I don't know about that last scene. I don't think it is cool to shoot somebody in the back when they are running away, especially since he didn't realistically have anywhere to run to actually get away from them any way.

loading replies

7 replies

@twiztidjuggla420 I agree. It was all good up until this point, but while he was running away there was ZERO reason to shoot him, he was no threat.

@twiztidjuggla420 @ragreynolds Yeah but you two are also assuming that he was shot dead, but do we know that? Sure, the ending might imply that but they could also just have wounded/shot him in a leg or something. We'll never get a second season or anything so we will never find out but I wouldn't write him off like that.

Sure, but they had no reason to shoot him at all, regardless of if it was a killing shot or not.

@mellowb Why do you assume to know what you think that I assumed? I didn't say that they killed him. I don't think whether they killed him or not is even relevant. They definitely were shooting at him while he was retreating. I am going to stick with my original statement that you shouldn't shoot somebody in the back while they are fleeing (not even in the back of the leg).

@twiztidjuggla420 Do you live in america?

@twiztidjuggla420 They already killed a guy...then the police arrives at the scene where they find a guy who is stabbed and a police officer who is knocked out. When they pursue them, they see the girl knocked out and the guy running away with a shotgun. In these fucked up days is it perfectly legal to shoot an armes fugitive, so I understand the ending

I don't understand the confusion about the shot at the end. It's a TV series! Yet no one bats an eye when a trained detective gets handed a shotgun from murderers who then immediately (2 seconds later it's not even in her hand) puts it down within reach of said murderers. Then the 80 pound Alyssa picks it up and knocks out a trained detective with one swing.

Loading...