Follow us on Twitter

Podcasts - A Couple of Cold Ones -July 22, 2012

This episode the Top... oh wait. There is no Top 5 this week. We discuss why, along with conversations about why our dark Knight short will never be released, the shooting in Colorado, gun control, afros and dreadlocks, bat hate, our love for the members at Comic Con, and tweets and emails.

Tags: acoco, korey, carlyle, podcast, spill, spill.com, box office, top 5, movies, batman, dark knight, rises

283 Comments for A Couple of Cold Ones - July 22, 2012

July 27, 2012 at 9:42 AM, crazypants88 said ...

@OperaW

Well that's simply not true, vehicular homicide is not a term made up by me. Even if no one ever used a car as a murder weapon, the intent doesn't make people killed by cars any less dead.

Also I'm sure there are far more people who use knives with the intent to murder, so now we should ban all knives?
July 26, 2012 at 9:41 PM, said ...

give people access to guns and innocent people will be shot , give people access to knifes and innocent people will get stabbed , give people access to cars and innocent people will be run over. Sadly this is all apart of life and always has been ,but ask yourself will you really care about the poor people killed a year from now ? or will just forget about it as soon as something harsher happens?
July 26, 2012 at 7:49 PM, said ...

@ Crazypants. The one thing you are missing in your argument is intent. No one goes out with their car intending to kill anyone, yet the percentage of people intending to kill with a gun is far higher.
July 26, 2012 at 11:41 AM, crazypants88 said ...

@Leon

Yes I did, see I can argue like this too, oh wait that's not arguing is it? I don't think you'd take me seriously if I'd just say "gun control doesn't work, it's a fact" and left it at that? Then why shouldn't the same apply to you?

Seriously, I did give a real live example of an assault rifle used in self defense and I showed you examples of things that would have had to be, at one point, argued for without any precedence. The fact something lacks precedence does not invalidate that thing. If it did, then concepts like gay/women/black/etc rights would have been invalid at the day at their inception, since they would have no precedence and would only have hypothetical arguments for them.

And yes I compared car deaths to gun deaths as cars kill far more people than guns do, even in the US. Whether or not cars are designed to kill, like guns are, is irrelevant of the fact that they DO kill more people. Again appeals to ridicule seem to be your only form of tackling any argument I make, shame that my opinion of you as a reasonable person grows ever lower by each comment. And please spare me the snide comment about how my opinion means little to you, you're getting a bit a predictable.
July 26, 2012 at 7:58 AM, said ...

Man, I loved TDKR. Watched it twice now. When's the spoiler podcast coming out?
July 26, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Leon said ...

@ Crazypants - Um, no, you kinda didn't demonstrate that at all. What you DID do was compare a gun to a car without the leasr bit of irony or selfreflection.
July 26, 2012 at 5:16 AM, said ...

Awkward Silence @102:40ish
July 26, 2012 at 4:32 AM, said ...

About the spot for Comic Con next year, let's throw a spillio fund raisers or something!
July 26, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Rodrigo de Toni said ...

Terrorist(as defined by Oxford):a person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims.

So senseless killing by a guy that claimed to be the Joker doesn't qualify as terrorism, he needed to have terror as his goal not as side effect.
July 26, 2012 at 12:07 AM, VinnyLT said ...

Niggas never listen. SMH
July 26, 2012 at 12:06 AM, VinnyLT said ...

I was trying to talk to Korey but he was drunk as all fucking hell. But the bar next door to Hard Rock was giving out free drinks to people who could pass their tests of super hero comic book and movie and video game knowledge.
July 25, 2012 at 9:28 PM, said ...

TDKR wasn't epic? What....
July 25, 2012 at 8:40 PM, crazypants88 said ...

@Lucas

No I demonstrated that arguments can be hypothetical and still be valid, if they didn't, then at the inception of gay/black/women rights, they would have been invalid since, all argument for it would be hypothetical.
Also it's not the right to kill or maim, it's the right to self defense. Sure self defense can include killing or maiming but the vast majority of the time, no one get's hurt when guns are used in self defense.
And no you're at least so far not insulting.

And yes there definitely are other ways to defend yourself, martial arts and such but a gun will be far more effective. Also what if you're a disabled person or a senior citizen. These other means of defense are fine but they aren't as effective as a gun.

Again, I've never said that simply because of the simple fact you're armed you'll be immune from getting assaulted, merely that both scenarios given as equal, that in the one where you have a gun you have a better chance of successfully defending yourself as opposed to the one where you don't have a gun. If you're being held at gunpoint and you all of the sudden pull out your gun, you're most likely going to get shot, that doesn't mean than that guns as a self defense measure are invalid. I could easily use this same line of reasoning to say martial arts aren't valid form of defense (not that I'm arguing that, I'm merely showing how faulty this logic is). Say you're being held at knifepoint and you start using martial arts as self defense and you get stabbed, are martial arts then invalid form of defense? No, and the same applies to guns.

I don't know if you properly read my comment but the "it rarely kills anyone" means that either the act of displaying your gun is enough to send a would be assailant running or if it's shot it's often time a warning shot, meaning it's shot in the air, not at the person. But yeah there instances where a would be assailant is severly injured or even killed. If it's done in self defense than it to me is absolutely justified.

Sure the gun industry could very well be the way it is today to make money and not for self defense reasons and the same might apply to why the 2nd amendement is still more or less upheld. I just don't see how this has any relevance. Guns as a self defense measure stands or falls regardless of whether it's done purely for profit.

True the 2nd amendement is old but so is the bill of rights, the magna carta etc. The point of the 2nd amendement was to give citizens the means of defending themselves if the government became tyrannical and the fact that weapons have become more powerful and disparity of power between the state and the citizens has grown would make it more relevant not less. At least according to the rationale behind the 2nd amendement.
And yes I agree there are other solutions, other methods of self defense, but that doesn't mean you have to exclude the most effective method just because there are alternatives. Liberal gun laws don't bar you from using martial arts as a defense measure, restrictive gun laws can indeed bar you from using guns as a defense measure.

And I'm not really demanding a debate, more that if someone (namely Korey and Leon) is going to say factually wrong things and use fallacious logic than it's to be expected that they should at least try and defend they're views, not just brush them off like some people do (namely Leon)
And really, what misconceptions? Nothing I've said has been factually wrong, me citing places with liberal gun laws and strict gun laws have been true, you can look up the gun laws and crime rates in Mexico, Brazil, Thailand and Switzerland. Shouldn't it behove you to cite what it is I'm saying that's wrong and not just sort of insinuate it?
July 25, 2012 at 5:28 PM, said ...

And that is why I love you Korey. Because only you will tell me how full of shit I get at times.
July 25, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Army1601 said ...

One of the victims from the shooting was dating a guy from my Town, Markham, Ontario and lived here during the summer. She escaped death the same week when there was a shooting at the Eaton Center. But unfortunately, she lost her life. Kinda sad hearing about this, my heart and prayers go out to the boyfriend.
July 25, 2012 at 3:58 PM, said ...

When are you guys doing the podcast for the Dark Knight Rises spoiler discussion? Need something good to listen to while driving around town lol.
July 25, 2012 at 2:52 PM, said ...

Can't wait to hear this audio gold later tonight at work Korey and Leon! I can see from the comment section below that... never mind, I think Gothka13 had the correct idea. So, in my best Louis C.K. voice, here is me in a Catwoman costume, lol. All joking aside, I like the idea that on this website and others I can hear ideas that I may have not considered, I do not agree with, or that will grow me in a different direction.
July 25, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Jan said ...
July 25, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Lucas said ...

@ Crazypants
Did you just compare the Right to kill/maim somebody with Black/Women/Gay Rights?
I'm not sure if I read that right or if you did read your posts before sending them?
Please, I don't want to be insulting but try to put things in perspective a little.

Talking about self-defense,
You can still learn how to fight properly. There's dozens of defenses arts you can learn then teach to your love ones without risking it to backfire at their face or innocents people.
And at least if you're overpowered, the rapist/thief won't use your arm to put a hole in your body.

And about those 2 similars scénarios ?
Being armed can get you shot without having to be overpowered. That false impression of power will more likely get you to draw your gun out and award you a bullet when you would just have been mugged.

Also for the "it rarely kills anyone": Being Shot hurts like hell and if you don't end up a cripple you're in for MONTHS, sometimes years, of reeducation and additional suffering.

I don't own a Gun and I can't fight either, but I know that those Laws giving you the right to carry a double-edged sword are not maintained today to protect you. Gun Market is a Large, Serious & Lucrative business that worths Billions and the lives that are in line don't matter at this scale. (6000 Bullets bought on the net... SERIOUSLY)
We do not live in 1791 anymore. In remote areas where you have to protect yourself in the middle of the night because the Milice won't be here for your family if the Army shows up.
You have Tons of others solutions.
And right now you Demand a serious debate when all you have to offer is just misconceptions of reality and imaginary scenes where "if" gets too much vote in your reflexion.

But I suppose an internet connection is just like a gun, you have the right to use it while a lot people wish you wouldn’t.
July 25, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Damocles said ...

I see alot of people sighting how violence is lower in countries that have fewer gun control laws. You seem to be forgetting one very important thing... they are not american. People in the United States have a very specific mentality that is seen almost nowhere else in the world.

There is a feeling of self entiltement that it weakens a persons judgement. I have the RIGHT to do what I want and if you get in my way I have the RIGHT to everything. Most countries respect other people boundaries, most people in the U.S.A are just not mature enough to handle the responsibility of owning a gun. Most of the people are those who decry gun control, they are so obsessed with their RIGHTS that they forget about that others will have the same RIGHTS and may be even less mature then them. Get rich or die trying right?
July 25, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Jan said ...

And it's not about guns being legal. E.g. in Czech Republic you can posses a concealed weapon without stating a reason why, and the number of murder committed by a legally owned gun actually dropped in last decade.
July 25, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Jan said ...

Access to a weapon is 5%, being willing to murder someone is 95%. Especially since anything can be a weapon (vide quite recent knife stabbing in China).
July 25, 2012 at 11:30 AM, crazypants88 said ...

@Leon

Yeah, pretty much, it's supposed to let you see your conduct has been less than admirable and that people who once had fondness for you have had that fondness severly lowered. I know my opinion doesn't carry much weight for you, but I thought it was worth the risk of another snide comment, which in my opinion are starting to drop in quality.

Well, an item's purpose can be subjective, I mean cars weren't designed to kill, yet they kill far more people in the US than guns do.
Also the vast majority of self defense uses for guns never see the weapon fired and the rare times it does get fired it rarely kills anyone. So the purpose of the object is irrelevant, especially if by and large it doesn't accomplish that purpose.

Oh debate over? You were debating? You could've fooled me. Usually debating involves considering the opposition's arguments, not ignoring them and not use something as petty as their username against them.

If you're looking for real life examples of assault rifles used in self defense a 2 minute google search would have provided you with examples
Link: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2010/09/07/long-island-man-arrested-for...

Not that real life examples are needed, I mean obviously the abolition of slavery, women's suffrage, gay rights were invalid at the time of their inception, right? Because without real life examples one cannot argue for something.
Hey Leon, I invented this newfangled device called a hammer. What's that? No there are no real life examples of hammers being used as I was one who invented it. Oh well guess my invention is invalid then.....

Yeah it's a nonsensical argument to say the least. Which is seemingly an apt description for my experience with you, Leon.
July 25, 2012 at 11:12 AM, crazypants88 said ...

@Lucas

What half truths?
And yeah, Switzerland could very easily have a different culture when it comes to guns or that the reason their crime rates are lower is not caused by high gun ownership rates, but the fact remains that Switzerland shows that high gun ownership rates don't automatically cause high crime rates, thereby showing the assertion that it's the guns that cause these crime rates as being silly.
And I never claimed that by the simple fact that you carry a gun, you will be protected. Sure if an assailant get's the drop on you, then the fact you're armed isn't going to deflect bullets, no one's making that claim. But the fact remains given two almost identical scenarios, one where you're unarmed and one where you're unarmed, the one in which you're armed gives you the better chance of self defense.

And yes I fully admitted that in the confusion and terror, an armed civilian could have hurt an innocent bystander by accident. But many of the movie goers could easily identify the shooter, despite the chaos and despite the smoke, I don't see why it's so far fetched that one them could have at least injured the shooter and bought time for people that were injured or unfortunetly didn't make it.

Why can't I use stats from other countries?

I never insulted anyone, except maybe Leon but that was merely after I'd been nothig but decent to him and he had been nothing but insulting to me.

No, I will advocate using force against force. The iniation of force is wrong, but using force for self defense is fine, what else should you do? Let the robber rob you? The raper rape you? Let the murderer murder you? You can employ this tactic if you want to, but I will not.
July 25, 2012 at 9:53 AM, said ...

*Looks at the comment section* Okayyyy, walking away from the gun discussions. But I will talk about Batman.

Korey, take all the Batman nerd rage with a salt of grain. Remember, most of those people are just 15-year old's sitting behind a computer in their parents basement.

We all just want to have the last Dark Knight movie to be the best, just because all of us Batman geeks have wait for soooooo long to have our great Batman series. Remember the '90's Batman? Yeah, besides Tim Burton's one, it all kind of is embarrassing.

Batman Begins was not as big with everybody as it was in the geek community. I was in middle school, but didn't have my geek friends that age. That was the last movie my father took me to before he switched to Netflix. The Dark Knight exceeded everybody's expectations, even some of the geeks, and now we are just riding off from that high. Even my friend and I were discussing that the Dark Knight will always be the best, and that was before we saw the .

When I came out of the movie, I knew there were flaws, and yet, I still was crying, I was the only one who clapped when Bruce Wayne reveals his Batman suit, I was glad when my theories were right, I was shocked at the very end when a 'twist' was revealed. I was basically a six-year old in that theater who hadn't seen a movie at all before. It was only in the middle that I started to feel underwhelmed just a little bit, but as soon as Bruce climbed that wall, I was back to being that six-year old and pumping my fist in the air.

So, basically what I am saying is that, it's the movie that we deserved, but not the one that we need right now. No, wait, I fucked that line up. What I mean is that why so serious about your reviews? No, that one doesn't even make sense.

Fuck it, here's a picture of me in my costume. If nothing else, remember, not all of us nerds/geeks are like those sending others death threats and calling you a jerk.

Showing 25 out of 283 comments View All

Connect With Spill