I can certainly understand how this may rub people the wrong way, but I think its gone a bit over the top.
The cards existence doesn't bother me and it would proudly be the centerpiece of my collection if I were to pull it.
That being said, I still can't bring myself to purchase a Leaf product.

Howdy,

Tone is a difficult thing for me to put across on a forum.

I don't appreciate the card and others do, I don't understand there view point but I accept it.

Not falling out with anyone because I enjoy reading every members posts and writing responses for them.

TTFN

My tone is easy to read. I have said this in other places, the card is sick. Gray is on record stating that some parts of the leather interior he bought still has blood stains. This is gimmicky attention seeking ****. The whole idea is to outrage some folks and get publicity. Thats the main reason I have kept my mouth (mostly) shut about it for the last two months. Don't feed the beast. This takes cards to an unhealthy and disturbing low.

With this type of hodge podge product, there are always going to be 3 or 4 autograph cards that a collector might like to have. That is besides those handful of cut signatures that you know it takes a miracle to find.

But if you buy blind packs or boxes, the most likely outcome is that you will pull signatures of people you barely heard of or don't like at all. The average autograph is going to be worth a whole lot less than the price of the pack.

That's just how it works and its the reason why I stay away from these lottery lures now. I have been burned before with 1/1 autograph cards of people that only their mothers could love.

The Kennedy/Oswald card is a gimmick that smacks of desparation for publicity. If that's the best idea Leaf has to drum up business for this product they are in trouble.

quote:

Originally posted by Sci-FiPlanet:
My tone is easy to read. I have said this in other places, the card is sick

Time erases emotions. If this was a card with a relic of Lord Nelson's coat from when he died, cool. If it was from a WW1 soldier, cool. WW2 is quickly becoming ancient. You want a bayonet wielded by a Hitler youth... cool. Someday, we will be talking about authentic 9/11 relics.

the trouble is,that they are together,if the set had both auto's on seperate cards it would be completely different.

Someone at work once asked me if I remembered where I was when I heard JFK had been shot. Puzzled, I did a wiki search and discovered he had been assassinated ten years before even my older brother was born. (Ouch!)

Seriously, we are coming up to the 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination, and I'm not sure why they didn't hold the card until then. Maybe they are planning another one for later?...

I also wonder why they didn't make it a triple sig. with Jack Ruby? I guess you have to be about 70 though to remember why any of these people were independently significant--younger folks just get it from movies which would lead you to believe that JFK and Mr. Oswald were both innocents.

Off board, I mentioned to someone that I don't recall this kind of opposition when Breygent made a Marilyn Monroe hair card--which was supposed to have contained hair taken from her body after she had died. The card was clearly labelled as having hair taken by her embalmer. I almost bought one to add to my collection as a conversation piece. I suspect this card will end up as something similair for someone. I can see the offence though. If it was Princess Diana being featured along side a piece of bloody seat, I might feel upset by it. (Oh, I saw an infomercial that was selling commemorative coins featuring gold or silver recovered from the site of ground zero after the 9/11 attacks. Guess this happens in other hobbies too).

--Chris

quote:

Originally posted by collector of things:
(Oh, I saw an infomercial that was selling commemorative coins featuring gold or silver recovered from the site of ground zero after the 9/11 attacks. Guess this happens in other hobbies too).

--Chris

Well said. If the offense is the exact content of the card, then I don't know what to say. Anyone offended that it has a piece of the car should be offended simply that JFK's and Oswald's autos are in close proximity. The offense should be profiteering from a terrible event. And, as I said before, time erases emotion. Titanic... I wish I had a piece of that ship.

Yep, 1500 people died, but if they released a set of cards with relics from the Titanic I would collect them in a heartbeat.

Owning this card is owning a piece of history. Simply put. If they made a John Wilks Booth / Lincoln card, I would think that is an amazingly cool card too. Whether you like it or not, Oswald is now a part of history. He is an awful dirty part of history, but its not like we can just overlook and forget what he did. This card is a conversation piece, and I could care less what kind of publicity it gets Leaf (although if that was the plan, I have not heard anything other than on this forum and a sports forum of people being angry by it, so it isn't really drumming up much press) it would be something that I would hold onto forever, because getting those three elements onto a card, or framed into a display piece might never be able to be done again.

Were you angry when they put Kennedy and Marilyn Monroe on a cut autograph card together and basically celebrated an alleged affair between the President of our country and a hollywood star? I don't really find that bad at all.

quote:

Originally posted by TheMetatrOn:
Were you angry when they put Kennedy and Marilyn Monroe on a cut autograph card together and basically celebrated an alleged affair between the President of our country and a hollywood star? I don't really find that bad at all.

Similarly, look at the upcoming Horrors of War set from Famous Fabrics. I am CERTAIN they are going to receive tons of hate mail for daring to put Hitler and Mussolini autographs on trading cards.

I dont really know where I come down on this whole issue. I dont see anything wrong with putting Oswald and Kennedy's autos together on the same card. It would be an odd piece in my collection but I would still keep it. The real issue I have with the cards is cutting up a piece of history to put it on the card in the first place. When they cut up letters and other things from Kennedy, Lincoln, Washington, Beethoven and other they are destroying our shared history. Why not just make it a redemption card for the whole item instead of cutting it up. What happened to the rest of what ever they took Oswald and Kennedy's autos from?

quote:

Originally posted by Nicnac:
Similarly, look at the upcoming Horrors of War set from Famous Fabrics. I am CERTAIN they are going to receive tons of hate mail for daring to put Hitler and Mussolini autographs on trading cards.

I assume they will receive some complaints for putting the communist leader/nazi party members/etc. signatures on cards, however I don't think it will be that big of an issue- not as controversial as this card could be. My thought is that these are two separate products = two different target audiences and two different themes. Horrors of War is about historical value, Pop Century is all about celebrities. As I see it, Famous Fabrics is creating a set showing both sides of the war (the heroes, and the villains) so it's not glorifying these individuals- they're just 'major players' in the story. Pop Century is just a hodge podge of famous entertainers and pseudo famous people.

I know the point of this card is to drum up interest in the company/product, but I have three more points:
a.) I don't think this will have nearly the press coverage that the Allen Ginter Castro card created


b.) I hope this card is 1. actually produced, and 2. makes it into the collecting community
c.) I'm not even sure if I'm going to open the product, but if I were to pull this piece I know exactly what I'd do.
-send the card off for third party authentication
-have the card professionally framed by company who specializes in preservation techniques
-decide whether to keep the card, put it up for auction (not ebay) or try and have it loaned to a museum (more for insurance than anything else)- probably the latter of the three.


I have more I'd like to say, however as someone who is selling this product- I feel it's best not to bad mouth it that much. I've sold 4 cases worth and when I get rid of this final one I may speak my mind.

I was actually watching the t v film Ruby and Oswald with Michael Learner and Fredrick Forest this time 2 nights ago on the true movies channel

i m all for these memorbeilia cards
i was watching someone on youtube breaking a box of topps american heritage,in the first pack he had Clara Bow and Duke Ellington,and later had a memrobeilia card of pope john paul and a piece of the yankee stadium wall,how does that fit ?
but (no offence) with these pop century, the material cards are a drag,material worn, but no info where ? why ? or when ?

anyway back to the controversial card,what does everyone think of Charlie Sheen signing

quote:

Originally posted by cheifbrody:
anyway back to the controversial card,what does everyone think of Charlie Sheen signing

"Winning!"

quote:

Originally posted by Nicnac:

Time erases emotions.

To an extent this is true, but more accurately I think you could say time allows us to look back on events with a wider and more pragmatic view. I would argue however that the passage of time isn't and shouldn't be an automatic dilution of morality and ethics.

quote:

Originally posted by Nicnac:

If this was a card with a relic of Lord Nelson's coat from when he died, cool. If it was from a WW1 soldier, cool.

You see this morbidity loses me why when he died? Wouldn't a relic of Nelson be just as fascinating if the man had not died in it?

quote:

Originally posted by Nicnac:

WW2 is quickly becoming ancient. You want a bayonet wielded by a Hitler youth... cool. Someday, we will be talking about authentic 9/11 relics.

Tons of Nazi memorabilia from bayonets to badges and medals have been copied to feed the collectable market, and it's been that way for a few decades now, military collectables have been around for a long time but your comparing several different fields at once to justify what is at it's hart a selection of cut up historical artefacts mounted on card.

Lets follow your example: A Hitler Youth Bayonet, interesting collectable in it's own right perhaps. Now lets have it mounted with a signature of a Jew it was used to kill and perhaps some of his blood stained shirt... you see the point at which this crossed the line? The ingredients are not all bad in themselves (the car leather is IMO) but when you put them TOGETHER you have something offensive.

Again I have no problem with a JFK autograph, or even a LHO signature, they are both historically important figures, putting them together however is in in very poor taste.

Remember that Kennedy was the victim of a crime, he was murdered no matter how long ago, and someone thinks it's funny and neat to place the killer and his victims autographs together along with a blood stained portion of the death car? Sorry to me that crosses a line and I feel darkens our industry. How long before we have a Columbine High card set with signatures from Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold mounted with a spent shell casing...

quote:

Originally posted by Sci-FiPlanet:
To an extent this is true, but more accurately I think you could say time allows us to look back on events with a wider and more pragmatic view. I would argue however that the passage of time isn't and shouldn't be an automatic dilution of morality and ethics.

This depends on how much time we are talking about. A blood stained relic from the time of Napoleon is unlikely to inspire disgust on a personal level as much as a card from our living memory would.

quote:

Originally posted by Sci-FiPlanet:
You see this morbidity loses me why when he died? Wouldn't a relic of Nelson be just as fascinating if the man had not died in it?

We have, and we always will be fascinated by the lives AND deaths of famous people. I saw an episode of The Mentalist once that claimed there was a select group of collectors, mostly based in and around Hollywood that seeks memorabilia of the death vehicles of famous celebrities. One of the key scenes was a bunch of wealthy fops at someone's mansion bidding on a piece of the car that James Dean died in. They may have also mentioned parts of a plane that some actor died in (I don't remember clearly). The truly disgusting thing about this, was that the metal was worked into modern sculpture. So, you had an art piece from a vehicle that someone died in (seen in a smaller scale on the commemorative coins made from gold from the World Trade Center). The truth is, Titanic would not be so interesting if not or the utter disaster it was in the human toll. It's one level of morbid fascination to own a piece of rusty hull. It's another to own a shoe from the wreck.

quote:

Originally posted by Sci-FiPlanet:Lets follow your example: A Hitler Youth Bayonet, interesting collectable in it's own right perhaps. Now lets have it mounted with a signature of a Jew it was used to kill and perhaps some of his blood stained shirt... you see the point at which this crossed the line? The ingredients are not all bad in themselves (the car leather is IMO) but when you put them TOGETHER you have something offensive.

Well said. You will notice I have, at no time in my responses disagreed that this card is in terribly poor taste. In fact, I did mention that it is shameless profiteering from a terrible event. Still, I go back to my main point. Time really does erase emotion. I will add that distance erases it. Perhaps there will never be a time when it is okay to have a death relic from JFK for sale in a pop-market product. But, perhaps it would be okay, removed from the U.S. A piece of the toga Gandhi was wearing when he was assassinated: In poor taste but not emotionally offensive to many Americans. Again, I go back to a blood-stained article of clothing from the Napoleonic era. We are removed by so much time and distance, how could anyone be offended? Disgusted yes, but offended?

quote:

Originally posted by Sci-FiPlanet:
Remember that Kennedy was the victim of a crime, he was murdered no matter how long ago, and someone thinks it's funny and neat to place the killer and his victims autographs together along with a blood stained portion of the death car?

I don't think anyone has to find this product 'fun' to make this a terrible idea and one of incredibly poor taste. "It's neat" is perhaps the most damning accusation you can make of the publisher, and I can't disagree with you. It's business? I don't know.

I think that there are things people shouldn't collect. Not because they can't, and not because they might not want to, but just because they know they shouldn't. You can make a decent argument for a lot of things that you know are wrong. It still won't make it right, it just makes you feel better about doing it anyway.

This Kennedy/Oswald card is not the worst thing that ever happened, but it is very mean spirited and intentionally done just to break a taboo. Somebody at Leaf should be ashamed of themself.

As for 9-11 souveniors, I was in NY when the towers came down. I knew people who went down with them, everyone in the city knew someone, who knew someone that died that day. There is no such thing as a 9-11 souvenir.

Not now, not a 100 years from now. The Titanic was a natural disaster, there is a difference.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Raven,

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
You can make a decent argument for a lot of things that you know are wrong. It still won't make it right, it just makes you feel better about doing it anyway.

I wish you could see how your emotions are making you see things that are really not there. I don't like this card. I think it's disgusting that someone would think to profit from this (third time I will be saying this in this thread).

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
This Kennedy/Oswald card is not the worst thing that ever happened, but it is very mean spirited and intentionally done just to break a taboo. Somebody at Leaf should be ashamed of themself.

I agree. I will say it again. It's disgusting.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
As for 9-11 souveniors, I was in NY when the towers came down. I knew people who went down with them, everyone in the city knew someone, who knew someone that died that day.

I was in Oklahoma City when somebody decided to blow up his truck bomb underneath a daycare center in the Murrah Federal Building. If someone made a trading card of a brick from that building I would say it's disgusting. Offensive, even. 200 years from now it might still be disgusting but it might not be offensive. All I ask is that people see the difference.

Again, this JFK/Oswald/Car card is disgusting. How offensive it is depends on your age and your personal feeling toward the people involved in the event.

As an aside, DC just revealed a story arc for Superman comics. He is going to declare that he is renouncing his US citizenship because he is tired of being a tool for a militaristic US policy. Disgusting of DC? Perhaps. Offensive? Certainly. Will it be offensive in 200 years? Disgusting? No. Definitely no. Personally, when I read the news I chuckled wondering how badly DC is going to botch the story (if they are even allowed to go forward with it once Fox News gets a hold of the story).

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
There is no such thing as a 9-11 souvenir.

Sorry, but there are. There were souvenirs while the ground was still smoking. Cabinet members of the last presidency diverted twisted metal pieces for personal mementos for their offices. More public, there have been these late night infomercials selling 'commemorative' coins for some new warship in the U.S. Navy (USS New York), the ship itself made from steel from the remains of the world trade center, and the coins made from gold and silver recovered from the world trade center. The infomercial tells you how it would actually be patriotic for you to buy these, only 19.95 plus S&H, limit 5.

Disgusting? Yes. Offensive? Yes. In 200 years, who knows.

Hate to say it but It is just like the Dom Deluise Stargate Autograph card before his death the card was $30.00-$35.00 . After $75-$100 . That is just an example . Or O.J Simpson's Rookie card during his trial ect was selling fast for $250-$300 (now and before $25-$85). I personally do not agree with having both together . Thats like having a Bush and Suddam autographed card ( from todays time ).

quote:

Originally posted by Stargaterules:
Hate to say it but It is just like the Dom Deluise Stargate Autograph card before his death the card was $30.00-$35.00 . After $75-$100 . That is just an example . Or O.J Simpson's Rookie card during his trial ect was selling fast for $250-$300 (now and before $25-$85). I personally do not agree with having both together . Thats like having a Bush and Suddam autographed card ( from todays time ).

Leaf already made a George H.W. Bush & Saddam Hussein dual cut card. And an OJ Simpson & Kato Kaelin dual.As well as multiple Saddam/Tommy Franks duals.