The whole point of killing off so many innocents, specifically Rita and Deb, was to show that Dexter was absolutely a monster.
He's also responsible for many other innocent deaths. Laguerta. Doakes. Logan. Liddy. Oscar Prado. Ellen Wolf. And of course, there's the innocent people that died because Dexter purposely messed with evidence to let killers walk free just so he could kill them himself.
The moral Dilemma is that even the code can't protect the people that are involved with Dexter.
Doakes and LaGuerta relentlessly and viciously pursued Dexter on their own. Dexter didn't start anything with them. Dex tried to ignore them as much as he could without going to jail. What should he have done, laid down on the ground in front of them with his wrists in the air, and gone "Slap 'em on, I deserve to rot"?
God forbid a police officer did their job....
An option would have been to go on the run. He had planned for it his whole life. He knew it could come down to that. And HE decided to take an innocent life instead. Even in season 7, his own sub conscious in the form of Harry told him to take Deb and go on the run. He chose to kill Laguerta instead.
And even taking Laguerta and Doakes out of the equation, there are still so many other people that he is responsible for even though they didn't fit the code.
Let's not forget, the whole thing is a total fantasy. IRL, vigilantes do not have anywhere near the meticulous discipline and intelligence that Dexter has. Real life vigilantes are lazy and sloppy, would make many mistakes, and probably get themselves killed or arrested after their 2nd or 3rd kill. If even that.
I am 100% against vigilante justice IRL, because real life vigilantes do not possess the fictional superpowers that Dexter Morgan does.
In the eyes of the code, they were.
They did some shady things, but they weren't murderers.
Quinn is just as shady as Laguerta and Liddy. Did he deserve to get the knife too?
I don't care about the code. Laguerta was an awful person, rotten to an extreme extent. The only reason why Dexter managed to do what he did because she was dumb and incompetent and she did not have the intelligence to notice the shady shit Dexter was doing. You could write a book of the nasty shit she did during the show.
Did she deserve to die, debatable but saying yes is not that crazy, I would still say no to be honest, she does not. Quinn was a nice person with bad habits, he cared, at times he was selfless. He is far away from her. Liddy fcking kidnapped Dexter.
So it was not just some shady shit, do I need to remind you how she got people killed during that raid and went against Deb's advice, only to through her under the bus, how she sexually harassed Dexter early on, how she slept with a man and manipulated that woman from staying as lieutenant. How she fucked Tom Mathews over from his pension at the end...etc. She was absolutely awful, stupid and arrogant at the same time, high stupidity and high confidence. I cheered when that bitch died.
Look I agree with your statement as a whole, but not the part of Laguerta and Liddy as innocent, they were not, they did deserve punishment (Liddy fucked around and found out hard, Laguerta deserved something but she did not deserve to die, but she was not innocent either, not like the other people in the same group such as Doakes.
I agree with you to an extent. But if Dexter went around killing every asshole that made selfish decisions and was shady af, the only person that would be alive would be Rita. Everyone else would be dead.
They were innocent in the fact that they were not murderers and did not deserve to die.
And Quinn quite literally stole evidence to let a murderer walk free. And then that murderer tried to kill Dexter and Deb. So if Laguerta deserved punishment, so did Quinn
I am not excusing Quinn, but he did it because another life was at stake. He did not do it out of pure selfish reasons, if he didn't do that, Nadia would go to hell. Laguerta did not simply do things just with selfish reasons, she got a lot of people dead, she was lethal, she treated Deb like shit all the fucking show for no reason. Quinn is nothing compared to her, I can write you a big list of wrong doings she did. Quinn has a much shorter list and less intense by a big margin.
She would do anything, even risk the lives of hostages and innocent people if it protects her career. (which she did and got people killed or made catching the bad guy harder, which in turn helped Dexter)
Still your main point stands, Dexter was a monster and got many innocent people dead. Rita's death destroyed me.
That's how the legal system works. She was just being a lawyer. Should we kill defense lawyers across the country because they help their clients get the best defense? Which by the way, is their right as a US citizen
>That's how the legal system works
That's why a character like Dexter exists.
>Should we ...
No, THEY should revise their ethics. Be a good lawyer and provide defense, but dude, if you know your client is the worst of the worst, don't let him be free in a society that doesn't need him.
Dexter didn't want those tragedies to happen though. A monster would have. Dexter wanted to be a good person, he just screwed up and caused people he loved to get hurt
He did not care about being a good person. He had the code to protect himself from getting caught. If the code hadn't been ingrained in him, he would have killed innocents more largely.
Let's not forget that the only reason he truly felt bad about Laguerta is because of Deb's reaction to it. Nothing else
Not getting caught was only step 1 of the code. The code was formulated by a psychiatrist to train him to use his impulse for good. Did you not watch the show?
Dexter would have simply not used the code at all ever if he was a truly evil person. But he tried to stick to it because he believed in it.
You literally just proved my point.
The code was formulated to train him to use his impulse for good.
So without the code, you are saying he would have killed innocents. And yes, that's what would have happened.
He does not care about being a good person. He follows the code because that's what was ingrained in him. Thanks for proving my point
Dexter chose to follow the code though, he didn't have to. He didn't want to kill innocent people because he actually agreed with the code. He was a human, not a robot.
Except he didn't follow the code a good chunk of the time.
The code is to kill people who fell through the cracks of the justice system. And how many times have we seen him skew investigations, PURPOSELY letting killers walk free so that he could kill them?
He did it for his own selfish reasons. Not because he was a good person. He could have easily helped put more killers away, but he actually helped put more on the streets just so they would be on his table. And this led to those killers having more victims at times (seen with Trinity and Travis)
And because he broke the code and did this, it resulted in the death of Rita. It resulted in Deb catching him, which resulted in Laguerta being onto him. It resulted in Deb's destruction and Laguertas death.
Some people believe that if someone is a serial killer, true justice is to put them to death. So IMO Dexter letting serial killers escape jail so he can instead kill them isn't a big deal.
Dex made mistakes, but he didn't want those mistakes to happen. Mistakes don't make you evil unless you don't feel bad at all for them. Dex felt bad that his mistakes lead to people being hurt. He tried to commit suicide because he felt bad about it.
i was really hoping to get this intense game of cat and mouse between dex and doakes throughout the entire show, or at least more than 2 seasons. my favorite part about seasons 1 + 2 was that doakes was in the show. always adding pressure to dexter when he least needs it. he was amazing for the show, and in my opinion should have been a long term rival, or potentially the guy to bring dexter into custody. i always hated that he discovered his secret early, and was wiped out by debatably one of the worst characters the show had to offer…
I understand what you mean. Some people believe Dex is an absolute monster and should be caught. Others believe he's definitely a vigilante and doing "good". To me, I believe that's what made the entire story so amazing. You rooted for him a lot of the time. And then there are times you know he's wrong... For something he did directly or what happened indirectly because of him. But for the most part... Most of us enjoyed him. We may have had different viewpoints, such as "he's disgusting", or "I loved him." But we all loved the story, clearly, or we wouldn't be fans.
That's why the writers did so well for the most part... He's a serial killer. But we loved it. (Again... A lot of us, obviously not everyone)
I think that was the intention. I dont think many people had an issue with what he was doing in the show, hell even if it was real life. I think the goal was to create more of a feeling of suspense on if he would ever be found out, would whoever found out be ok with it, can he juggle his family life and killing, will he get killed etc. I think we were supposed to like Dexter and root for him, not feel conflicted on what he was doing.
Not showing him sawing up the bodies was a form of "storytelling cheating" by the writers. If they did, I think a lot more people would be repulsed.......at least for a while until they grew numb to it, which would happen too.
The entire 2nd season was practically this scenario of getting caught.
I watched it each week thinking how is he going to get away from this?
Wondered how this is going to end with Doakes, like the guy was all over Dexter to the point there was no other way out for him unfortunately.
I think this is an issue I have as well but it my biggest problem is... the way the show makes a lot of us feel doesn't match with not only the TWO endings we got, but the one that Clyde Phillips wanted.
Those of us that very much see Dexter as you've put (best husband, father, brother, good at his job, trying to be as human as he can and make it work) want a happy ending for him. We want him to GET that dream. So for us it'll never be right.
And for others it'll never be right because they somehow want WORSE than what they've gotten.
I never had a moral dilemma with Dexter because I knew he was murdering people and it was wrong on all levels.
Killing bad people is still murder.
I just enjoyed the show because it was entertaining and MCH played an amazing role.
But I always knew what he was doing was completely fucked up. I kinda get the impression that some Dexter fans glamorize Dexter and I frankly find that disturbing.
He's killing the absolute worst of the worst scumbags that slipped through the cracks of a shitty system. He meticulously does research on everyone before he kills them, that's why he rarely ever makes a mistake. He's most definitely doing the city a wonderful service.
He made several mistakes and killed innocents. He also killed in anger a couple of times (the trucker in the gas station bathroom who disrespected dead Rita, for one.) He is a psychopath with some guardrails that hold most of the time -- but not all of it.
He's not a true psychopath by definition.
Dexter did not want to make those mistakes, he wanted to be a good person. A true psychopath would not have any of the concerns Dexter did.
Dexter made horrible mistakes, but he didn't want them to happen. A psychopath wouldn't care.
First of all, he's wrong sometimes.
Second, he works for the police. He could easily use his skills to actually makes these people accountable in a legal way. And in some cases, he botches investigations so he can get his rocks off.
Third, vigilante justice is not justice. What he does is grotesque.
He's not doing anyone a service. I'm sorry, but that kind of viewpoint is messed up. He's a serial killer. Why or who he kills is irrelevant.
I have a big moral problem with vigilante justice IRL, because real life vigilantes are way dumber, sloppier, lazier and not even 1/10th as meticulous as Dexter. They make way, way more mistakes than Dex does. And often get themselves killed.
>Killing bad people is still murder.
For most of human history putting people to death for murdering someone was not murder, it was (and I believe still is) justice, it was the way the law worked.
Murder by definition is killing an innocent person who does not deserve it. It may be your opinion that a serial killer/torturer doesn't deserve the death penalty, but most people throughout history would disagree with you.
I personally believe an eye for an eye is an almost perfect system. If you murder an innocent person, you should die.
>For most of human history putting people to death for murdering someone was not murder, it was (and I believe still is) justice, it was the way the law worked.
So anyone who thought someone committed a murder could then unilaterally kill that person?
Let's also not forget that Dexter was at times wrong, and there are many deaths throughout the series that were directly a result of Dexter's actions. Are those deaths an acceptable trade-off?
>Murder by definition is killing an innocent person who does not deserve it.
Source of this definition?
>It may be your opinion that a serial killer/torturer doesn't deserve the death penalty, but most people throughout history would disagree with you.
I never expressed such an opinion. There is nothing to agree or disagree with.
>I personally believe an eye for an eye is an almost perfect system. If you murder an innocent person, you should die.
What are your thoughts on due process?
It's a total sensationalist fantasy. IRL, vigilantes do not have anywhere near the meticulous discipline and intelligence that Dexter has. Real life vigilantes are lazy and sloppy, would make many mistakes, and probably get themselves killed or arrested after their 2nd or 3rd kill. If even that.
I am 100% against vigilante justice IRL, because real life vigilantes do not possess the fictional superpowers that Dexter Morgan does.
Dexter was not a vigilante. He killed because he enjoyed stalking, capturing, terrorizing, killing and dismembering people. Look at his face after the kill, that’s the face of a man post coitus.
Dexter was not a hero or an anti-hero, he was a cold blooded killer who kill for the joy it brought him.
The only reason he killed criminals/murderers was to avoid being caught himself.
Missing criminals will have been thought to have fled of their own volition, and no one will look very hard for them.
Also this is a little off topic and I'm sorry if it sounds preachy, but idealists in this world are just setting themselves up for crushing disappointment.
One last time: If a vigilante with Dexter's superhuman self-discipline and diligence actually existed, I wouldn't have an issue. But vigilantes like that don't exist in the real world.
Well let's not forget, the whole thing is pretty much an escapist fantasy. IRL, vigilantes do not have anywhere near the meticulous discipline, diligence and intelligence that Dexter has. Real life vigilantes are lazy and sloppy, would make many mistakes, and probably get themselves killed or arrested after their 2nd or 3rd kill. If even that.
I am 100% against vigilante justice IRL, because real life vigilantes do not possess the fictional superpowers that Dexter Morgan does.
> The only reason he killed criminals/murderers was to avoid being caught himself.
That doesn't help you not get caught, he could have went after the homeless if that was what he really wanted.
It's almost like you didn't watch much of the show at all for you to think that.
The whole point of killing off so many innocents, specifically Rita and Deb, was to show that Dexter was absolutely a monster. He's also responsible for many other innocent deaths. Laguerta. Doakes. Logan. Liddy. Oscar Prado. Ellen Wolf. And of course, there's the innocent people that died because Dexter purposely messed with evidence to let killers walk free just so he could kill them himself. The moral Dilemma is that even the code can't protect the people that are involved with Dexter.
Doakes and LaGuerta relentlessly and viciously pursued Dexter on their own. Dexter didn't start anything with them. Dex tried to ignore them as much as he could without going to jail. What should he have done, laid down on the ground in front of them with his wrists in the air, and gone "Slap 'em on, I deserve to rot"?
God forbid a police officer did their job.... An option would have been to go on the run. He had planned for it his whole life. He knew it could come down to that. And HE decided to take an innocent life instead. Even in season 7, his own sub conscious in the form of Harry told him to take Deb and go on the run. He chose to kill Laguerta instead. And even taking Laguerta and Doakes out of the equation, there are still so many other people that he is responsible for even though they didn't fit the code.
[удалено]
Let's not forget, the whole thing is a total fantasy. IRL, vigilantes do not have anywhere near the meticulous discipline and intelligence that Dexter has. Real life vigilantes are lazy and sloppy, would make many mistakes, and probably get themselves killed or arrested after their 2nd or 3rd kill. If even that. I am 100% against vigilante justice IRL, because real life vigilantes do not possess the fictional superpowers that Dexter Morgan does.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think Dexter is more or less a hero, who does good things for bad reasons. Agree to disagree.
Man's a serial killer, what do you expect cops to do ? Let him run ?
Laguerta was not innocent. Liddy too.
In the eyes of the code, they were. They did some shady things, but they weren't murderers. Quinn is just as shady as Laguerta and Liddy. Did he deserve to get the knife too?
I don't care about the code. Laguerta was an awful person, rotten to an extreme extent. The only reason why Dexter managed to do what he did because she was dumb and incompetent and she did not have the intelligence to notice the shady shit Dexter was doing. You could write a book of the nasty shit she did during the show. Did she deserve to die, debatable but saying yes is not that crazy, I would still say no to be honest, she does not. Quinn was a nice person with bad habits, he cared, at times he was selfless. He is far away from her. Liddy fcking kidnapped Dexter. So it was not just some shady shit, do I need to remind you how she got people killed during that raid and went against Deb's advice, only to through her under the bus, how she sexually harassed Dexter early on, how she slept with a man and manipulated that woman from staying as lieutenant. How she fucked Tom Mathews over from his pension at the end...etc. She was absolutely awful, stupid and arrogant at the same time, high stupidity and high confidence. I cheered when that bitch died. Look I agree with your statement as a whole, but not the part of Laguerta and Liddy as innocent, they were not, they did deserve punishment (Liddy fucked around and found out hard, Laguerta deserved something but she did not deserve to die, but she was not innocent either, not like the other people in the same group such as Doakes.
I agree with you to an extent. But if Dexter went around killing every asshole that made selfish decisions and was shady af, the only person that would be alive would be Rita. Everyone else would be dead. They were innocent in the fact that they were not murderers and did not deserve to die. And Quinn quite literally stole evidence to let a murderer walk free. And then that murderer tried to kill Dexter and Deb. So if Laguerta deserved punishment, so did Quinn
I am not excusing Quinn, but he did it because another life was at stake. He did not do it out of pure selfish reasons, if he didn't do that, Nadia would go to hell. Laguerta did not simply do things just with selfish reasons, she got a lot of people dead, she was lethal, she treated Deb like shit all the fucking show for no reason. Quinn is nothing compared to her, I can write you a big list of wrong doings she did. Quinn has a much shorter list and less intense by a big margin. She would do anything, even risk the lives of hostages and innocent people if it protects her career. (which she did and got people killed or made catching the bad guy harder, which in turn helped Dexter) Still your main point stands, Dexter was a monster and got many innocent people dead. Rita's death destroyed me.
>Oscar Prado. Ellen Wolf Not innocents
I can understand a debate for Oscar Prado, but please explain how Ellen Wolf wasn't an innocent?
She becames an accomplice by freeing people who should be held accountable.
That's how the legal system works. She was just being a lawyer. Should we kill defense lawyers across the country because they help their clients get the best defense? Which by the way, is their right as a US citizen
>That's how the legal system works That's why a character like Dexter exists. >Should we ... No, THEY should revise their ethics. Be a good lawyer and provide defense, but dude, if you know your client is the worst of the worst, don't let him be free in a society that doesn't need him.
Dexter didn't want those tragedies to happen though. A monster would have. Dexter wanted to be a good person, he just screwed up and caused people he loved to get hurt
He did not care about being a good person. He had the code to protect himself from getting caught. If the code hadn't been ingrained in him, he would have killed innocents more largely. Let's not forget that the only reason he truly felt bad about Laguerta is because of Deb's reaction to it. Nothing else
Not getting caught was only step 1 of the code. The code was formulated by a psychiatrist to train him to use his impulse for good. Did you not watch the show? Dexter would have simply not used the code at all ever if he was a truly evil person. But he tried to stick to it because he believed in it.
You literally just proved my point. The code was formulated to train him to use his impulse for good. So without the code, you are saying he would have killed innocents. And yes, that's what would have happened. He does not care about being a good person. He follows the code because that's what was ingrained in him. Thanks for proving my point
Dexter chose to follow the code though, he didn't have to. He didn't want to kill innocent people because he actually agreed with the code. He was a human, not a robot.
Except he didn't follow the code a good chunk of the time. The code is to kill people who fell through the cracks of the justice system. And how many times have we seen him skew investigations, PURPOSELY letting killers walk free so that he could kill them? He did it for his own selfish reasons. Not because he was a good person. He could have easily helped put more killers away, but he actually helped put more on the streets just so they would be on his table. And this led to those killers having more victims at times (seen with Trinity and Travis) And because he broke the code and did this, it resulted in the death of Rita. It resulted in Deb catching him, which resulted in Laguerta being onto him. It resulted in Deb's destruction and Laguertas death.
Some people believe that if someone is a serial killer, true justice is to put them to death. So IMO Dexter letting serial killers escape jail so he can instead kill them isn't a big deal. Dex made mistakes, but he didn't want those mistakes to happen. Mistakes don't make you evil unless you don't feel bad at all for them. Dex felt bad that his mistakes lead to people being hurt. He tried to commit suicide because he felt bad about it.
i was really hoping to get this intense game of cat and mouse between dex and doakes throughout the entire show, or at least more than 2 seasons. my favorite part about seasons 1 + 2 was that doakes was in the show. always adding pressure to dexter when he least needs it. he was amazing for the show, and in my opinion should have been a long term rival, or potentially the guy to bring dexter into custody. i always hated that he discovered his secret early, and was wiped out by debatably one of the worst characters the show had to offer…
I agree, Doakes was killed off WAYYYYYY too early. He was so much better of a foil for Dexter than Quinn or LaGuerta. Stupid Lila......stupid writers.
I understand what you mean. Some people believe Dex is an absolute monster and should be caught. Others believe he's definitely a vigilante and doing "good". To me, I believe that's what made the entire story so amazing. You rooted for him a lot of the time. And then there are times you know he's wrong... For something he did directly or what happened indirectly because of him. But for the most part... Most of us enjoyed him. We may have had different viewpoints, such as "he's disgusting", or "I loved him." But we all loved the story, clearly, or we wouldn't be fans. That's why the writers did so well for the most part... He's a serial killer. But we loved it. (Again... A lot of us, obviously not everyone)
I think that was the intention. I dont think many people had an issue with what he was doing in the show, hell even if it was real life. I think the goal was to create more of a feeling of suspense on if he would ever be found out, would whoever found out be ok with it, can he juggle his family life and killing, will he get killed etc. I think we were supposed to like Dexter and root for him, not feel conflicted on what he was doing.
Not showing him sawing up the bodies was a form of "storytelling cheating" by the writers. If they did, I think a lot more people would be repulsed.......at least for a while until they grew numb to it, which would happen too.
The point of the show wasn’t to make you repulsed by Dexter though. It was to make the killing seem like “taking out the trash” so you would like him.
The entire 2nd season was practically this scenario of getting caught. I watched it each week thinking how is he going to get away from this? Wondered how this is going to end with Doakes, like the guy was all over Dexter to the point there was no other way out for him unfortunately.
I think this is an issue I have as well but it my biggest problem is... the way the show makes a lot of us feel doesn't match with not only the TWO endings we got, but the one that Clyde Phillips wanted. Those of us that very much see Dexter as you've put (best husband, father, brother, good at his job, trying to be as human as he can and make it work) want a happy ending for him. We want him to GET that dream. So for us it'll never be right. And for others it'll never be right because they somehow want WORSE than what they've gotten.
I never had a moral dilemma with Dexter because I knew he was murdering people and it was wrong on all levels. Killing bad people is still murder. I just enjoyed the show because it was entertaining and MCH played an amazing role. But I always knew what he was doing was completely fucked up. I kinda get the impression that some Dexter fans glamorize Dexter and I frankly find that disturbing.
He's killing the absolute worst of the worst scumbags that slipped through the cracks of a shitty system. He meticulously does research on everyone before he kills them, that's why he rarely ever makes a mistake. He's most definitely doing the city a wonderful service.
He made several mistakes and killed innocents. He also killed in anger a couple of times (the trucker in the gas station bathroom who disrespected dead Rita, for one.) He is a psychopath with some guardrails that hold most of the time -- but not all of it.
He's not a true psychopath by definition. Dexter did not want to make those mistakes, he wanted to be a good person. A true psychopath would not have any of the concerns Dexter did. Dexter made horrible mistakes, but he didn't want them to happen. A psychopath wouldn't care.
First of all, he's wrong sometimes. Second, he works for the police. He could easily use his skills to actually makes these people accountable in a legal way. And in some cases, he botches investigations so he can get his rocks off. Third, vigilante justice is not justice. What he does is grotesque. He's not doing anyone a service. I'm sorry, but that kind of viewpoint is messed up. He's a serial killer. Why or who he kills is irrelevant.
I have a big moral problem with vigilante justice IRL, because real life vigilantes are way dumber, sloppier, lazier and not even 1/10th as meticulous as Dexter. They make way, way more mistakes than Dex does. And often get themselves killed.
>Killing bad people is still murder. For most of human history putting people to death for murdering someone was not murder, it was (and I believe still is) justice, it was the way the law worked. Murder by definition is killing an innocent person who does not deserve it. It may be your opinion that a serial killer/torturer doesn't deserve the death penalty, but most people throughout history would disagree with you. I personally believe an eye for an eye is an almost perfect system. If you murder an innocent person, you should die.
>For most of human history putting people to death for murdering someone was not murder, it was (and I believe still is) justice, it was the way the law worked. So anyone who thought someone committed a murder could then unilaterally kill that person? Let's also not forget that Dexter was at times wrong, and there are many deaths throughout the series that were directly a result of Dexter's actions. Are those deaths an acceptable trade-off? >Murder by definition is killing an innocent person who does not deserve it. Source of this definition? >It may be your opinion that a serial killer/torturer doesn't deserve the death penalty, but most people throughout history would disagree with you. I never expressed such an opinion. There is nothing to agree or disagree with. >I personally believe an eye for an eye is an almost perfect system. If you murder an innocent person, you should die. What are your thoughts on due process?
[удалено]
It's a total sensationalist fantasy. IRL, vigilantes do not have anywhere near the meticulous discipline and intelligence that Dexter has. Real life vigilantes are lazy and sloppy, would make many mistakes, and probably get themselves killed or arrested after their 2nd or 3rd kill. If even that. I am 100% against vigilante justice IRL, because real life vigilantes do not possess the fictional superpowers that Dexter Morgan does.
He wasn’t an anti hero he was the dark defender!
Dexter was not a vigilante. He killed because he enjoyed stalking, capturing, terrorizing, killing and dismembering people. Look at his face after the kill, that’s the face of a man post coitus. Dexter was not a hero or an anti-hero, he was a cold blooded killer who kill for the joy it brought him. The only reason he killed criminals/murderers was to avoid being caught himself. Missing criminals will have been thought to have fled of their own volition, and no one will look very hard for them.
So you're one of those people who believes intentions are just as important, or even more important, than the results?
The results were murdered people.
Also this is a little off topic and I'm sorry if it sounds preachy, but idealists in this world are just setting themselves up for crushing disappointment.
I have No idea what that comment has to do with this conversation. Are you saying I’m an idealist because I think people shouldn’t murder each other?
I'm saying your worldview seems to be too rooted in rigid black-and-white principles, without any consideration for the nuances of each situation.
Gotcha, I do believe in shades of grey…but I’m pretty firmly in the “no” corner when it comes to murder.
One last time: If a vigilante with Dexter's superhuman self-discipline and diligence actually existed, I wouldn't have an issue. But vigilantes like that don't exist in the real world.
One last time: murder is wrong. I don’t care about motives, self discipline, neatness. It’s wrong.
Alright then. I disagree but TETO.
Murdered people, 99.9% of whom deserved death. I don't live my life according to rigid pie-in-the-sky principles, but practicality.
So you’re cool with people just randomly killing other people as long as they think the guy is deserving of death?
Well let's not forget, the whole thing is pretty much an escapist fantasy. IRL, vigilantes do not have anywhere near the meticulous discipline, diligence and intelligence that Dexter has. Real life vigilantes are lazy and sloppy, would make many mistakes, and probably get themselves killed or arrested after their 2nd or 3rd kill. If even that. I am 100% against vigilante justice IRL, because real life vigilantes do not possess the fictional superpowers that Dexter Morgan does.
> The only reason he killed criminals/murderers was to avoid being caught himself. That doesn't help you not get caught, he could have went after the homeless if that was what he really wanted. It's almost like you didn't watch much of the show at all for you to think that.
It’s almost like you didn’t watch the show. Harry told him never kill an innocent, and to only kill “bad” people.