@movie_nazi said:

I disagree. I think that honor goes to Carol who after taking it upon herself to murder some people for catching the flu, she suddenly fancies herself as 'hardcore' and believes in the notion of "kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out" . Fkn pathetic. And yet, people think she is actually a good character. LOL. That's too funny.

So how would you be in an actual zombie apocalypse ( I know it is far fetched, but let's pretend) ? And have you watched the show lately?

@movie_nazi said:

I disagree. I think that honor goes to Carol who after taking it upon herself to murder some people for catching the flu, she suddenly fancies herself as 'hardcore' and believes in the notion of "kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out" . Fkn pathetic. And yet, people think she is actually a good character. LOL. That's too funny.

Carol is a murderous bitch that I don't always agree with what she does. I do have sympathy for her since she was an abused housewife following around that even more murderous asshole Rick. Rick even has Father Gabriel killing people. Lol

@LizDuv said:

@movie_nazi said:

I disagree. I think that honor goes to Carol who after taking it upon herself to murder some people for catching the flu, she suddenly fancies herself as 'hardcore' and believes in the notion of "kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out" . Fkn pathetic. And yet, people think she is actually a good character. LOL. That's too funny.

So how would you be in an actual zombie apocalypse ( I know it is far fetched, but let's pretend) ? And have you watched the show lately?

What do you mean how would I be? I wouldn't murder people for catching the flu for one. I would know when there was a time to kill and a time not to. What exactly are you getting at? Yes I have watched the show lately although for the life of me I am not exactly sure why. It's so goddamn boring now.

@LadyGigi said:

@burger97 said:

@franky cook said:

@burger97 said:

@franky cook said:

I'm being rude??? "Unless Tara is sucking down fries dipped in mayo I just don't see how she's keeping the chunk." Mmkay!

You really have reality issue kid. I'm referring to the character, not the actress. I guess you're what they call a snowflake...getting all heated over a fictional character. Once again, I'm insulting the writers and directors of the show. Not the actress. Well you too now since I'm calling you a snowflake. Pick better causes to fight dude. You sound like a real idiot.

Attacking me because you have no real discourse? High five.

My 'discourse' was to tell you that you're off base on who I'm insulting and that you need get some education. Be gone child!

You do realise that he's probably not 7 years old. He's probably 30! Lol

I'd say closer to 50

Sorry. This thread is hilarious.

@movie_nazi said:

@LizDuv said:

@movie_nazi said:

I disagree. I think that honor goes to Carol who after taking it upon herself to murder some people for catching the flu, she suddenly fancies herself as 'hardcore' and believes in the notion of "kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out" . Fkn pathetic. And yet, people think she is actually a good character. LOL. That's too funny.

So how would you be in an actual zombie apocalypse ( I know it is far fetched, but let's pretend) ? And have you watched the show lately?

What do you mean how would I be? I wouldn't murder people for catching the flu for one. I would know when there was a time to kill and a time not to. What exactly are you getting at? Yes I have watched the show lately although for the life of me I am not exactly sure why. It's so goddamn boring now.

OK first..I asked how you would be for the obvious reason, catching the flu was detrimental to all of them as was shown. Did she go to far? Well I guess that is up to being in the same place she was at that time. I honestly do not know how I would be if it was a them or me situation, but apparently you know. What was I getting at? Well I hope my prior sentences answered that. And as far as asking why you have watched it lately, well up until this past episode Carol has been a slug and has not done anything "hardcore".

@LizDuv said: OK first..I asked how you would be for the obvious reason, catching the flu was detrimental to all of them as was shown. Did she go to far? Well I guess that is up to being in the same place she was at that time. I honestly do not know how I would be if it was a them or me situation, but apparently you know. What was I getting at? Well I hope my prior sentences answered that. And as far as asking why you have watched it lately, well up until this past episode Carol has been a slug and has not done anything "hardcore".

Karen and David were both into what the doctor told Hershel was the terminal stage, past the point of recovery. It was arguably an act of mercy to kill them quickly since death comes as your lungs gradually fill with blood and you choke on it. In that kind of situation, whether or not you did the right thing might come down to whether or not the virus is contained. If you stop an outbreak before it starts by killing a couple of people who were dead no matter what the answer's probably yes. If it's already too late and the virus spreads, all you did was murder two people for nothing.

@chrisjdel said:

@LizDuv said: OK first..I asked how you would be for the obvious reason, catching the flu was detrimental to all of them as was shown. Did she go to far? Well I guess that is up to being in the same place she was at that time. I honestly do not know how I would be if it was a them or me situation, but apparently you know. What was I getting at? Well I hope my prior sentences answered that. And as far as asking why you have watched it lately, well up until this past episode Carol has been a slug and has not done anything "hardcore".

Karen and David were both into what the doctor told Hershel was the terminal stage, past the point of recovery. It was arguably an act of mercy to kill them quickly since death comes as your lungs gradually fill with blood and you choke on it. In that kind of situation, whether or not you did the right thing might come down to whether or not the virus is contained. If you stop an outbreak before it starts by killing a couple of people who were dead no matter what the answer's probably yes. If it's already too late and the virus spreads, all you did was murder two people for nothing.

They were quarantined in a jail cell. There was no danger of it spreading to other people. Besides whoTF gave her authority to come to that decision?

@movie_nazi said: They were quarantined in a jail cell. There was no danger of it spreading to other people. Besides whoTF gave her authority to come to that decision?

Ask a doctor how effectively metal bars with no air seal confines an airborne pathogen. And no one gave her that authority; but she's not alone in deciding she has the right to kill random people, now is she?

I'm just saying you don't know until after the fact whether you did the right thing. If an airborne strain of ebola were to get loose in New York and killed tens of millions before they contained it, or was never contained at all, and you could go back and undo everything by terminating patient zero before they had a chance to spread it, would that be the right thing to do? I think most people would say yes. Of course, if someone does it they'll never really know they saved the world - will they? And what if you shoot them but they've already spread it. You've just killed a person for nothing. Was it the right thing to do then? Is right and wrong set in stone or does the final outcome play a role? Very important moral question. Not so easy to answer though.

@LizDuv said:

@movie_nazi said:

@LizDuv said:

@movie_nazi said:

I disagree. I think that honor goes to Carol who after taking it upon herself to murder some people for catching the flu, she suddenly fancies herself as 'hardcore' and believes in the notion of "kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out" . Fkn pathetic. And yet, people think she is actually a good character. LOL. That's too funny.

So how would you be in an actual zombie apocalypse ( I know it is far fetched, but let's pretend) ? And have you watched the show lately?

What do you mean how would I be? I wouldn't murder people for catching the flu for one. I would know when there was a time to kill and a time not to. What exactly are you getting at? Yes I have watched the show lately although for the life of me I am not exactly sure why. It's so goddamn boring now.

OK first..I asked how you would be for the obvious reason, catching the flu was detrimental to all of them as was shown. Did she go to far? Well I guess that is up to being in the same place she was at that time. I honestly do not know how I would be if it was a them or me situation, but apparently you know. What was I getting at? Well I hope my prior sentences answered that. And as far as asking why you have watched it lately, well up until this past episode Carol has been a slug and has not done anything "hardcore".

I personally would have quarantined them and after they died have someone go in there and put a knife in their head. Medicine was on the way and Glenn and others survived. She could have easily killed them as well. I guess it was easier for her to kill those people since she didn't know them as well. Either way no one gave her the authority to eliminate those people. What kind of society is it when you kill people because they might get someone sick? Ebola has no known cure yet people still risk their lives nursing victims of it to health even though there is a 95% chance they will die and quite possibly contaminate themselves in the process. THAT is humane. THAT is how one should act. Not murder them off because they might contaminate someone else.

And Carol may not have done anything hardcore this season but NOTHING has happened this season.

@movie_nazi said: I personally would have quarantined them and after they died have someone go in there and put a knife in their head. Medicine was on the way and Glenn and others survived. She could have easily killed them as well. I guess it was easier for her to kill those people since she didn't know them as well. Either way no one gave her the authority to eliminate those people. What kind of society is it when you kill people because they might get someone sick? Ebola has no known cure yet people still risk their lives nursing victims of it to health even though there is a 95% chance they will die and quite possibly contaminate themselves in the process. THAT is humane. THAT is how one should act. Not murder them off because they might contaminate someone else.

And Carol may not have done anything hardcore this season but NOTHING has happened this season.

At the time Carol killed the two terminal people (who were already going to die) they were the only ones exhibiting symptoms. It's possible what she did could have contained the virus and prevented any more people falling ill. It just so happened that it was too late.

Current ebola strains are not airborne. A fully airborne and highly contagious version with a very high mortality rate could bring the human race to its knees in a matter of weeks. Suppose you knew that someone was carrying the virus and had a chance to eliminate them and stop the pandemic before it began. Is that the right thing to do, yes or no? Suppose you shoot them. They do a post-mortem examination. Does their blood work coming up positive for the deadly virus (you saved the world) versus negative (you killed them for nothing) make a difference in the moral equation, or was right and wrong etched in stone beforehand?

@chrisjdel said:

@movie_nazi said: I personally would have quarantined them and after they died have someone go in there and put a knife in their head. Medicine was on the way and Glenn and others survived. She could have easily killed them as well. I guess it was easier for her to kill those people since she didn't know them as well. Either way no one gave her the authority to eliminate those people. What kind of society is it when you kill people because they might get someone sick? Ebola has no known cure yet people still risk their lives nursing victims of it to health even though there is a 95% chance they will die and quite possibly contaminate themselves in the process. THAT is humane. THAT is how one should act. Not murder them off because they might contaminate someone else.

And Carol may not have done anything hardcore this season but NOTHING has happened this season.

At the time Carol killed the two terminal people (who were already going to die) they were the only ones exhibiting symptoms. It's possible what she did could have contained the virus and prevented any more people falling ill. It just so happened that it was too late.

Current ebola strains are not airborne. A fully airborne and highly contagious version with a very high mortality rate could bring the human race to its knees in a matter of weeks. Suppose you knew that someone was carrying the virus and had a chance to eliminate them and stop the pandemic before it began. Is that the right thing to do, yes or no? Suppose you shoot them. They do a post-mortem examination. Does their blood work coming up positive for the deadly virus (you saved the world) versus negative (you killed them for nothing) make a difference in the moral equation, or was right and wrong etched in stone beforehand?

I just wished that Carol had consulted the counsel first before taking matters into her own hands. Then she lied about it for months and caused a fight between Rick, Daryl and Tyreese.

@LadyGigi said:

@chrisjdel said:

@movie_nazi said: I personally would have quarantined them and after they died have someone go in there and put a knife in their head. Medicine was on the way and Glenn and others survived. She could have easily killed them as well. I guess it was easier for her to kill those people since she didn't know them as well. Either way no one gave her the authority to eliminate those people. What kind of society is it when you kill people because they might get someone sick? Ebola has no known cure yet people still risk their lives nursing victims of it to health even though there is a 95% chance they will die and quite possibly contaminate themselves in the process. THAT is humane. THAT is how one should act. Not murder them off because they might contaminate someone else.

And Carol may not have done anything hardcore this season but NOTHING has happened this season.

At the time Carol killed the two terminal people (who were already going to die) they were the only ones exhibiting symptoms. It's possible what she did could have contained the virus and prevented any more people falling ill. It just so happened that it was too late.

Current ebola strains are not airborne. A fully airborne and highly contagious version with a very high mortality rate could bring the human race to its knees in a matter of weeks. Suppose you knew that someone was carrying the virus and had a chance to eliminate them and stop the pandemic before it began. Is that the right thing to do, yes or no? Suppose you shoot them. They do a post-mortem examination. Does their blood work coming up positive for the deadly virus (you saved the world) versus negative (you killed them for nothing) make a difference in the moral equation, or was right and wrong etched in stone beforehand?

I just wished that Carol had consulted the counsel first before taking matters into her own hands. Then she lied about it for months and caused a fight between Rick, Daryl and Tyreese.

They never would've been okay with the idea. And they would have been right, but there was no way of knowing that until after the fact. You know what I'm saying. That's the sort of thing you get one shot at, if you get a shot at all. Being in the right place at the right time means you have to make that choice like it or not. Take action or do nothing. Either of which could turn out to be the wrong decision. If she was going to do it though, Carol should have immediately admitted it rather than lying.

She is annoying. Also she looks like she would be especially stinky.

@franky cook said:

@domremy said:

@franky cook said:

@LastLion said:

She keeps getting fatter and uglier.

and you're pathetic. Is this site really going to become like IMDB and not monitor this kind of crap?

Lol, it is their opinion and I agree she could have got back in to shape after her pregnancy but she hasn't bothered to which questions her career professionalism.

Are you kidding me? "Questions her career professionalism"? If you gain weight at your work does that show your lack of professionalism? Who gets to decide when or how an actor loses weight? Internet trolls? Peas and rice.

not all jobs are created equal. if i was an actor, yes. if i was a secretary, no