itsnotmymind (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
itsnotmymind) wrote2017-04-10 07:03 pm
itsnotmymind) wrote2017-04-10 07:03 pm
Entry tags:
Go to Hell: Repo Man
I just finished re-watching Repo Man. I've always thought it a strong episode, one that really takes a harsh look at how Sam and Dean treat possessed people. But nonetheless, I've always felt the making Jeffrey turn out to be so evil undermined that harsh look. It makes it harder for us to care, to empathize with Jeffrey, to fully feel the effects of Sam and Dean's actions.
Yet somehow, I never noticed how the exorcism of the demon Nora's son completely undermines any argument for the Winchester brothers' near-constant murders of countless possession victims. Some fans have argues that demons should be killed rather the exorcised because otherwise the demons will return to kill others. Well, here is a demon who is especially dangerous - he not only kills, he possesses people planning to teach them how to be serial killers, so they can kill on their own after he leaves. Yet, because they have sympathy towards the victim's mother, Sam and Dean choose to exorcise him.
Dean even kills Jeffrey to keep him from killing the demon. Don't get me wrong - the Winchester brothers had no feelings of mercy towards Jeffrey at this point, nor should they have. There's a reason Dean shot him instead of making an attempt to disarm him. Nonetheless, I don't think Dean would have killed him directly accept to save another person - even if saving another person means saving the demon inhabiting that person. So much for the "No matter what meat suit he's in, I should have knifed him," argument that he gave a season later, after trying to kill Linda Tran.
(Also, so much for the fanon I've encountered that Sam cares about people he knows more than people he doesn't know, but Dean has no such prejudice...)
If killing Nora's son would have been wrong, why is it okay to kill so many nameless people who had the misfortune to have demons shoved inside them?
Yet somehow, I never noticed how the exorcism of the demon Nora's son completely undermines any argument for the Winchester brothers' near-constant murders of countless possession victims. Some fans have argues that demons should be killed rather the exorcised because otherwise the demons will return to kill others. Well, here is a demon who is especially dangerous - he not only kills, he possesses people planning to teach them how to be serial killers, so they can kill on their own after he leaves. Yet, because they have sympathy towards the victim's mother, Sam and Dean choose to exorcise him.
Dean even kills Jeffrey to keep him from killing the demon. Don't get me wrong - the Winchester brothers had no feelings of mercy towards Jeffrey at this point, nor should they have. There's a reason Dean shot him instead of making an attempt to disarm him. Nonetheless, I don't think Dean would have killed him directly accept to save another person - even if saving another person means saving the demon inhabiting that person. So much for the "No matter what meat suit he's in, I should have knifed him," argument that he gave a season later, after trying to kill Linda Tran.
(Also, so much for the fanon I've encountered that Sam cares about people he knows more than people he doesn't know, but Dean has no such prejudice...)
If killing Nora's son would have been wrong, why is it okay to kill so many nameless people who had the misfortune to have demons shoved inside them?