what about kids

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by UNYEILDING on September 24, 2008 at 4:29pm

this depends completely on the situation. if there was a 60% chance of saving him/her i would try my best but if'm i'm bit i'm only going to endanger them.

Permalink Reply by bobby on September 24, 2008 at 5:43pm

i would of course take them with me as long as they were not wild or dangerous. and obviously if they were in danger i would do what it took to remove them from danger. but at the same time, if it was an impossible situation, sadly i would not put myself in danger unless it was to save MY children.

Permalink Reply by josh on September 25, 2008 at 4:14pm

i agree with you about the wild and dangerous part considering the situation i dont think they would undermine some one that is willing to take them along. i have a different outlook kids are the future so wehter they were my kids or not if it came down to sacrifice i would have to go ahead and save them even if it ment getting infected. if i got infected from tring to save him/her i would tell them to go ahead and not look back than cap my self but thats ones oppion

Permalink Reply by UNYEILDING on October 2, 2008 at 6:59pm

if you're dead and they can't protect themselves than what good was your sacrifice?

Permalink Reply by Mkxlng63 on November 3, 2008 at 4:38am

For the first part. I would take them. A kid can always learn to shoot a .22. And in that situation, you can always use another set of eyes.

For the second part. Assuming I've had enough time, I think they would be well adapted to the new situation, and would probably at that point be an addition to your team. Definately take them with you.

Permalink Reply by luke on January 7, 2009 at 2:36pm

i would definatly take and train them i think at there young age they could learn anything and could become valued members of any team. i have an interesting thing to add though what about infant children if by some chance you find one or the current gaurdian goes zed.

Permalink Reply by bobby on January 7, 2009 at 3:47pm

well you cant leave them behind if you have any conscience what so ever. but that is a tough one, depending on their age, how would you feed them or keep them quiet? it woulde definitely be rough. tho i'm thinking the chances of just happening on one that has not been eaten or died from starvation already would be pretty slim.

Permalink Reply by jordan on February 4, 2009 at 12:51pm

Whether or not I took them would depend on if they were willing, If I had the supplies to support them, if they could be helpful to me or not, if they would attract zeds to my position (E.G. make lots of noise goofing off or something), and if they were infected or not.
If they were infected, but not yet turned zed, I'd have no choice but to leave them there, probably kill them to spare them being a zed. (Granted this might be harder if only one was infected and I simply killed him and took the other, who most likely wouldent be happy with me).
Its partially a moral dilema as well, leave them to die or survive on their own or take them under your wing.
The good thing about taking them in is that you'd have a couple of extra bodies (No pun intended) around the house to help out with tasks such as washing dishes, cleaning laundry, growing and maintaining and cooking food. In the event that you are wounded (Not infected, wounded. EX: broken arm) you could show them how to take care of the wound for you if you cant do it yourself and you wouldent have to do everthing with a debilitating injury that casued you pain all the time.
You provide and teach them essential skills, like how to shoot a gun and weild a melee weapon (Combat effectivness), how to grow food and make it for themselves in the event that you die or turn, build their physical fitness and give them a better chance at survival (as well as helping you), teach them (assuming they're not little geniuses) basic schooling stuff in your spare time such as reading, writing and mathmatics, and overall make them better equipped to survive in the zed filled world. So taking them in would have advantadges as well as disadvantedges...

As for saving them in the event that they were in grave danger, nobody knows if they would actually do it until they are faced with the situation.Personally though, I like to think that If they were in danger id charge in like rambo and save the day (or die trying).
It depends on the situation. If there was a 50/50 chance of me saving them Id go for it, mostly because if I had raised, nurtured, trained, and otherwise grown attached to the little guys then theres no way Id let them die if I had the oppertunity to save them

Permalink Reply by prototype mercy on February 5, 2009 at 1:32pm

me if i could save i would but if there was no way of saving them or myself i probably would put them out of there torment then myself

Permalink Reply by Ridd on February 5, 2009 at 5:48pm

Well in general i dont think kids would last more then 24 houres during and infected enviroment. And I may be critzized for saying this but Humans would still need to repopulate. So Kid would eventualy grow up so i think saving them is an investment for the future , Best idea would be to rescue then deposit them on in a safe location.{see entry on cruiz ship colony}

Permalink Reply by Brian L on February 11, 2009 at 11:40pm

1) I would take them in, given what has been said before; no infection, willingly come, and are at least able to help. Infants would be hard to decide...you may end up killing them on accident trying to shut up their cries...Watch "The Pianist" and you will see what I mean. The mother smothers her baby on accident to keep the nazis from knowing she was there, but the sound of the body dropping alerted them to their presence.

2) We wouldn't know if it was the end of the apocalypse, so everything would be based on whether or not you would be willing to give yourself up to MAYBE save them. I, personally, would make sure that situation never occurred. The only reason the kid/kids would be in danger and you not would be if you separated everyone. In this case, you should have everyone be in the same room, just in case your safe house did fall. Remember: No place is safe; only safer. So, you should never split the group up. The other reason why one of them would be in danger but the other one and you not, would be if that one was on patrol, which they should have noticed and ran up to you before the zeds got in enough to be a real threat. That means they dropped the ball, and they are more of a hindrance to you.

It all seems very shallow of me, but that is the cold hard truth. If they got themselves stuck in the situation, you can't risk the life of you or the people around you just to save them. By that logic, you would be willing to save EVERY SINGLE PERSON you come across, even if the odds were 1000 to 1. You would take on 1000 zombies just to save one person... I know we all want to sound heroic by saying we would definitely save the person, especially since in this case it is a child, but you have to think logically as well, not just emotionally. Would it be worth your life to save them? Would it be worth the other child's life to save them? Would the other child be able to fend for them self, in the case BOTH you and the kid in danger died? It takes a lot more than "It's a kid! I MUST save them!!"

Permalink Reply by UNYEILDING on February 15, 2009 at 6:21pm

survival is not jus simpley wanting to survive but carring it out. you can't just say "i'm going to make it. oh it's a kid! i'll go save them and we have a nice day." you need to have will and the means to survive and the knowledge that not all of them will make it.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page