24

Brannigan, p5

December 7, 2022 by Tim


Subscribe
Notify of
guest

118 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Matt Braddock
Matt Braddock
1 month ago

I find it very uncomfortable that I can relate to both trains of thought… and it’s good. That’s how it should be. No easy choice. Nuance, context. Hats off, Tim.

The Legacy
Member
The Legacy
1 month ago
Reply to  Matt Braddock

Indeed. What’s scary is that I live both trains of thought. I’m in both the camp of wanting justice to prevail against someone… and sometimes wishing that an accident were to happen to someone who seems to stay above the law.

Fletcher
Fletcher
1 month ago
Reply to  Matt Braddock

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it

OHJayDub
OHJayDub
1 month ago
Reply to  Matt Braddock

Getting comfortable and complacent /can/ lead to us no longer being open to learning…. I’d say similar to Fletcher that it’s a mark of your open mindedness and willingness to learn.

Hats off to Tim, this is great and I can’t wait to see what comes next.

TomB
TomB
1 month ago
Reply to  OHJayDub

There can be an uncomfortableness to having an open mind. I’m told (and have seen) older folk (50, 60, 70, etc) becoming ossified in their views and clinging to a particular world view that perhaps is no longer sufficient or reasonable, but it is what they became used to and change and acceptance are difficult after living a certain way for a while I guess, esp if you are traumatized and hurting. I find I’ve got a very different problem – I see most of the perspectives in a variety of fairly complex aspects of our modern world. I’m left… Read more »

P2Mc28
P2Mc28
1 month ago
Reply to  Matt Braddock

My Companion mother makes 50 bucks an hour on the PC(Personal Computer). She has been out of w0rk for quite some time however last month her check was 11,500 bucks only w0rking on the PC(Personal Computer) for 9 hours per day.
For more detail visit this article.. https://dollarsperhours1.blogspot.com/

Last edited 1 month ago by P2Mc28
KenP
KenP
1 month ago
Reply to  P2Mc28

Thank you for posting your spam URL. Reported spam post to blogger.com/report

Marsh
Marsh
1 month ago

What finely drawn expressions. It’s as if I can feel what Scott feels without the speech bubbles. The despair.

Bubble181
Bubble181
1 month ago

Welcome to “unresolved trauma and the unhealthy consequences it brings, the comic”. Scott’s arguments boil down to “I’m hurt and I’m willing to sacrifice everything never to get hurt again”.
Understandable? Relatable? Sure. Healthy, logical, rational, acceptable? No. He needs therapy to help deal with those emotions, not drink to stuff’m down and acting out on them.

Killiak
Killiak
1 month ago
Reply to  Bubble181

Scott is going to face a mirror at some point and realize he just became the killer instead, he went over to the Dark Side and is just trying to justify it to himself.
No matter how understandable his emotion is, he’s been morally wrong all the time.

The Legacy
Member
The Legacy
1 month ago
Reply to  Killiak

Precisely. And VERY human. Hopefully his friends help Scott get the help he needs.

…And I hope Zeke doesn’t kill Scott before that happens.

Will Belden
Will Belden
1 month ago
Reply to  The Legacy

Sorta thinking that maybe Zeke will somehow help/save Scott from something, and that might change his mind about things.

Khan Kaizhu
Khan Kaizhu
1 month ago
Reply to  The Legacy

What an interesting twist it’d be if Zeke returned with every intention of killing Scott, only to overhear everything Ethan and Scott are saying … causing Zeke to confront Scott … and forgive him. It could offer an intriguing arc for Scott to reassess his assumptions — can a simple, pre-programmed AI experience sympathy/empathy?

Smiffwilm
Smiffwilm
1 month ago
Reply to  Bubble181

Maybe some kind of therapy animal as well? You know, like a dog or cat. Maybe even something as farfetched as a penguin….

Paula
Paula
1 month ago
Reply to  Smiffwilm

LOL! This,

Marsh
Marsh
1 month ago
Reply to  Bubble181

I believe a challenging aspect of that is the availability of therapy, and the right therapy. for some money and time are an issue that impedes the progress. For others, it’s not being able to find the right professional to talk to before resources runs out or the person gives up. I’m glad our generations are more open to therapy than ever before, but there’s still obstacles here and there.

TomB
TomB
1 month ago
Reply to  Marsh

There’s also (as in my case) the issue of not understanding *how* talking to someone you see for an hour once a month and you can somehow they can understand and fix you…. That’s where I was. I figured if I lived with me 24 hours a day and I couldn’t even begin to identify what the issue was that had contracted my social groups, had left me alone and desolate, when work was fine, I had money, etc. What I had was post-traumatic effects (not quite bad enough to be PTSD, but enough to be affective disorder). And I… Read more »

Kaelin
Kaelin
1 month ago
Reply to  TomB

You’ve hit the nail on the head. Our past defines us.. we can either fight with it, or learn with it. Too many of us (myself included).. choose to fight it. Bad memory? squash it down. Childhood nightmare? ‘your a wuss, suck it up’. Traumatic experience. ‘your better then this, crying is not gonna help’. When sometimes, crying, and talking about these experiences.. are what help. You live your life.. every day, every minute. Its ‘normal’ for you.. even if that normal is a messed up chaotic jumble of ‘i hate myself’… thats you. It sometimes takes an outside source,… Read more »

GurrenLagann
GurrenLagann
1 month ago
Reply to  Bubble181

Counterpoint, therapy depending on the place, is more expensive and for therapy, you need to, you know WANT TO GO AND ACCEPT YOU NEED THE HELP, but naw, I relate to Death Shot way more.

Btw hi, I’m from Venezuela, been reading this comic since I don’t know when probably 10 years? Since I’m not from THE US I can’t relate to the Ethan/Superman/Batman/Spiderman way of thought now, I used to but not anymore.

TomB
TomB
1 month ago
Reply to  GurrenLagann

The part not being drawn out here is most people that take lives in a vigilante sense don’t actually get any better, but often get worse in their mental health as a result of that choice. There is a cost. You see it too in ERT/SWAT situations as taking a life takes a toll on the officers, even if there was no choice and it might have saved lives. I understand the vigilante way, but the truth is any individual making decisions can be fallible and a vigilante can kill innocent people (lots of cases documented in different times and… Read more »

raven0ak
raven0ak
1 month ago
Reply to  Bubble181

Sometimes, killing killer before killer starts killing spree can save many many lives more than just one; some ppl simply are never willing to let down of path to kill, some will never ask themselves if killing is right or wrong, only if killing is fun or not.

Kumiho
Kumiho
1 month ago
Reply to  Bubble181

I think you’ve missed the mark just slightly, tbh. Scott isn’t trying to protect himself from pain; in his mind, he’s already as hurt as he can get. No, he wants to do anything in his power to protect anyone *else* from the pain he’s living. Is he doing it right? Nope. Bit it’s definitely a nobler goal than simple fear.

blake
blake
1 month ago

Scott is such a patronising twat. Ethan is doing his damnest here and Scott is still pulling the “my pain is more important than your opinion” card. Ethan should hang him out the window and ask him how he feels about killing a killer then. Gah what a half-baked sanctimonious prick!

Damion
Damion
1 month ago
Reply to  blake

He’s not sanctimonious, he’s in pain. Every day. Ethan got the worst fucking superpower in the world, aside from telepathy, but he’s still a supe. Scott? Scott, in his mind, he has NOTHING, nothing but his rage and pain and helplessness. (none of that is true of course, but the world Scott’s in won’t let him see it that way). He’s still a douche, but he’s understandable, and relatable. I’ve been there, different reasons, but same place.

Last edited 1 month ago by Damion
chargersfan
chargersfan
1 month ago
Reply to  Damion

Not to totally derail a conversation, but… why is telepathy the worst superpower?

Glaedien
Glaedien
1 month ago
Reply to  chargersfan

I’d imagine that without any sort of power growth (E.G. Learning their telepathic link lets them quell or flame emotions) a pure telepath is just a glorified telephone switchboard for the rest of the team. It is perhaps a *boring* ability to have by itself, but instantaneous, long-range, silent, undetectable and perfectly secure communication systems are a pretty damn nice bonus for a team.

Nobody
Nobody
1 month ago
Reply to  Glaedien

Your missing the worst part. Imaging being able to hear everyone’s thoughts. Now realize there is no off switch for the power. You can focus on an individual to hear them more clearly over the crowd but all day every day it is like your in a massive crowed with everyone talking at once. And that isn’t even dealing with the horrors of all the inner thoughts you are passively overhearing

Glaedien
Glaedien
1 month ago
Reply to  Nobody

Most recent pop culture example I can think of that specifically is Imogen in critrole campaign 3. Granted, by the time the show is set in she has developed coping mechanisms for it, so it’s not quite as traumatic as written above. That is certainly a viable way to write a telepathic character, but a stock telepath doesn’t *have* to have it be an uncontrolled and unwilling ability (even if it’s generally more interesting that way, going by Sanderon’s Second Law). In any case, you could apply such crippling weaknesses to any ability, whether it’s MHA’s Deku with super human… Read more »

Nomx
Nomx
1 month ago
Reply to  Nobody

Yeah idk that sounds like a particular example of telepathy — that’s like “wow flight sucks because you can’t turn it off and you have to focus to not float away all the time”. Passive telepathy that you can’t block or turn off is a very specific niche, albeit one that people talk about a lot.

jack
jack
1 month ago
Reply to  Glaedien

“i can feel your anger just radiating off you”

“STFU CECILLE”

Robert
Robert
1 month ago
Reply to  Damion

As a teacher of special needs students, I’d have telepathy at the top of my list. By the way, Ethan has the most powerful superpower we’ve seen so far. He could have killed Deathblood, he just didn’t because he has better morals.

Richard Weatherfield
Richard Weatherfield
1 month ago
Reply to  blake

Yeah..that’s not going to help matters. At all.

leduk
leduk
1 month ago
Reply to  blake

You’re right but 28 ppl so far are happy to be wrong.

leduk
leduk
1 month ago
Reply to  leduk

hey, it’s 40 now! congrats

blake
blake
1 month ago
Reply to  leduk

This place is full of those willing to downvote without a good counter-argument. The closest anyone came was Damion, who didn’t really refute anything I said and instead talked about how Scott doesn’t have powers, which has nothing to do with Scott’s standpoint. Too many unthinking downvotards on this site, and always has been. Eh, it’s just fake internet points anyway!

no thanks nintendo
no thanks nintendo
1 month ago

Scott’s making a great argument on behalf of Deathblood.

Not really helping justify his own actions yet, though. How many people who haven’t done anything yet does Deathblood kill because they might do something?

As far as we’ve been shown, Deathblood only goes after criminals who have proven themselves to be repeat offenders and who the justice system failed to do anything about.

Like I’ve been saying, Scott’s worse than Deathblood.

Imperator Ruscal
Imperator Ruscal
1 month ago

I mean, Deathblood attempted to kill Analog. Unless I’m mistaken, Analog has yet to become a bad guy. He was simply standing in Deathblood’s way and refusing to step aside so he could kill the gang members without due processes.

Pretty sure that counts as Deathblood doing the big-bad bit here.

PhobosRising
PhobosRising
1 month ago

Yet, I’d read an evil Analog arc. 😀

Richard Weatherfield
Richard Weatherfield
1 month ago

Technically speaking (and I do mean technically, because this is a bit of a stretch) Ethan was aiding and abetting the crooks just by talking to them, so Deathblood might have used that as justification to shoot Ethan.

Ashi
Ashi
1 month ago

In Deathblood’s mind, Ethan was aiding and abetting then by opposing his “Just massacre them” plan.

Urazz
Urazz
1 month ago

Remember, Zeke was talking about killing humans or enslaving them. He toned that talk down to an extent and looked like he wasn’t serious about it anymore, but Zeke could’ve easily been seen as a threat. Scotts big mistake was lying to Lucas about disarming the bomb when they were discussing about Zeke no longer being a threat to humanity and he lied about removing the bomb (he didn’t outright say he would remove the bomb but when amongst friends/family, using specific language so you can say you technically didn’t lie will not go down well). Both Lucas and Scott… Read more »

ThatGuy
ThatGuy
1 month ago

I reluctantly have to accept both trains of thought. However, I lean towards Ethan because of my saying “The dead will never learn. They will have won.” Going all Punisher/Red Hood on villains makes sense, but it also runs the risk of you BECOMING the villain you fight against as well. Not only that, but I recall a Daredevil episode where the child of a slain gangster admonished Punisher for killing his father. What’s to stop the kid from becoming the next generation of evil due to what a hero had done to his family? And that’s what sucks: There’s… Read more »

SGT Lewis
SGT Lewis
1 month ago

Sometimes it’s best to become the monster so others don’t have to.

Damion
Damion
1 month ago
Reply to  SGT Lewis

But then all you do is make more monsters.

Anon200
Anon200
1 month ago
Reply to  Damion

That line is stupid.
no one(sane) is saying to go murder everyone who sells a bag of weed or grabs a purse.
if someone is casually killing innocent people, then they should be removed from society.

leduk
leduk
1 month ago
Reply to  SGT Lewis

not it’s absolutely not, never.

Damion
Damion
1 month ago

And boom. There it is, the line, and Scott has just admitted he crossed it without looking back. Empathy & Justice vs. Sorrow & Pain. They both start in tragedy, but one looks outwards and tries to heal – despite how broken he is, the other looks inward, and finds nothing but agony and an all-consuming desire to hurt the world back. This is INCREDIBLY good.

Last edited 1 month ago by Damion
Giraldi
Giraldi
1 month ago
Reply to  Damion

Stories like this are a big part of why I keep reading this comic. I continue to be impressed by Tim’s storytelling prowess.

Xenneth
Xenneth
1 month ago

If we justify wanting to kill someone before they do something heinous we’re looking at the extinction of humanity because nearly everyone who has lived long enough can and often will do something heinous.

Jack0r
Jack0r
1 month ago
Reply to  Xenneth

Especially if the definition of “death-deserving-heinous” is up to everyone to decide.

I guess, to some people, me getting out of the bed on the wrong side might already qualify.

As seen e.g. during the pandemic, where at least one person was murdered, because he asked a customer at the place where he worked, to please wear a mask as mandated by law.

Michiel
Michiel
1 month ago

Oh, yeah, if Ethan can’t imagine any scenario where it’s okay to take a life, he simply has a poor imagination. For example, Batman could save countless lives by killing the Joker. (Locking him in Arkham doesn’t seem to work very well.)

On the other hand, if Scott’s actions are being driven by his grief, rather than his rationality, there are many ways that could go badly. Especially in a comic-book.

leduk
leduk
1 month ago
Reply to  Michiel

well, batman and the joker are fictionnal characters and cant be used are argument tho.

Robert
Robert
1 month ago
Reply to  leduk

We cant use fictional characters, as analogies to other fictional characters? What makes Ethan and Scot more real than Batman and the Joker?

Dorander
Dorander
1 month ago
Reply to  Robert

I think the point he was trying to make is that we can’t use their actions or behaviour as reasons to justify anything because what they do and how they do it is made up. Even though *why* they do it is written by human beings and thus reflects human behaviour.

Which still isn’t relevant to what he was responding to, but you know, in that regard it at least makes some sense.

leduk
leduk
1 month ago
Reply to  Robert

since lots of ppl here are talking about real life issue, no you fucking cant.

Cyrad
Cyrad
1 month ago

Both Ethan and Scott raise very good points. However…

Scott’s argument is driven by hatred.
Ethan’s argument is driven by compassion.
That is the crucial difference.

B B
B B
1 month ago
Reply to  Cyrad

There are many crucial differences. For example you could also say:

Scott’s arguement appeals to results.
Ethan’s argument appeals to emotions.

Honestly that seems to be a far more crucial difference than deciding which emotion is a more valid moral foundation.

Dorander
Dorander
1 month ago
Reply to  B B

They’re not that easily seperated. For example, one might also state that: Scott’s argument appeals to the result where he doesn’t have to grieve again in that manner. Ethan’s argument appeals to the result where people are compassionate enough not to execute people extrajudiciarily (is that a word? :P) and instead get arrested and stand trial. Emotions and arguments are linked, we may make very good arguments for things but inevitably they appeal to the world we want to have. Easy example: most of us wouldn’t want to live in a world where murder was legal, because we’d be forced… Read more »

Anon200
Anon200
1 month ago

There seems to be a lot of comments talking about how Scott needs therapy over his grief which is true but really we should be also be talking how Ethan also clearly needs someone to talk to him about his issues due to his detachment to his own existence.

he was playing around with people who were casually killing him, if deathblood hadn’t shown, they could have easily physically overpowered him by not instant killing him.
He should have been running away or causing enough mayham to cause them to run, not cracking one liners.

Last edited 1 month ago by Anon200
BioYuGi
BioYuGi
1 month ago
Reply to  Anon200

Yeah, Ethan is being more compassionate, but his respawns have made him forget that these people killed him *five* times.

Esc
Esc
1 month ago
Reply to  BioYuGi

He didn’t die, they shot him five times with intent to kill. Heck, probably the first two times with intent the other times out of confusion to just try and buy time to escape.

B B
B B
1 month ago
Reply to  Esc

No, by the comic’s own canon he died, he just didn’t -stay- dead.

D.Mentia
D.Mentia
1 month ago

I hadn’t read this comic for a good decade, and I think this has by far made the most improvement out of all of my old favorites. You didn’t fall into the trap of using it as a political soapbox, and you managed to actually pull it away from a funny episodic webcomic, and turn it into a legitimate and printable superhero comic. Your art is extremely high quality for a webcomic, and somehow you’re still doing them 3/week? Not to mention the extremely well-written dialogue, not just on this one but all of them
Bravo, Tim

Alex Falk
Alex Falk
1 month ago

Scott lost his girlfriend. Ethan lost his sister.
Scott doesn’t have a leg to stand on.

Cragfast
Cragfast
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Falk

Wow ableist.

Phoenix
Phoenix
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Falk

-.-

Last edited 1 month ago by Phoenix
Jack0r
Jack0r
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Falk

Apart from the joke about disabled people (which isn’t ok at all):

I am much closer to my wife than to my sister. That wasn’t the case for my first girlfriend in high school, but that’s a long time ago.

But I am building a life with and around my wife, having kids with her, building a future.

I don’t with my sister.

Willess12
Willess12
1 month ago
Reply to  Alex Falk

*fiance

Jack0r
Jack0r
1 month ago

Thanks, Scot!

Seeing some rando criminal who you just met and who tried to murder you a few times die, does not compare to watching the love of your life fade away while lieing on the floor, being seriously wounded, and there’s nothing you can do about it.

087
087
1 month ago

The irony of Scott’s circular thinking here ‘I wish for violence because of all this rampant VioLeNcE’.
Team Ethan forever.

Jack0r
Jack0r
1 month ago

I feel that the comic shifted quite radically since the first issue. In Issue 1, Ethan didn’t have any issues using explosives to kill/destroy the attackers, even though their only offence was to destroy some smartphones. Kinda feels like Tim was originally going for fun-slapstick-superheroes but then shifted to a much more existential tone. Issue 1 Ethan and current Ethan don’t really fit well. For example, take the following page: https://cad-comic.com/comic/analog-and-d-pad-01-26/ Here Ethan basically uses a hand grenade (which can not be used non-lethally, it’s specifically made to maim and kill) to blow up the leader of the robots, and… Read more »

Kevin Greenbaum
Kevin Greenbaum
1 month ago

If only Scott had a way to branch off on his own. Ethan and Lucas can’t turn him in because he could leak who they really are just like the Master can. I don’t see Scott becoming a villain, and we already have Deathblood somewhat acting as this worlds Punisher.

MercuryGreen
MercuryGreen
1 month ago

Scott hasn’t realized that he’s looking at it from the point of view of the shooter that took Charlie’s life. “They’re not REALLY people, and I need this.”

Did they catch that guy?

chargersfan
chargersfan
1 month ago
Reply to  MercuryGreen

This is an excellent point. I hope Ethan points it out to Scott.

ShonaSoF
ShonaSoF
1 month ago

I get where Scott is coming from, but the flaw in his approach is that he’s refusing to see/accept that Zeke was _trying to learn_. If Zeke knew about the proximity explosive then an argument could have been made that they were just waiting for the chance to strike. But he played by the rules, showed genuine emotions and rationality despite his “upbringing”. Scott started from a point of ‘Ethan’s wrong, the robot is a threat’ and just like Deathblood, is refusing to even consider rational debate. He just made a show of it for Ethan’s sake, but Ethan’s learned… Read more »

ThatMageGuy
ThatMageGuy
1 month ago

The difference between Scott and Ethan is that Scott got to the point where he believed nothing really mattered anymore. To be honest, I believe it was the sister. Her relationship was different with Ethan than it was with Scott’s, and I think this would have influenced how they moved on after her death. For Ethan, he lost a close family member, a friend and confidante, and probably someone who he knew better than anyone. He never really acts like she’s gone, but more like she’s always out there watching him, like she always had been before. Maybe this relationship… Read more »

chargersfan
chargersfan
1 month ago

Confirmed, Scott is Deathblood. The wheelchair makes a great cover. /s

Joel
Joel
1 month ago

Oh cry me a river, Scott.

Nomx
Nomx
1 month ago

Wasn’t he like “That Murderer Deathblood” like two pages ago? Idk man I’ve got a clear pick on who’s not being reasonable here.

Arcslayer
Arcslayer
1 month ago

Scott’s argument boils down to this. “I did what I could but failed. No one else did or could have done better, therefore only I can be right about what to do next.” Scott’s Martyrdom syndrome will lead to some very nasty places, and Scott is smart enough to rationalize them as necessary. Done well this will be a great storyline, but it will be very very difficult to do right.

Arcslayer
Arcslayer
1 month ago
Reply to  Arcslayer

To those downvoting this comment, I wonder how you interpret Scott’s past actions. Scott was quite ready to kill Zeke indirectly and what would have have done if he had succeeded? Would he A, confessed and sadly helped dispose of the body, B lie and pretend he had no idea why Zeke died, or C, rub it in Ethan’s face and loudly proclaim how “Justified and Righteous” his actions were? He calmly set up a deathtrap for a sentient being and quietly waited weeks (possibly months) for it to trigger. During that time he watched and waited, until he either… Read more »

GeorgeV
GeorgeV
1 month ago
Reply to  Arcslayer

Where’s option D: Pretty much what happened? You seem to be ignoring that the bomb did actually go off, and we already saw the repercussions even before Zeke got back up (and ran out). There’s plenty of range between being genuinely sorry and the ‘smug jackass’ reaction you’re describing. (For example, the reactions we actually got). I think you’re trying to drag in the wrong trope with that supposed superiority complex. Scott’s actions don’t seem to be out of feeling better than everyone, or believing nobody could have done better than him. If anything it’s more the opposite: He can’t… Read more »

Arcslayer
Arcslayer
1 month ago
Reply to  GeorgeV

“You seem to be ignoring that the bomb did actually go off” No, I was describing Scott’s (possible) mental flowchart about what his reaction should be after his plan works. I want to see what Scott’s willing to do after he said “Ethan wants to protect people I need to. Whatever the cost”. That indicates that he is ready to do much more to accomplish this goal, including fake his reactions when his plan succeeds. However, Scott never thought that his plan could fail and is now dealing with the fallout of his actions. Which led to damaged friendships, possible… Read more »

Rolando
Rolando
1 month ago

This goes to show them, to those thinking that Scott was the voice of reason.

As many have figured out, they both have valid logical points AND an emotional stake here.

There’s no perfect solution, ultimate argument, or ideal system that can realistically fix their world.

Simply because, there’s none of that for OUR world either.

Last edited 1 month ago by Rolando
David K.
David K.
1 month ago
Reply to  Rolando

Scott is 100% not the voice of reason, he’s justifying murder based on his UNILATERAL GUESS as to what people MIGHT do in the future. He’s saying it’s ok if I kill someone I decide is a threat even before they have done anything. You think it’s reasonable for random Joe-citizen to have that power? If that’s your definition of reason I hope they lock you up before you start taking people out yourself. Yeesh

Rolando
Rolando
1 month ago
Reply to  David K.

Dude. Calm the f*ck down and learn to read. I am clearly implying SCOTT IS NOT THE VOICE OF REASON. You read the opposite of what I said, and decided that was enough to PUT ME IN JAIL BEFORE I DO [email protected] While criticising Scott for judging people on what they might do in the future? You’re doing the same he is, genius……

“This goes to show them” has a universal meaning of “this proves you wrong, when you claim the following.”

Rolando
Rolando
1 month ago
Reply to  David K.

Have you ever been in similar situations? I bet not. But I have. And I always stood up for descalating, non-violence, dialog and treating people fairly. I might’ve even saved a few lives, that way. I certainly saved a few people from a trip to the hospital.

Don’t judge people you don’t know. It’s stup¡d.

Rolando
Rolando
1 month ago

Survivor’s guilt. One of the most destructive psychological issues. It can affect anyone, given the right circumstances. Those without any previous conditions, too.

It’s particularly strong, able to lead people down the most dangerous and twisted paths.

It has one of the highest suicide attempt rates ever. Something like 70-80%.

It CANNOT be handled by sheer will alone. If you know of anyone who could have it, do something.

Namefield
Namefield
1 month ago

I like this comic arc a lot: Idealism vs reality. Morals always beg the question what they’re backed up by. If you’re attributing values to another being, which that being might lack or even oppose, then you’re just making a fool of yourself by setting yourself up to be exploited and disappointed while also putting others at risk of this happening to them because of your actions. Your morals are only for people that share them. This means that violence is obligatory against people that don’t share them or even oppose them, if they don’t try to avoid conflict as… Read more »

David K.
David K.
1 month ago
Reply to  Namefield

Except it’s not idealism vs reality it’s idealism vs insanity. Scott’s approach is not rational it’s purely emotional. “I should be able to kill someone because I think they might be a threat in the future.”

Let’s look at a situation using Scott “logic”:

My fiancé is killed by a drunk driver.
I see you at a bar drinking.
I am 100% justified in murdering you on the spot because I think you MIGHT drive home drunk and therefore killing you NOW will save possible victims in the future!

That’s what Scott is advocating. And he’s wrong.

Bogdan
Bogdan
1 month ago

Kill the spiders to save the butterflies…

Esc
Esc
1 month ago

What happened to Carlie’s killer?

Arcslayer
Arcslayer
1 month ago
Reply to  Esc

I’m 90% sure he doesn’t mention it. I’m wondering if Tim is leaving it ambiguous to set himself apart from the Spiderman and Batman hero origins or that’s going to be answered in the next arc.

Esc
Esc
1 month ago
Reply to  Arcslayer

Thanks. I was wondering if Scott is still wishing that guy gets caught or murdered by deathblood or if was already incarcerated.

JustJoel
JustJoel
1 month ago

Doesn’t seem like we’ll find a middle ground anytime soon. A pity, I really like this Scott, and I’d rather not lose him entirely to the dark side. Hopefully this won’t end on him and Lukas being thrown to the sidelines like in CAD 1.0

Greevar
Greevar
1 month ago

When you allow killing as a solution, it becomes a slippery slope that leads to making excuses for killing anyone.

Rauri
Rauri
1 month ago

I can find instances where taking a life is justified, especially in comics. Wilson Fisk is a danger to thousands if not millions of people by his very existence, for example. THAT SAID: Scott is very much projecting his fears onto potential danger rather than actual danger. Even Deathblood’s situation with Ethan one could argue that they were doing bad things that will hurt others and were willing and ready to murder (let’s face it if it was anyone but Ethan odds are many would find Deathblood’s attack more justified). Zeke on the other hand had up to that point… Read more »

Scarsdale
Scarsdale
1 month ago
Reply to  Rauri

Anyone can be redeemed if they want to be and Zeke was showing all the signs of that. Yes Scott has PTSD that is clear, if he doesn’t stop and get help he may very well cross the line in a big way and innocents will pay the price. He could very well become a villain that goes on a killing spree that the guys will have to take down or maybe Deathblood will.

Gravshire
Gravshire
1 month ago

It’s criminal negligence to allow criminal negligence. It’s not Scott’s fault that there are people too stupid to stop committing crime.

Scarsdale
Scarsdale
1 month ago

I can relate to Scott’s point, that SOMETIMES it’s necessary to go his route, I had someone I cared about get pointlessly murdered and they tried to pin it on me.
But Ethan has made a very good point, where do you draw the line?

Sure there will be times when you have no choice, like a strung-out junkie with a knife and no brain cells left coming at you. But killing in cold blood for “just in case” isn’t right or reason to do it. Period.

Derek Hansell
Derek Hansell
1 month ago

Welp, Scott’ll be the villain soon – joining up with Deathblood.

Paula
Paula
1 month ago

No, Scott. No. I understand your pain, but you do not have logics. We cannot kill everyone just in case they are going to murder someone in the future.

ThatMageGuy
ThatMageGuy
1 month ago
Reply to  Paula

“Logic” disagrees with you. The probability of X person murdering Y person is > 0% while X is alive. This probability increases when considering other factors such as motive and capability. The probability of X person murdering Y person is 0% if dead (barring dead-man’s switch-esque scenarios). Perhaps morality is on your side, but logic isn’t. You could argue that Scott’s mindset skews his ability to determine probability accurately, but the point remains that if X determines Y is a threat, the “logical” thing to do is to remove that threat. It’s our humanity and morality that resists logical outcomes… Read more »

Paula
Paula
1 month ago
Reply to  ThatMageGuy

What is not logic is to kill to prevent other people to kill. (Just like that, then there are nuances like you said, with probabilities and reasons to kill. But if you want to prevent a killing but becomes a killer yourself, the total result is still a dead person and a killer. So you did not actually prevent a killing. You just changed the names of victim and killer.

Dorander
Dorander
1 month ago
Reply to  Paula

Well to be fair, you did say we “cannot kill everyone just in case they are going to murder”. Killing and murdering have different definitions, murder is defined as illegally and intentionally killing another person. This is different from accidental killings or legal killings (such as war or execution).

So you are right when you say we cannot kill everyone just in case they are going to kill someone in the future, that’d lead to an infinite regression. However the logic when it comes to killing someone who might murder, does not have that issue.

David K.
David K.
1 month ago
Reply to  ThatMageGuy

By your “logic” we should kill everyone then because they all have a greater than zero chance of being a killer themselves in the future. It should be obvious to you how your logical solution doesn’t work now.

Jon
Jon
1 month ago

Isn’t Scott’s discussion in this thing irrelevant to the Ethan’s point? I mean, Scott (as far as we know) isn’t killing any humans. It’s understandable that someone who has gone through such trauma might want bad people to die it’s just not acceptable to follow through.

Also…. strange that Scott is now glorifying or at least accepting death blood when he seemed against him when Ethan first entered his abode.

GeorgeV
GeorgeV
1 month ago
Reply to  Jon

Scott might not be killing any humans (yet), but he did try and was (is) willing to kill Zeke in order to prevent potential bad things from happening. And given his current statements, he likely would be willing to follow through in other circumstances as well. It’s a very relevant discussion, even if the actual ‘kill a human’ situation hasn’t come up yet.

I wouldn’t say he’s really glorifying Deathblood, it’s more that Scott is in enough pain that he’s willing to take any solution that could remove (some of) that anguish. Even a bad one like Deathblood.

Pyre
Pyre
1 month ago

Well, any hopes that Scott would seek any form of middle ground just died.

Dorander
Dorander
1 month ago
Reply to  Pyre

Don’t give up hope, they still have a lot of whisky.

Pyre
Pyre
1 month ago
Reply to  Dorander

I kinda feel like it’s going to turn into the Whiskey-based version of the Laffer Curve where profitable outcomes are going to fall into loss.

Given this comic and the one two comics ago, I’ve been suspecting this confrontation is going to hurt more than heal. Maybe it’s necessary for their relationship that they have to get this all out in the open without Lucas acting as a mediator. However, I’m feeling like this is going to end in a net negative rather than a net positive.

leduk
leduk
1 month ago

revenge is not justice, you can’t be judge and judged

Ashi
Ashi
1 month ago

I’m about to say something very bad, and I accept your condemnation in advance.

I low-key want to find out that one of Scott’s parents was less than pure so Ethan can go “Yeah, you’re right, Deathblood SHOULD kill people who [insert bad things here] that spot-on described said parent. Force him to start the salami slicing.

Last edited 1 month ago by Ashi
TomB
TomB
1 month ago

Dark, potent, and thought provoking. Well done, Tim.

HarlequinGnoll
HarlequinGnoll
1 month ago

im pretty sure the one the two of them lost would be closer to Ethan’s viewpoint than Scott’s

Well Then
Well Then
1 month ago

Huh. I have a pretty high standard when it comes to writing, but this strip impressed me. I was doubtful up to now, but the parallel being drawn between previous events and Deathblood paid off in a big way here. Scott’s dialogue isn’t just believable, it’s evocative. Over the course of one strip, I went from thinking Scott was irredeemable to feeling that he’s justified. I went from hoping he’d apologize to thinking that he shouldn’t. That’s impressive. There’s an even more impressive bit of nuance in this arc that has been pretty subtle. I wasn’t sure if it was… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Well Then
Jonathan Smith
Jonathan Smith
1 month ago

Reference to the old CAD story?