Discussion History Main / StarfishAliens

\\\"For all we know that child is the kid of some evil mob leader and Johann\\\'s expression is because he\\\'s an Anti Hero who\\\'s tired of putting up with the crap of having to be a goody two-shoes all the time.\\\"

The guy with the gun is BEHIND the child, and the child is looking backward at him terrified. It\\\'s obviously not self-defense. It\\\'s also obvious from the positioning and the expression on the man\\\'s face that he\\\'s not some terrified fugitive desperately using the child as a hostage to save his own life.

I will agree that pointing a gun at a kid does not guarantee that a character fits this trope. The circumstances you described would be an example of why it doesn\\\'t.

Unless you have a picture of someone with a smoking AK-47 in hand raping a pile of bullet-filled nuns and orphans (that isn\\\'t HighOctaneNightmareFuel), the current picture works. Actually, even that wouldn\\\'t guarantee it, because what if the nuns were all carrying a deadly disease that almost necessitates killing them and the character has a FreudianExcuse for raping them? Maybe we need to show the shooter\\\'s nice-looking parents trying to stop him, and have Jesus in the background shaking his head in disapproval! That still wouldn\\\'t prove that the shooter doesn\\\'t have positive qualities, though, so we\\\'ll need the shooter to be wearing a nametag that says \\\"Ted\\\" and have a piece of paper in-view that says \\\"Ted\\\'s positive qualities: none. -signed, someone with good judgement who\\\'s been watching him since he killed his twin sister in the womb.\\\" We should throw in a speech bubble in which Ted says \\\"I\\\'m doing this because I hate everything good!\\\" as a safety measure in case it\\\'s not clear enough. Wait! I forgot irrefutable proof that the person with the smoking gun who\\\'s the only armed person visible is the shooter!

\\\"For all we know that child is the kid of some evil mob leader and Johann\\\'s expression is because he\\\'s an Anti Hero who\\\'s tired of putting up with the crap of having to be a goody two-shoes all the time.\\\"

The guy with the gun is BEHIND the child, and the child is looking backward at him terrified. It\\\'s obviously not self-defense. It\\\'s also obvious from the positioning and the expression on the man\\\'s face that he\\\'s not some terrified fugitive desperately using the child as a hostage to save his own life, but intends to (or at least appears to be willing to) actually shoot.

I will agree that pointing a gun at a kid does not guarantee that a character fits this trope. The circumstances you described would be an example of why it doesn\\\'t.

Unless you have a picture of someone with a smoking AK-47 in hand raping a pile of bullet-filled nuns and orphans (that isn\\\'t HighOctaneNightmareFuel), the current picture works. Actually, even that wouldn\\\'t guarantee it, because what if the nuns were all carrying a deadly disease that almost necessitates killing them and the character has a FreudianExcuse for raping them? Maybe we need to show the shooter\\\'s nice-looking parents trying to stop him, and have Jesus in the background shaking his head in disapproval! That still wouldn\\\'t prove that the shooter doesn\\\'t have positive qualities, though, so we\\\'ll need the shooter to be wearing a nametag that says \\\"Ted\\\" and have a piece of paper in-view that says \\\"Ted\\\'s positive qualities: none. -signed, someone with good judgement who\\\'s been watching him since he killed his twin sister in the womb.\\\" We should throw in a speech bubble in which Ted says \\\"I\\\'m doing this because I hate everything good!\\\" as a safety measure in case it\\\'s not clear enough. Wait! I forgot irrefutable proof that the person with the smoking gun who\\\'s the only armed person visible is the shooter!

\\\"For all we know that child is the kid of some evil mob leader and Johann\\\'s expression is because he\\\'s an Anti Hero who\\\'s tired of putting up with the crap of having to be a goody two-shoes all the time.\\\"

The guy with the gun is BEHIND the child, and the child is looking backward at him terrified. It\\\'s obviously not self-defense. It\\\'s also obvious from the positioning and the expression on the man\\\'s face that he\\\'s not some terrified fugitive desperately using the child as a hostage to save his own life, but intends to (or at least appears to be willing to) actually shoot.

I will agree that pointing a gun at a kid does not guarantee that a character fits this trope.

Unless you have a picture of someone with a smoking AK-47 in hand raping a pile of bullet-filled nuns and orphans (that isn\\\'t HighOctaneNightmareFuel), the current picture works. Actually, even that wouldn\\\'t guarantee it, because what if the nuns were all carrying a deadly disease that almost necessitates killing them and the character has a FreudianExcuse for raping them? Maybe we need to show the shooter\\\'s nice-looking parents trying to stop him, and have Jesus in the background shaking his head in disapproval! That still wouldn\\\'t prove that the shooter doesn\\\'t have positive qualities, though, so we\\\'ll need the shooter to be wearing a nametag that says \\\"Ted\\\" and have a piece of paper in-view that says \\\"Ted\\\'s positive qualities: none. -signed, someone with good judgement who\\\'s been watching him since he killed his twin sister in the womb.\\\" We should throw in a speech bubble in which Ted says \\\"I\\\'m doing this because I hate everything good!\\\" as a safety measure in case it\\\'s not clear enough.

\\\"For all we know that child is the kid of some evil mob leader and Johann\\\'s expression is because he\\\'s an Anti Hero who\\\'s tired of putting up with the crap of having to be a goody two-shoes all the time.\\\"

The guy with the gun is BEHIND the child, and the child is looking backward at him terrified. It\\\'s obviously not self-defense. It\\\'s also obvious from the positioning and the expression on the man\\\'s face that he\\\'s not some terrified fugitive desperately using the child as a hostage to save his own life, but intends to actually shoot.

I will agree that pointing a gun at a kid does not guarantee that a character fits this trope, but unless you have a picture of someone with a smoking AK-47 in hand raping a pile of bullet-filled nuns and orphans (that isn\\\'t HighOctaneNightmareFuel), the picture works. Actually, even that wouldn\\\'t guarantee it, because what if the nuns were all carrying a deadly disease that almost necessitates killing them and the character has a FreudianExcuse for raping them? Maybe we need to show the shooter\\\'s nice-looking parents trying to stop him, and have Jesus in the background shaking his head in disapproval! That still wouldn\\\'t prove that the shooter doesn\\\'t have positive qualities, though, so we\\\'ll need the shooter to be wearing a nametag that says \\\"Ted\\\" and have a piece of paper in-view that says \\\"Ted\\\'s positive qualities: none. -signed, someone with good judgement who\\\'s been watching him since he killed his twin sister in the womb.\\\" We should throw in a speech bubble in which Ted says \\\"I\\\'m doing this because I hate everything good!\\\" as a safety measure in case it\\\'s not clear enough.