Board Thread:WARNING ALL USERS False Info\Spoilers/@comment-24642928-20140305234722/@comment-24642928-20140306000708

I understand that Scott falls back on an ethics argument but I always found that argument weak. While I agree fundamentally with the principle, thou shall not kill there are extenuating circumstances where you must sacrifice a belief to do what is right. The comic fan went "crazy" when Superman killed Zod in the most recent Superman movie but I was okay with it. Zod left him no choice and would have killed thousands or millions more while Superman searched for a way to imprison him if he hadn't done that. Superman had to sacrifice his personal belief and his inner peace for what is right. It would have been a cop-out for him to let others suffer so that he could fall back on his personal belief. The average policeman does not want to shoot/ kill an assailant but they have to sacrifice that want in their public duty for the greater good of those defenseless. I'll argue that with Scott's powers and knowledge of what is going on, he has that same duty.

When Gerard threatened to kill Scott's Mom if Scott didn't help him (which would likely result in more death and suffering), a circumstance to sacrifice his beliefs was created. Not even for just the greater good but to protect the one person who had always protected him. Gerard threatened her, an innocent. That was definitely claws to the throat worthy imo. Would he kill to protect his own mother from a situation that she did not make and had no knowledge or involvement with?

Everytime he lets someone go that is murderous, has killed and will likely kill in the future, he bears responsibility for what they do to those who can't defend themselves.