The Shield

[Herr Logan]

Originally Posted by oregondude

You are taking the show too seriously Mein Friend. It is just a show, I could care less how viewers feel about Vic or what not. I am entertained by these guys and I know they are evil slugs deserving of a beat down. Lem is probably the least evil among them as he has not done the things Shane and Vic have, Lem does not know about killing Terry and those sorts. Still, he is a crooked cop on the take. He is bad. Do I care? nah it is just a TV show.

Dutch strangles a cat and had kiddy porn on the laptop. Why aren't you complaining about him? To me abusing children is the worst thing smeone could do.

Is there anyone on this show who is pure good? Claudette wanted to turn her back on the old pot grower. They all have dirty fingers it seems, to some degree anyway.

I'm not taking the show too seriously. I'm taking it seriously when I see comments from viewers who don't have a clue. Whether or not you care about how viewers feel is irrelevant to everything I said. If I care and you don't, then you have absolutely nothing to say on that topic.

Why wasn't I complaining about Dutch strangling a cat and having kiddy porn on his computer? Well, because noone mentioned Dutch since I subscribed to this thread or made any comments denouncing a character who became a liability to Dutch. It wasn't relevant to the specific topic at hand. Is it clicking now? Dutch strangling that cat horrified me. I mean, I knew he had psychological flaws and vast weaknesses in his work habits (he's brilliant, but his overdependence on psychological profiles is a weakness), but strangling a cat after a scumbag serial rapist tells him a childhood dog-killing story is beyond anything I saw him capable of. I couldn't even believe it when he almost planted a bra clip in that obese killer's house, and was not surprised when he stopped and reversed his decision. Awkward geek or not, he was a likable character who was an example of what a straight detective is like as opposed to Vic & friends. As for the kiddy porn, I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, but I thought he said he got it from the computer of a suspect and it was part of his investigation. He's not always honest, but the scene played out like a throw-away joke at his expense, so I didn't see it as a solid red flag.

The biggest problem I have with Claudette Wims is not that she wanted to let the old pot grower go. It's that she had every single conviction that the drugged-out public attorney defended overturned. Innocent people do get put on trial, in prison and even put to death, but considering how difficult it is most of the time to get a suspect all the way to trial (especially the amount of evidence required for a self-serving DA to feel that the case is a viable win), most of the people who gets arraigned and convicted are guility of at least of the charges brought against them. If Claudette wanted to overturn convictions of defendants who didn't have a competent laywer, she should hqave reopened the cases and gone over the details for each individual case.

I don't see how the question of "who is pure good" is relevant. I was talking about how people in the real world react to ideas put forth by a fictional product. I care, and you don't. The fact remains that if you don't care, then that only means that you don't have a counter-argument.