You don't actually see what happens to the bag after that, I don't think, but there was no indication that Jane took it when she left. Also,… more as I added above, even if you don't take the bag at all, Clem still tells Arvo that Jane was the one who stole from him, which means that she must have been referring to the gun.
And here I made a pretty great point in another post: Why didn't she admit mid-fight that it was all a ruse and that the baby was fine? She could have prevented anyone dying. Because she wanted Kenny to think she had murdered a baby so she could have him flip out on her and in turn kill him in front of Clem, putting her in the right in Clem's eyes - Or simply she just wanted to expose Kenny as a hothead so Clem would run away with her right? But wait if her endgame was to run away with Clem, exposing Kenny as a badguy, surely she would have had to leave the baby in the car to die. If she went and got the baby back Clem would clearly find out it was alive and Clem would go running back to Kenny.
So she either WAS going to let the baby die, and/or wanted to kill Kenny from the start.
I saved Jane cause i felt like Kenny took this one step too far
then the whole "the baby is not rly dead lol" thing happened and i regreted this so fucking much so i left her and now it's only Clem and AJ
This post in a perfect example of the logical fallacy called "False Dichotomy." There are plenty of other reasons, potentially millions. What if a person's finger slipped? What if the person hates all men? What if the person just wanted to shoot somebody? What if the person picked the wrong thing by accident? What if (ect ect ect)
I shot him because you don't let one person murder another. If she would have been on top bringing the knife down I would have shot her too. Kenny attacked her and was going to kill her. If you see murder happening you try to stop it.
No, I don't think you understand. If you don't choose to take the supplies at all and give the entire bag back to Arvo, when he later confronts you, he still accuses you of stealing from him. Clem's response to this accusation is that "Jane stole, not me." He and Clem couldn't have been talking about the bag of supplies here since he walked away from that encounter with his bag. The only item of his that was taken in that case would be his gun, which Jane dropped on the ground in disgust at herself for "threatening some stupid kid."
He had no reason to suspect that she murdered AJ. He came in and attacked her for no reason. He didn't even find AJ.
He should have come back and said "Where is he? WHERE IS HE? You SHOW him to me!" or something like that. He didn't even do that. He just attacked her without knowing anything.
Regardless of whether or not she manipulated the fight, I had no knowledge of that at the time. I'm also wondering if the fight hadn't happe… morened, old it just happen later? Would Kenny have found a reason to kill someone else?
Also, what do you mean by "Just like in season 1"
And it was perfectly reasonable for Kenny to assume Jane murdered the baby/sacrificed it, given her inhumane history, uncaringness for human life, and only caring about her own survival/doing anything to survive.
And I really did assume Jane sacrificed the baby to save herself because that's who she was. 1. She left her sister behind 2. She wanted to leave that other girl with the glasses to die (even though she was right next to her and could be convinced to try and save her and STILL get away unscathed) 3. She wanted to leave baby behind before 4. She wanted to leave the pregnant mom behind 5. She wanted to leave Luke behind 6. She wanted to leave Kenny… [view original content]
Sure whatever, at the time Kenny and the player thought Jane killed a baby so Kenny was killing her for it.
Nevertheless this is such incredibly more important evidence and can hardly fall under speculation because it is the only possible endgame, stop splitting hairs man, this argument should really be over.
And here I made a pretty great point in another post: Why didn't she admit mid-fight that it was all a ruse and that the baby was fine? She could have prevented anyone dying. Because she wanted Kenny to think she had murdered a baby so she could have him flip out on her and in turn kill him in front of Clem, putting her in the right in Clem's eyes - Or simply she just wanted to expose Kenny as a hothead so Clem would run away with her right? But wait if her endgame was to run away with Clem, exposing Kenny as a badguy, surely she would have had to leave the baby in the car to die. If she went and got the baby back Clem would clearly find out it was alive and Clem would go running back to Kenny.
So she either WAS going to let the baby die, and/or wanted to kill Kenny from the start.
Firstly, that's not an answer. Secondly, the reason it's NOT relevant is that you're speculating on motives based on information given after… more the choice in your topic is made. We have both agreed: we can only act on the information we have at the time. And so this is not relevant.
If you feel it is relevant, demonstrate that.
You're telling me my argument is getting weak and is "deconstructing" after posts where I have made no argument. Simply asked a question that you are unable to answer except for "Sure whatever".
And all the while, in all these posts, you haven't once spotted the obvious paradox in your support for a killing based on speculation that a killing may have taken place.
Sorry man but your argument is getting weak.
Sure whatever, at the time Kenny and the player thought Jane killed a baby so Kenny was kill… moreing her for it.
Nevertheless this is such incredibly more important evidence and can hardly fall under speculation because it is the only possible endgame, stop splitting hairs man, this argument should really be over.
And here I made a pretty great point in another post: Why didn't she admit mid-fight that it was all a ruse and that the baby was fine? She could have prevented anyone dying. Because she wanted Kenny to think she had murdered a baby so she could have him flip out on her and in turn kill him in front of Clem, putting her in the right in Clem's eyes - Or simply she just wanted to expose Kenny as a hothead so Clem would run away with her right? But wait if her endgame was to run away with Clem, exposing Kenny as a badguy, surely she would have had to leave the baby in the car to die. … [view original content]
OH WOW! So he still says you stole his supplies even if you didn't? (Yes I stole them), all the more reason for him to die, so then he is completely responsible for the conflict!
But now you also bring up more juicy info. It's entirely possible after the interaction and her leaving the group, she could have stolen his supplies on her own (being a survivalist).
But more than that "supplies" in no way could mean just a gun.
I don't think a gun would even be considered a "supply" singular
No, I don't think you understand. If you don't choose to take the supplies at all and give the entire bag back to Arvo, when he later confro… morents you, he still accuses you of stealing from him. Clem's response to this accusation is that "Jane stole, not me." He and Clem couldn't have been talking about the bag of supplies here since he walked away from that encounter with his bag. The only item of his that was taken in that case would be his gun, which Jane dropped on the ground in disgust at herself for "threatening some stupid kid."
Kenny had every right that to believe Jane "knowingly and willingly" killed the baby for her own survival.
And the only reason he thought that was because Jane WANTED HIM TO THINK THAT by saying the baby was dead KNOWING he did not trust her because of her reputation for leaving people for her own selfish survival. And at any point in time SHE COULD HAVE TOLD HIM THE BABY WAS OKAY.
And here I made a pretty great point in another post: Why didn't she admit mid-fight that it was all a ruse and that the baby was fine? She could have prevented anyone dying. Because she wanted Kenny to think she had murdered a baby so she could have him flip out on her and in turn kill him in front of Clem, putting her in the right in Clem's eyes - Or simply she just wanted to expose Kenny as a hothead so Clem would run away with her right? But wait if her endgame was to run away with Clem, exposing Kenny as a badguy, surely she would have had to leave the baby in the car to die. If she went and got the baby back Clem would clearly find out it was alive and Clem would go running back to Kenny.
So she either WAS going to let the baby die, and/or wanted to kill Kenny from the start.
He had no reason to suspect that she murdered AJ. He came in and attacked her for no reason. He didn't even find AJ.
He should have com… moree back and said "Where is he? WHERE IS HE? You SHOW him to me!" or something like that. He didn't even do that. He just attacked her without knowing anything.
I think you're confusing speculating with knowing. You can speculate. And sure, for some people (perhaps a great many people) you could be right. But, no, you can't say we all know why. Because that would be incorrect. It's cool that you have an opinion on why you think people chose Carley but, as I've stated, I didn't choose her for that reason and I suspect I am far from the only one.
Can I know it for sure? Of course not. But what I can know for sure is that not everyone chose Carley for the reasons you have outlined.
I don't believe either he or Clem use the word "supplies" or "supply." I thought they just said "stuff," which is broad enough for it to mean a gun.
It's entirely possible after the interaction and her leaving the group, she could have stolen his supplies on her own (being a survivalist). But more than that "supplies" in no way could mean just a gun.
I don't believe this is possible since she would have had to somehow track him down when he wasn't with his group an entire night after he left. He also asks you where "the other woman" is, so if she had robbed him later on, he would have already known this information.
OH WOW! So he still says you stole his supplies even if you didn't? (Yes I stole them), all the more reason for him to die, so then he is co… morempletely responsible for the conflict!
But now you also bring up more juicy info. It's entirely possible after the interaction and her leaving the group, she could have stolen his supplies on her own (being a survivalist).
But more than that "supplies" in no way could mean just a gun.
I don't think a gun would even be considered a "supply" singular
Oh boy, we established all this a long time ago.
Kenny had every right that to believe Jane "knowingly and willingly" killed the baby … morefor her own survival.
And the only reason he thought that was because Jane WANTED HIM TO THINK THAT by saying the baby was dead KNOWING he did not trust her because of her reputation for leaving people for her own selfish survival. And at any point in time SHE COULD HAVE TOLD HIM THE BABY WAS OKAY.
And here I made a pretty great point in another post: Why didn't she admit mid-fight that it was all a ruse and that the baby was fine? She could have prevented anyone dying. Because she wanted Kenny to think she had murdered a baby so she could have him flip out on her and in turn kill him in front of Clem, putting her in the right in Clem's eyes - Or simply she just wanted to expose Kenny as a hothead so Clem would run away with her right? But wait if her endgame was to run away with Clem, expos… [view original content]
You're telling me my argument is getting weak and is "deconstructing" after posts where I have made no argument. Simply asked a question tha… moret you are unable to answer except for "Sure whatever".
And all the while, in all these posts, you haven't once spotted the obvious paradox in your support for a killing based on speculation that a killing may have taken place.
I don't have to. No. I knew Carley much better and I imagine other did too. I didn't have the same issues you appear to about Doug being a "… morefat nerd" and that didn't even occur to me so, no, I'm guessing many others made the choice for the same reasons I did.
Oh boy, we established all this a long time ago.
Kenny had every right that to believe Jane "knowingly and willingly" killed the baby … morefor her own survival.
And the only reason he thought that was because Jane WANTED HIM TO THINK THAT by saying the baby was dead KNOWING he did not trust her because of her reputation for leaving people for her own selfish survival. And at any point in time SHE COULD HAVE TOLD HIM THE BABY WAS OKAY.
And here I made a pretty great point in another post: Why didn't she admit mid-fight that it was all a ruse and that the baby was fine? She could have prevented anyone dying. Because she wanted Kenny to think she had murdered a baby so she could have him flip out on her and in turn kill him in front of Clem, putting her in the right in Clem's eyes - Or simply she just wanted to expose Kenny as a hothead so Clem would run away with her right? But wait if her endgame was to run away with Clem, expos… [view original content]
Yes, If I saw someone taking a hatchet to a baby, and lopped its head off, yes I would be fine with murdering the person that lopped a baby's head off.
Killing babies is no big deal as long as your sweet sweet Jane lives, right?
Actually no, we just established that is irrelevant and HardAppleCider is right.
Here's a follow-on question... if Kenny suspects Jane led to AJ's death, why is he right to kill her?
So... the only reason he thought that was because Jane... wanted him to think that?
So... mind control? Is that what you're suggesting?
… more
He didn't find AJ. He had no idea "how" AJ died. He didn't even inspect the body or anything.
Sorry, but your'e wrong.
Yeah we have covered that and so no need to go over it again. But if you're going to repost, show relevance. You still haven't done that. Just posting the same stuff over and over does not make it any more true or any more relevant. It wouldn't even be true or relevant if you posted in caps.
Oh, and once again you've failed to answer a question which is pretty key to the discussion.
Beefy, we covered this too, lmao.
Yes, If I saw someone taking a hatchet to a baby, and lopped its head off, yes I would be fine with … moremurdering the person that lopped a baby's head off.
Killing babies is no big deal as long as your sweet sweet Jane lives, right?
This is a classic example of cognative dissonance.
MULTIPLE PEOPLE have explained to this guy EXACTLY how he's wrong but he CAN'T FUCKING SEE IT because he can't accept the idea that he "might" be wrong. Instead he starts flinging insults and arguing like a teenager.
Yeah I finally saw all the endings, I definitely think saving Kenny then letting him leave Clem and AJ at the city was probably the best and… more most heartfelt ending.
Especially the fact that the place actually existed - it was like salvation, and he had to sacrifice himself so they could get in.
You wanna talk about saving people? Really?
Did it ever accur to your fat skull that Kenny was far away from Clem on the ice incident because he had to chase an escaping enemy?
Wasting time to brutalize Carver when trying to escape shows a lack of control. I was for killing Carver but escaping was more important so … morejust put a bullet in him.
Jane didn't manipulate Kenny into thinking she killed the baby he did that on his own. She said it was an accident Kenny couldn't take it so he decided she murdered the baby so he could have a reason to kill. Putting the baby in the car in a snowstorm where the wind ,snow, walkers and Kenny can't get to it was not to kill but to save the baby.
If she wanted Kenny dead she could have let the Russian kill him at he beginning of the episode.
Okay, well at least we're all using the word "murder" for what Kenny is doing. An unlawful killing. I don't think we tend to ever call it murder when it's justified.
So that takes us all the way back to Dojo's answer to your question: "because I wanted to prevent murder". That's really it.
Beef come on man...this is getting pretty inane.
We have broken it down into two groups: Pre and Post, before and after a murder.
Pre: … moreA completely justified view at the time it was believed that Jane had murdered a baby, and that Kenny was going to murder her for it
Post: FACT: Jane was manipulating Kenny, to fight her because she wanted to kill Kenny and let the baby die as long as it meant getting Clementine.
What more is to be said?
This is a classic example of cognative dissonance.
MULTIPLE PEOPLE have explained to this guy EXACTLY how he's wrong but he CAN'T FUCKING… more SEE IT because he can't accept the idea that he "might" be wrong. Instead he starts flinging insults and arguing like a teenager.
Kenny had "no good reason" to suspect that Jane had killed AJ. He didn't find a body. He had no idea how AJ had died.
You said that Kenny thought she killed AJ "because she wanted him to" which, logically speaking, means you think that "her wanting him to" caused him to believe it, and her "wanting him to" is a good enough reason for him "to" believe it. This implies mind control, as one person "wanting" a person to think something doesn't cause them to think it.
She wanted Kenny to think that AJ had died knowing that Kenny hated her and knowing that he would attack her. I have no doubt this is true.
He didn't know that. He had no reason to suspect that she had murdered AJ. He just flipped out and attacked her without knowing anything.
Keep the hate-speech level to a minimum please.
What part are you stuck on? Articulate and be specific, I will explain myself one step at a time. Start from the beginning.
Beefy, we're back to square one, you've run out of steam.
Here was my response to that;
And it was perfectly reasonable for Kenny to assume Jane murdered the baby/sacrificed it, given her inhumane history, uncaringness for human life, and only caring about her own survival/doing anything to survive.
And I really did assume Jane sacrificed the baby to save herself because that's who she was. 1. She left her sister behind 2. She wanted to leave that other girl with the glasses to die (even though she was right next to her and could be convinced to try and save her and STILL get away unscathed) 3. She wanted to leave baby behind before 4. She wanted to leave the pregnant mom behind 5. She wanted to leave Luke behind 6. She wanted to leave Kenny behind 7. She wanted to probably leave others behind too that I forgot 8. She DID LEAVE everyone behind
Okay, well at least we're all using the word "murder" for what Kenny is doing. An unlawful killing. I don't think we tend to ever call it mu… morerder when it's justified.
So that takes us all the way back to Dojo's answer to your question: "because I wanted to prevent murder". That's really it.
Yes, we're right back at square one - something we can both agree on! But rather than begin again or repost the exact same stuff (really no need for that - we can all read the posts and it adds nothing), I'll simply leave responses to the new elements that pop up in the thread or if you choose to answer those questions you haven't yet responded to.
Beefy, we're back to square one, you've run out of steam.
Here was my response to that;
And it was perfectly reasonable for Kenny to … moreassume Jane murdered the baby/sacrificed it, given her inhumane history, uncaringness for human life, and only caring about her own survival/doing anything to survive.
And I really did assume Jane sacrificed the baby to save herself because that's who she was. 1. She left her sister behind 2. She wanted to leave that other girl with the glasses to die (even though she was right next to her and could be convinced to try and save her and STILL get away unscathed) 3. She wanted to leave baby behind before 4. She wanted to leave the pregnant mom behind 5. She wanted to leave Luke behind 6. She wanted to leave Kenny behind 7. She wanted to probably leave others behind too that I forgot 8. She DID LEAVE everyone behind
Beefy, we covered this too, lmao.
Yes, If I saw someone taking a hatchet to a baby, and lopped its head off, yes I would be fine with … moremurdering the person that lopped a baby's head off.
Killing babies is no big deal as long as your sweet sweet Jane lives, right?
Did you even read my original post way up there? I already stated my response to that.
Here I just posed the exact same thing again to Beef.
And it was perfectly reasonable for Kenny to assume Jane murdered the baby/sacrificed it, given her inhumane history, uncaringness for human life, and only caring about her own survival/doing anything to survive.
And I really did assume Jane sacrificed the baby to save herself because that's who she was. 1. She left her sister behind 2. She wanted to leave that other girl with the glasses to die (even though she was right next to her and could be convinced to try and save her and STILL get away unscathed) 3. She wanted to leave baby behind before 4. She wanted to leave the pregnant mom behind 5. She wanted to leave Luke behind 6. She wanted to leave Kenny behind 7. She wanted to probably leave others behind too that I forgot 8. She DID LEAVE everyone behind.
She was an inhumane monster
Let me try to explain this to you in as few words as possible:
Kenny.... didn't.... KNOW... Jane... was... manipulating.... him....
Kenny... didn't... KNOW... how... the... baby... died....
IS THAT SIMPLE ENOUGH FOR YOU?
Did you even read my original post way up there? I already stated my response to that.
Here I just posed the exact same thing again to Be… moreef.
And it was perfectly reasonable for Kenny to assume Jane murdered the baby/sacrificed it, given her inhumane history, uncaringness for human life, and only caring about her own survival/doing anything to survive.
And I really did assume Jane sacrificed the baby to save herself because that's who she was. 1. She left her sister behind 2. She wanted to leave that other girl with the glasses to die (even though she was right next to her and could be convinced to try and save her and STILL get away unscathed) 3. She wanted to leave baby behind before 4. She wanted to leave the pregnant mom behind 5. She wanted to leave Luke behind 6. She wanted to leave Kenny behind 7. She wanted to probably leave others behind too that I forgot 8. She DID LEAVE everyone behind.
She was an inhumane monster
And it was perfectly reasonable for Kenny to assume Jane murdered the baby/sacrificed it, given her inhumane history, uncaringness for human life, and only caring about her own survival/doing anything to survive.
And I really did assume Jane sacrificed the baby to save herself because that's who she was. 1. She left her sister behind 2. She wanted to leave that other girl with the glasses to die (even though she was right next to her and could be convinced to try and save her and STILL get away unscathed) 3. She wanted to leave baby behind before 4. She wanted to leave the pregnant mom behind 5. She wanted to leave Luke behind 6. She wanted to leave Kenny behind 7. She wanted to probably leave others behind too that I forgot 8. She DID LEAVE everyone behind. She was an inhumane monster
Did you even read my post just up there? I already responded to that.
I'll just repost it here in hopes that you might come to understan… mored it.
Let me try to explain this to you in as few words as possible:
Kenny.... didn't.... KNOW... Jane... was... manipulating.... him....
Kenny... didn't... KNOW... how... the... baby... died....
IS THAT SIMPLE ENOUGH FOR YOU?
Let's all assume we're able to read and stop reposting the same things. It's like a clips show in here. Takemeunder, unless you can prove relevance or back posts up or add new information, there is no point in reposting the same stuff again and again. It does not make any post more true.
And the response:
And it was perfectly reasonable for Kenny to assume Jane murdered the baby/sacrificed it, given her inhumane history… more, uncaringness for human life, and only caring about her own survival/doing anything to survive.
And I really did assume Jane sacrificed the baby to save herself because that's who she was. 1. She left her sister behind 2. She wanted to leave that other girl with the glasses to die (even though she was right next to her and could be convinced to try and save her and STILL get away unscathed) 3. She wanted to leave baby behind before 4. She wanted to leave the pregnant mom behind 5. She wanted to leave Luke behind 6. She wanted to leave Kenny behind 7. She wanted to probably leave others behind too that I forgot 8. She DID LEAVE everyone behind. She was an inhumane monster
Comments
Yes, the fact that Clem said Jane took the rest of the supplies with her, when she was admitting she robbed Arvo.
No but the graph of who played the game and what decision they made represents...who played the game and what decisions they made
This post in a perfect example of the logical fallacy called "False Dichotomy." There are plenty of other reasons, potentially millions. What if a person's finger slipped? What if the person hates all men? What if the person just wanted to shoot somebody? What if the person picked the wrong thing by accident? What if (ect ect ect)
I shot him because you don't let one person murder another. If she would have been on top bringing the knife down I would have shot her too. Kenny attacked her and was going to kill her. If you see murder happening you try to stop it.
No, I don't think you understand. If you don't choose to take the supplies at all and give the entire bag back to Arvo, when he later confronts you, he still accuses you of stealing from him. Clem's response to this accusation is that "Jane stole, not me." He and Clem couldn't have been talking about the bag of supplies here since he walked away from that encounter with his bag. The only item of his that was taken in that case would be his gun, which Jane dropped on the ground in disgust at herself for "threatening some stupid kid."
Does it indicate the why?
He had no reason to suspect that she murdered AJ. He came in and attacked her for no reason. He didn't even find AJ.
He should have come back and said "Where is he? WHERE IS HE? You SHOW him to me!" or something like that. He didn't even do that. He just attacked her without knowing anything.
Sorry man but your argument is getting weak.
Sure whatever, at the time Kenny and the player thought Jane killed a baby so Kenny was killing her for it.
Nevertheless this is such incredibly more important evidence and can hardly fall under speculation because it is the only possible endgame, stop splitting hairs man, this argument should really be over.
You're telling me my argument is getting weak and is "deconstructing" after posts where I have made no argument. Simply asked a question that you are unable to answer except for "Sure whatever".
And all the while, in all these posts, you haven't once spotted the obvious paradox in your support for a killing based on speculation that a killing may have taken place.
OH WOW! So he still says you stole his supplies even if you didn't? (Yes I stole them), all the more reason for him to die, so then he is completely responsible for the conflict!
But now you also bring up more juicy info. It's entirely possible after the interaction and her leaving the group, she could have stolen his supplies on her own (being a survivalist).
But more than that "supplies" in no way could mean just a gun.
I don't think a gun would even be considered a "supply" singular
Oh boy, we established all this a long time ago.
Sorry Beef, you're just being facetious here.
We all know why.
I think you're confusing speculating with knowing. You can speculate. And sure, for some people (perhaps a great many people) you could be right. But, no, you can't say we all know why. Because that would be incorrect. It's cool that you have an opinion on why you think people chose Carley but, as I've stated, I didn't choose her for that reason and I suspect I am far from the only one.
Can I know it for sure? Of course not. But what I can know for sure is that not everyone chose Carley for the reasons you have outlined.
I don't believe either he or Clem use the word "supplies" or "supply." I thought they just said "stuff," which is broad enough for it to mean a gun.
I don't believe this is possible since she would have had to somehow track him down when he wasn't with his group an entire night after he left. He also asks you where "the other woman" is, so if she had robbed him later on, he would have already known this information.
Actually no, we just established that is irrelevant and HardAppleCider is right.
Here's a follow-on question... if Kenny suspects Jane led to AJ's death, why is he right to kill her?
Beef come on man...this is getting pretty inane.
We have broken it down into two groups: Pre and Post, before and after a murder.
Pre: A completely justified view at the time it was believed that Jane had murdered a baby, and that Kenny was going to murder her for it
Post: FACT: Jane was manipulating Kenny, to fight her because she wanted to kill Kenny and let the baby die as long as it meant getting Clementine.
What more is to be said?
Sure you did Beef. Methinks you're just arguing out of pride now, lol.
So... the only reason he thought that was because Jane... wanted him to think that?
So... mind control? Is that what you're suggesting?
He didn't find AJ. He had no idea "how" AJ died. He didn't even inspect the body or anything.
Sorry, but your'e wrong.
Beefy, we covered this too, lmao.
Killing babies is no big deal as long as your sweet sweet Jane lives, right?
Fuck you buddy.
He DIDN'T FUCKING KNOW she was manipulating him. All he knew is that she said "I'm sorry"
[removed]
Yeah we have covered that and so no need to go over it again. But if you're going to repost, show relevance. You still haven't done that. Just posting the same stuff over and over does not make it any more true or any more relevant. It wouldn't even be true or relevant if you posted in caps.
Oh, and once again you've failed to answer a question which is pretty key to the discussion.
This is a classic example of cognative dissonance.
MULTIPLE PEOPLE have explained to this guy EXACTLY how he's wrong but he CAN'T FUCKING SEE IT because he can't accept the idea that he "might" be wrong. Instead he starts flinging insults and arguing like a teenager.
How did he sacrifice himself? There was no spot for Kenny, no matter what. He didnt give his spot to them, he didnt have a spot to begin with.
That first picture, how was Jane supposed to save Clem at that point?
So then why did you think she did what she did? Tell me, what was her plan?
I've already posted it so many times my eyes hurt, but please go on and answer that question.
Okay, well at least we're all using the word "murder" for what Kenny is doing. An unlawful killing. I don't think we tend to ever call it murder when it's justified.
So that takes us all the way back to Dojo's answer to your question: "because I wanted to prevent murder". That's really it.
It's called an emotional sacrifice, look it up.
Let me try to explain this to you in as few words as possible:
Kenny.... didn't.... KNOW... Jane... was... manipulating.... him....
Kenny... didn't... KNOW... how... the... baby... died....
IS THAT SIMPLE ENOUGH FOR YOU?
Keep the hate-speech level to a minimum please.
What part are you stuck on? Articulate and be specific, I will explain myself one step at a time. Start from the beginning.
I'm not stuck on anything.
Your theory is wrong.
Kenny had "no good reason" to suspect that Jane had killed AJ. He didn't find a body. He had no idea how AJ had died.
You said that Kenny thought she killed AJ "because she wanted him to" which, logically speaking, means you think that "her wanting him to" caused him to believe it, and her "wanting him to" is a good enough reason for him "to" believe it. This implies mind control, as one person "wanting" a person to think something doesn't cause them to think it.
She wanted Kenny to think that AJ had died knowing that Kenny hated her and knowing that he would attack her. I have no doubt this is true.
He didn't know that. He had no reason to suspect that she had murdered AJ. He just flipped out and attacked her without knowing anything.
So tell me... what part of this are you stuck on?
Beefy, we're back to square one, you've run out of steam.
Here was my response to that;
Yes, we're right back at square one - something we can both agree on! But rather than begin again or repost the exact same stuff (really no need for that - we can all read the posts and it adds nothing), I'll simply leave responses to the new elements that pop up in the thread or if you choose to answer those questions you haven't yet responded to.
Are you serious right now?
I'm starting to think this guy's a troll. Normal people don't spout such nonsense.
Did you even read my original post way up there? I already stated my response to that.
Here I just posed the exact same thing again to Beef.
Did you even read my post just up there? I already responded to that.
I'll just repost it here in hopes that you might come to understand it.
And the response:
Let's all assume we're able to read and stop reposting the same things. It's like a clips show in here. Takemeunder, unless you can prove relevance or back posts up or add new information, there is no point in reposting the same stuff again and again. It does not make any post more true.
Then use the proper term, instead of saying that Kenny sacrificed himself, since that is bs.
You don't know what an emotional sacrifice is, do you?