Not signed in (Sign In)
    •  
      CommentAuthorstsparky
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2010
     (8064.41)
    The story works. Better than the door. Kait will sort it out. She's theatre too ... I'm happy Luke got shot through the head. Self defense works for me.
    • CommentAuthorsupergp
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2010
     (8064.42)
    <blockquote>"Oh, so killing someone of "their own" is worse than having him running around shooting everything? Interesting, the pigs being more equal and so on."</blockquote>

    Actually, yes. Even in massive disaster, humans are still way more numerous than Freakangels. The human race seems in little danger of going extinct, whereas there's a small (and now, decreasing!) number of FA's.

    So....don't they have the moral responsibility to value the FA life higher than the human one?

    It squicks me out to think that way, but from an objective standpoint, it strikes me as correct.
    •  
      CommentAuthorscs
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2010
     (8064.43)
    @johnjones wrote:
    You'll also note that Jack is preemptively taking the credit/blame for killing Luke all on his own shoulders, despite the fact that Alice is really the one who did it. He probably figures, quite rightly in my opinion, that the idea of a "normal" (even an honorary Freakangel normal) killing a Freakangel would push some serious buttons with others in the clan.

    Maybe, maybe not. The FAs seem to be very hardy. It's quite possible Alice may have dinged Luke up good but not killed him. Jack may have detected this and chose to finish him off for any number of reasons. Maybe Luke knew something Jack didn't want divulged. Maybe he didn't want the possibility of an exiled Luke teaming up with Mark. Maybe he just wanted to be sure Luke was dead. We'll see.

    Or maybe we won't. :-)
    •  
      CommentAuthorphorgan1
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2010
     (8064.44)
    Clearly Alice didn't kill Luke. Luke would have healed. He still might. Jack, though, intended to make it final.
    • CommentAuthorNakedCelt
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2010
     (8064.45)
    Heh.
    "He shot at new girl--" "Alice."
    Have to keep reminding myself she's only been there a week...
    •  
      CommentAuthorrazrangel
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2010
     (8064.46)
    @NakedCelt - A week + six months, actually.
    • CommentAuthorthud
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2010
     (8064.47)
    Great job on Mark's "cocoon" on page 3.
    It has that wonderful optical finish but is still somehow organic.
    It reads as a membrane, very thin, but containing bullet-proof FA stuff. WOW !
    (If it was finished with a perfect, glass-like optical surface then it would look strange without refractions bending the light and shifting the background slightly.)
    •  
      CommentAuthortaphead
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2010
     (8064.48)
    @razrangel - Six months? There was a "one week later" skip, but have I missed a six month one as well?
    •  
      CommentAuthorrazrangel
    • CommentTimeApr 17th 2010
     (8064.49)
    Oh crud I had remembered the jump as six months. They had gotten so much built up and the newcomers were in much better health... what i get for posting pre-down and not double checking
    •  
      CommentAuthorrfrancis
    • CommentTimeApr 18th 2010
     (8064.50)
    So, I keep pondering something -- first, that Jack more than foreshadowed his shooting of Luke; he outright called it while he and Alice were sitting on Luke back in 61: "Actually, they sat you here so that I don't fire a gun through his head." Now, mind you, that was in response to Alice saying that Jack was there to keep her from cutting Luke's throat. So, a couple of questions rolling around in my head:

    Did Jack shoot Luke to protect Alice from being the guilty party? (I don't disagree with @phorgan1 about whether Luke would've been killed by her last shotgun blast, but surely she would've finished the job if Jack hadn't?)

    Did Jack intend something like this all along?

    Did Jack know in advance it was going to happen? (Corrolaries: Does Jack know the future -- perhaps, as someone suggested, because he too has had a possibly fatal or near-fatal experience -- and if so, is it on his own, or, perhaps, and I love this scenario, did he find out from Arkady?)

    It seems to me the more that I look that Jack has been hinting around for some time about going out on his boat and not returning... it all just makes me wonder.

    Man, I love this comic. :)

    R
    •  
      CommentAuthorDoctor_Six
    • CommentTimeApr 18th 2010
     (8064.51)
    Warren's mistake:

    Was it page 4, panel 2? Karl says "It was fuckin brilliant".

    Should he have said "fucking brilliant" or at least "fuckin' brilliant"?

    Pedantically yours, look forward to the documentary
    • CommentAuthorJerakal
    • CommentTimeApr 18th 2010
     (8064.52)
    I hope Kait beats seven shades of shit out of Jack.
    Luke was a douche, we all know that, but he never actually killed anyone.
    Jack is hardly in the moral position to be handing down death sentences to anybody.
  1.  (8064.53)
    The crimes have sure added up in a hurry, haven't they? Let's break them down:

    CATEGORY 1-CRIMES BY OBVIOUS CRIMINALS
    Luke's rape of the girl.
    Luke shooting Kirk.
    Luke shooting down KK.
    Luke shooting at Jack.
    Mark returning from exile.
    Mark bringing weapons into Whitechapel.
    Mark conspiring with others to overthrow Whitechapel.
    Mark killing that guy for Kait to find.
    Mark trying to mind-control Kait.

    CATEGORY 2-CRIMES BY THE WHITECHAPEL STATE?
    Kirk shooting Luke.
    Alice shooting Luke.
    Jack shooting Luke.

    CATEGORY 3-NON-CRIMINAL ACTS OF POLICE WORK
    Caz and Sirkka apprehending Luke.
    Arkady, Kait, Kirk, KK and Caz apprehending Mark.

    So Arkady says "We didn't kill him." Which means all five of them showed restraint, including Karl who tried to kill him before. Karl is given a second chance to hurt Mark after the reconstruction, but again shows restraint in front of Kait. Which suggests he's operating from a practical standpoint more than a moral one. Similarly, Caz as much as told Alice that she thought Luke should be exectuted, but she still showed restraint in knocking him down. Working with the group in spite of individual feelings is how the Freakangels get along.

    So the big question: do the actions I've put in category 2 truly belong in that category? I know Alice had to surprise Luke to bring him down. But she was the one who said "fuck the law" before doing it. If shooting Luke was okay, why did Kirk wait until everyone was gone to do it? Why didn't Jack tell Sirkka about the guns in her house? These actions are done in secret for the same reason all states commit crimes in secret: to get away with it.

    A bigger question: which category does Kirk and Karl's conspiracy belong? They acted in defiance of the other nine; Kirk said as much. But they did it with the intent of protecting the state. ONLY THEY DIDN'T SHOW RESTRAINT, AND THEY WEREN'T SANCTIONED BY THE OTHERS. I think that is the important difference. That's what separates Caz's actions from Jack's, where Luke is concerned. And it wasn't done in the heat of the moment. Even though they probably regret it now and may or may not do it again, when it was committed, I'm not sure the attempted murder of Mark doesn't belong in Category 1.

    As always, Alice's position makes her the most important character. If Kirk and Karl had been successful her brothers might still be alive. Unless of course, they ARE immortal. I don't see Alice having an easy time dealing with THAT little bit of information.
    •  
      CommentAuthorphorgan1
    • CommentTimeApr 21st 2010
     (8064.54)
    Two days.
    •  
      CommentAuthorjohnjones
    • CommentTimeApr 22nd 2010 edited
     (8064.55)
    @ longtimelurker

    I think you're forgetting something in the midst of your categorizing. There is no State. There is no formal Whitechapel government, or laws as such. Right now, Whitechapel looks like a bunch of people going through the motions of their previous society because that's really all they know. And in the meantime, they're content to take direction from the nice, helpful, but very, very dangerous group of young people who came in and restored order during the Bad Time.

    Is there is President or Prime Minister or even a Mayor of Whitechapel? Not that we've seen. Is there even a formal leader of the Freakangels? Again, no. Essentially, the group divided general responsibilities and left it at that. There's no formal structure. There's no one who's actually "in change." Instead, you have a highly informal group that easily subdivides into differing cliques and opinions with no real way of settling conflict.

    And I think in the next few issues and in the next Volume we're going to see the effects of that.
    • CommentAuthorFan
    • CommentTimeApr 23rd 2010
     (8064.56)
    > Is there even a formal leader of the Freakangels? ... There's no formal structure.

    Maybe it's a direct democracy.

    "Anarchy means without leaders, not without order".
    •  
      CommentAuthorcity creed
    • CommentTimeApr 23rd 2010
     (8064.57)
    Has everyone forgotten about Mark's drone army?