The Walking Dead.

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Roadie

    Modus InHiatus
    Rating - 100%
    17   0   0
    Feb 20, 2009
    9,775
    63
    Beech Grove
    If only Glen had had one of these..

    55DA5BA-2_large.jpeg
     

    dusty88

    Master
    Local Business Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Aug 11, 2014
    3,179
    83
    United States
    Exactly, she doesn't understand what type of violence the group is capable of. There was a guy who was talking about how far the group progressed, and how they've become EXACTLY like the first villain of the show, Shane. Shane was the first to understand the world they lived in, and how to survive. Remember how horrified the group was of Shane's actions? How many of them would bat an eye now, if Shane had killed that young guy who he took to the woods? The group is essentially a bunch of Shane clones.

    I disagree about the "Shane" comparison. The way the group has changed, they would have agreed to kill the young man who had been shooting at them. However, Shane did a lot more than that.

    The rest of the group generally doesn't go behind the others' back. Carol did once, and it was a source of trouble.

    Shane was going to kill a group member JUST to have another man's wife to himself.

    And no one in that group has done anything comparable to Shane's shooting of Otis. They've saved each other, they've sometimes tried to save people they don't know, and they've thrown some enemies to the walkers. But they've never double-crossed someone who was helping them.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    I disagree about the "Shane" comparison. The way the group has changed, they would have agreed to kill the young man who had been shooting at them. However, Shane did a lot more than that.

    The rest of the group generally doesn't go behind the others' back. Carol did once, and it was a source of trouble.

    Shane was going to kill a group member JUST to have another man's wife to himself.

    And no one in that group has done anything comparable to Shane's shooting of Otis. They've saved each other, they've sometimes tried to save people they don't know, and they've thrown some enemies to the walkers. But they've never double-crossed someone who was helping them.

    Well, ill give you Shane potentially killing Rick, but (and I'm putting my flame suit on) the killing of Otis was completely justified. Shane killed Otis because he had to. Go back and watch that episode. After Shane goes gimp, he TELLS Otis to leave him. Otis refuses. So there are a few choices, die with Otis, and thus condemn Carl to die as well or kill Otis and save himself and Carl. Shane only knows his mind, which is if Otis gets caught by the walkers, Shane will be like "oh well." Otis on the other hand may have tried to save Shane, a get himself eaten in the process. Shane went with what he knew, himself. I think he made the right call.
     

    printcraft

    INGO Clown
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Feb 14, 2008
    39,728
    113
    Uranus
    I say ol' chap... I don't recall that?

    Unless he is talking about the lead inmate that gave the other inmate a beatdown with the hammer after he was stabbed in the back by the zombie.

    That guy was reaching for a gun to kill Rick right after he threw a walker at him and Rick split his wig with a machete.
     

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    95,233
    113
    Merrillville
    I disagree about the "Shane" comparison. The way the group has changed, they would have agreed to kill the young man who had been shooting at them. However, Shane did a lot more than that.

    The rest of the group generally doesn't go behind the others' back. Carol did once, and it was a source of trouble.

    Shane was going to kill a group member JUST to have another man's wife to himself.

    And no one in that group has done anything comparable to Shane's shooting of Otis. They've saved each other, they've sometimes tried to save people they don't know, and they've thrown some enemies to the walkers. But they've never double-crossed someone who was helping them.
    O agree that the Shane comparison is incorrect.
    Shane was all about Shane - Shane - Shane.
    Everyone else was incidental.
     

    jbombelli

    ITG Certified
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    May 17, 2008
    13,057
    113
    Brownsburg, IN
    Reaching for what?

    [video=youtube;sCUglQCkkpE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCUglQCkkpE[/video]

    That wasn't a double cross. That was killing the guy who asked for it by throwing a walker at Rick and then just stood there underestimating him.

    Double cross implies a certain level of trust that was not there.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Top Bottom