Thread:Mediawatcher/@comment-4708882-20160106063355/@comment-24469175-20160221080409

There is an antihero in my idea, not talking about Michael, his name is Harold and he is the chief of police, but he doesn't value all life, he is in fact a jackass of the highest order, but he does some good points. He goes after a crime lord who holds a woman with a child hostage, here's where jerkass has a point moment comes. None of his police are willing to shoot, but he shoots the bullet through the hostage and it hits his target, he's not proud of it, but he felt it was necessary, don't worry he didn't kill her, she survived and was able to go back to her family, what he says is messed up but not false:

"You do what you have to in order to protect the public, you can't worry about every single civilian out there, you gotta make sacrifices. If you were given the option to sacrifice either one civilian or a million civilians, which one would you chose"?

That's what happened, either he doesn't shoot the terrorist and harm the civilian or he lets millions of civilians die, is really a villain for it?