gathered up and taken away by the government.
So you call a thread full of recent information regarding the status of this case and Zimmerman's defense fund a "flame thread"....hmmmm....really?
Last edited by FancyFeast5000; 08-15-2012 at 08:35 AM..
You said "NRA hoodies".........was the concealed carry hoodie part of that 2011 release of hoodies? Is that why NRA posted "new" on the item? Did NRA attempt to deceive?
"It's not clear when the hoodie became available, but a red seal labeled "new" alerts visitors to the store that the sweatshirt is a relatively recent arrival." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1386128.html
Show us a reliable source which shows this hoodie was part of the 2011 release of hoodies and I'll gladly accept that as fact. Then the question becomes why did NRA label the item as "new"....
You, too, need a vocabulary refresher course regarding the word lie.
Last edited by FancyFeast5000; 08-15-2012 at 08:42 AM..
Reason: added link
You said "NRA hoodies".........was the concealed carry hoodie part of that 2011 release of hoodies? Is that why NRA posted "new" on the item? Did NRA attempt to deceive?
You, too, need a vocabulary refresher course regarding the word lie.
So a hoodie released for the 2011 holiday season can't have "New" on it still in Feb/March? Can you show us all your research into how long the NRA keeps "new" on their products?
Seriously, give it up. I've already proven you wrong. The article specifically says that hoodie was released in 2011. Just as you were proven wrong with your claim that the NRA gave him $10,000.
So a hoodie released for the 2011 holiday season can't have "New" on it still in Feb/March? Can you show us all your research into how long the NRA keeps "new" on their products?
Seriously, give it up. I've already proven you wrong. The article specifically says that hoodie was released in 2011. Just as you were proven wrong with your claim that the NRA gave him $10,000.
Don't have any research on how long NRA keeps a red label announing "new" on items. Do you? Certainly NRA was not trying to capitalize on the Trayvon Martin shooting..........they would never do something like that. MY OPINION of course.
However, I'm wondering how you got "holiday season release" from this quote from your link. Do you have a more specific source with more specific information?
"The National Rifle Association was taking heat for selling a hooded sweatshirt with a hidden pocket for a gun. Some critics mistakenly believed the NRA started selling them after Trayvon’s death, but the $59.95 “concealed carry hooded sweatshirt” was introduced late last year."
There is no way possible for Zimmerman to get away with murdering a minor. The donations where a temporary thing. They came from people (many where anti black racist) emotions not out of peoples hearts in support for Zimmerman as a person. The fact that Z's supporters where donating money before the facts of the case where released shows who it was coming from and shouldn't be a suprise to anyone that funding Z's case would be short lived. Regardless of what happens in court, George Zimmerman still has a price to pay for murdering a minor.
Apparently O'Mara is not as confident of the case being a slam dunk because of stand your ground laws as many posters here were/are.
"O'Mara also said Monday he believes that the facts that will be argued in the case fall more under traditional self-defense, not under Florida's "stand your ground" law, which allows people to use deadly force — rather than retreat — if they believe their lives are in danger."
Basically he is saying what I have said all along. This case is a slam dunk with standard self defense law. Someone cannot simply beat you without you having an opportunity to defend yourself wth deadly force if necessary. Zimmerman would get off in the most looniest of liberal states.
Throw in Stand your Ground and it's 100% he get's off after all folks have been known to miss slam dunks.
Basically he is saying what I have said all along. This case is a slam dunk with standard self defense law. Someone cannot simply beat you without you having an opportunity to defend yourself wth deadly force if necessary. Zimmerman would get off in the most looniest of liberal states.
Throw in Stand your Ground and it's 100% he get's off after all folks have been known to miss slam dunks.
O'Mara not definitely not saying it's a slam dunk case or even implying it's a slam dunk case. He's saying he has a better chance with self defense than SYG. With SYG the judge would have to believe and have confidence in Zimmerman's assertion that he was in fear for his life. Zimmerman and his wife have already proven their trustworthiness to the judge. O'Mara would have to put Zimmerman on the stand if he were putting all his "faith" in SYG. He will NOT put Zimmerman on the stand because that is an absolutely SURE WAY to have his immunity claim REJECTED. I'm thinking that O'Mara will not put Zimmerman on the stand in the trial either because Zimmerman has been proven a liar so many times now. O'Mara is putting the best face he can on this issue by saying he thinks he has a better self-defense case than SYG. He knows he has crap for a case either way. Zimmerman has worked overtime to get himself convicted!
What do you mean, "throw in SYG"? What is it you don't get about the fact that SYG will be dealt with in the immunity hearing. When the judge denies the SYG claim, then the case will go to trial before a jury. You said all along it was a clear SYG case and Zimmerman should not even be charged!
You change your "story" so often about what you've said and what you've supported in the past, I have no doubt that when Zimmerman is convicted you will come in and post that you thought and said all along he would be convicted. Seems your ego has not boundaries.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
NRA just sought to make money off Martin's death.
....they would never do something like that. MY OPINION of course. 
