Yes, Carl was right. As he said to Rick, the guy was part of the group that attacked the prison.

He was given an adequate chance to put down his gun. He was hesitant, so he really had no choice. I like the Hershel character but he overreacted to the incident.

 

I think he was right. They've been screwed over so many times I dont blame him.

 

I pretty much agree with this, and the Directors definitely created a situation for justification of the shooting by Carl, and for the audience to accept the shooting was justified.

The "kid" was told to put down is weapon and instead kept moving in closer to Carl. His weapon was out in front in a surrender position, but he was closing the distance to Carl that he could have attacked him hand to hand.

The kid looked scared, but he also looked a bit like he was thinking if he got close to Carl, he could take him.

 

Carl was justified in shooting the guy.

I prefer saying he was justified because saying he was right implies not shooting him would have been wrong. It's not such a neat dichotomy.

Carl ordered him to drop the weapon and the guy didn't. He claimed he was turning over the gun but he was inching toward Carl. Carl also said drop the gun, not give me the gun.

Note that they blocked that scene in a similar fashion to how they blocked the scene when Rick killed Shane. I think that was intentional. The guy could have been making a move.

Having said that, if it were be I'd have given the guy one last chance. Order him to stop where he is and drop the gun (not hand it over) and any hesitation I would have shot him. Then again, that might have given him the chance to murder me.

It's not a question of right and wrong. It's a question of acceptable risk and how much benefit of the doubt people get in the apocalypse.

 

Exactly. And when a person surrenders in war you drop your weapon and put up your hands, you don't behave in a threatening manner.

It's pretty hypocritcal too of Rick too. Shane actually did "stand down" in that field, and changed his mind, but Rick then surprised him by stabbing him.

 

Carl was right to shoot the kid.

The kid was part of an army that went to the prison with the intention of killing Carl's group. If any of them disagreed, they had a golden opportunity to say no when Tyreese stood up to the Governor.

Hershel told the kid to drop the gun. Instead of doing what Hershel ordered, the kid was approaching Carl and telling him to take the gun. The kid was going to grab Carl, and kill Hershel and Beth. And don't forget Carl's baby sister, Judith, was with them, you better believe Carl's going to protect her.

Rick and Hershel cleary believed if they defeated the Governor, they all could start living, and stop surviving. It's never going to be like that again.

 

Carl may look 18, but in many ways, he is still a child.

It's a fine balance between trusting and protecting him that must be maintained by Rick. So far, things don't look too promising.

As for whether Carl did the "right" thing... if you think he was motivated to protect people he love and thus, committed murder, most definitely right.

If motivated by ego and pride, maybe not.

 

I would like to point out where the dudes trigger finger is as he is "handing over his weapon". Clearly he was up to no good.

 

Can't see the image but I'd love to see this.

 

Fixed.

http://i.imgur.com/OmTikCZ.jpg

 

Going to play devil's advocate here, to a point

- Hershel, who was in position to see exactly what the kid was doing (and none of us were) when Carl shot the kid (remember the camera was on Carl for a couple of seconds before he fired), thinks Carl was wrong

- Rick asked Carl twice if the kid was handing over his gun - Carl wouldn't answer the question, he pins his decision on eliminating the kid because he could be a future threat, not because he was an immediate threat

All that said, I don't feel bad for the kid. He went into the prison, toting a shotgun, and if he had the chance he would have shot anybody at the prison. He was a combatant who took the risk of whatever might happen to him once he engaged in the assault.

Second, Carl, etc., are under no obligation to take prisoners. What do they do with the kid if he surrenders? That plan has never worked out well for this group. Take him as a prisoner now, then have to watch your back from now on? Let him go so he can rearm at some point and come back and attack again?

Third, though Carl couldn't know this, if the kid had gotten away with the rest of the Woodbury group, he's dead anyway.

On balance, based on the "evidence" that we have (Hershel and Carl's statements), Carl probably did gun the kid down when he wasn't an immediate threat. Your answer to this question as to whether you consider his action right or wrong, morally, might be a separate question of whether it was it a smart strategic decision, justifiable based on Carl's previous experiences.

Rick and just about everyone else in the ZA has had to violate their own moral code in this show. The question is whether Carl believes he violated his own moral code, and I am not sure he has one.

 

Thanks, it looks like imgur doesn't work anymore, I'll just photobucket it.

 

Bear in mind that Carl didn't shoot him at that point, but several seconds later. We really don't know what the kid was doing at the moment Carl actually shot him.

 

That's not the best image of it, but your point to bring up his trigger finger is a good one. From what I saw, his trigger finger is not ON the trigger, but it's also not far away. It's not straight and off the trigger, but curled in a way that the tip is only a few centimeters from the trigger. Drop the gun means drop the gun, son. Yeah he was probably scared. But drop the gun means drop the fu cking gun! Not, okay, let me slowly move towards you and think about this.

Main thing I thought Carl did wrong was tell his dad "he drew on us." Had he said "Naw pops, I told him to surrender and he kept moving towards me and not putting his shotgun down. It was kindof aimed at an angle towards us and he simply wouldn't put it down. He got too close, so I didn't take the chance. Especially with Judith right there. But I'm not being a cold hearted killer dad. Just did what had to be done." Yayyyy, no more silly threads about whether or not he was right.

 

Sure we do, he was walking towards him and not putting down the gun like he was told to do.

 

I watched the episode the first time and was uncertain if Carl should have shot the older kid.

I watched it again and have formed my opinion as a YES "drop the gun or die"

Even if the older kid just shot Carl and Herschel was able to shoot him after that, that doesn't do Carl much good.

 

He absolutely made the right call! That guy was too slow with dropping his weapon. Carl needed to protect his group...Herschel is lucky he did that. He also avoided another Randall situation which is a plus!

 

Yeah I was getting pissed at Hershel for reacting the way he did, reminded me of when Dale wanted to save Randall so he can get his group and come back to the farm and kill everyone.

 

The kid is looking alternately at Herschel and Carl (the two with guns) If your intentions are good then you do not advance and you drop your weapon. If your intentions are suspect then you slowly move forward while trying to keep an eye on the two guns pointed at you.

Here is the bottom line. In today's world if you are confronted by the police and you act the way the older kid did then the cops will shoot you.

In the ZA there are no cops so you need to be your own cop.

Live another day Carl, Herschel, Beth and Judith.