spoiler alert r.i.p. buddy. .. Shane was a asshole, he killed Otis, Randal and almost killed Rick, he had no heart. spoiler alert r i p buddy Shane was a asshole he killed Otis Randal and almost Rick had no heart
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (7)
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
#1 - rolldubs
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(03/12/2012) [-]
Shane was a ******* asshole, he killed Otis, Randal and almost killed Rick, he had no heart.
#2 to #1 - notasexoffender [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/12/2012) [-]
i completely agree with that, but at the same time, that's the world they're in. and shane, and maybe daryl are the only ones ready and reshaped to live in it. it goes back to how man used to be, animals, eliminating a threat in order to survive. there's no more good, or bad, right, and wrong. its survival. and rick couldn't even kill dave while he was suffering because he was alive.
User avatar #4 to #2 - audiotune
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/12/2012) [-]
So you are justifying him killing good people? Rick was going to kill Dale, but Daryl basically pushed him aside. Just because the world went to **** doesn't mean you have to as well...especially with your own people. Could you take your best friend into the woods and kill him for a petty reason? That's exactly what Shane was doing...it wasn't to "help the group", he has been selfish the entire time. He only wants Laurie, Carl and the unborn child. He's made that fairly obvious, I feel like he could give a rat's ass about the rest of the group, hence him killing Otis and threatening Dale and Hershel.
#5 to #4 - notasexoffender [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/12/2012) [-]
the fact he was going to kill rick, for the third time especially pisses me off. and i didn't say it wasn't but he thinks for survival. if it came down to it, he'd kill everyone in the group, excepr lourie and carl if that's what it took to survive. and i saw otis as an eye for an eye. he shot carl, and if shane didn't get back 3 people would die. but if he shot otis, only 1 did, so he was saving 2 lives by killing a third one that would have died anyways
User avatar #6 to #5 - audiotune
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/13/2012) [-]
But the point is he is killing people a majority of the time that do not need to die. He tried to kill Rick and for what reason? Because he was in the way? He threatened Dale, because he was meddling in business that wasn't his? He completely disregards Hershel, who allowed them all to stay on his property which was a huge risk mind you because what stopped all of these new people on his land from killing his family? The Otis situation, if they kept walking away from the walkers, they would have been fine. If the didn't turn around every 2 steps to shoot a single walker out of 50, they would have made it. Otis didn't NEED to die to ensure Carl would stay alive. There was another way to handle the situation, just as there is in every single other case that involves Shane. He chooses to take the more aggressive, and generally rash, way to handle things. And if you remember at the CDC building, Shane tried to rape Laurie. What kind of reasonable and sane man would try to rape his best friends wife? What kind of reasonable man would hook up with his best friends wife after his "death", find out he isn't dead and continue to try to take the role of the man in her life? None of that is for survival; he is purely looking at his best interest, being selfish, which hurts the group. And just for a philosophical counter, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
#7 to #6 - notasexoffender [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/14/2012) [-]
otis, no they wouldn't have. he had a leg injury, and needed otis down to distract them, saving 2 of the 3 lives that would have been lost
dale was being a risk by hiding the guns, and hershel needed to realize the walkers are dangerous, and shane did the right thing to take them all out. and now hershel realizes this. he needed too.
but i do admit him trying to kill rick pisses me off. the only part of his actions that pissed me off. the best way i can describe why shane's thinking is logical is this: if a bear kills you for getting to close to it or its cubs, even if you are trying to feed it, its not mean, or nice, or good, or evil. it feels threatened, and eliminates the treat. it's nature, and survival.
#3 to #2 - rolldubs
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(03/12/2012) [-]
Good point good sir, a sub for you