BYOAC Talking Dead - Walking Dead Season 5

[RandyT]

I don't disagree with the fact that the philosophy of non-violence doesn't work in tribal society, but I think that's kind of the point... if you ever want to elevate your community out of a tribal society then you need to institute such philosophies, regardless of the consequences.

I think my brain just exploded.  The way tribal societies, and humanity in general, became "elevated" was to cast out those with violent tendencies, who acted on them in ways which were not beneficial to the tribe.  This was a death sentence in times where solitude made survival virtually impossible.  Of course, if the case warranted it, they just cut to the chase and eliminated the threat...violently.  Violence is an unsavory component of human nature, and to be completely rid of it, you'd pretty much need to "breed it out" of us.  Or continuously cull the herd, which is violent in itself.  I think both methods have been tried in the past, and are still in practice to a lesser extent (at least in this country.)

And what happens when one tribe achieves "non-violence", and twenty others have not?  TWD poses a lot of these questions, which is part of what makes it so interesting. Even with the constant and formidable shared threat posed by the walkers, we don't cease being who, and what, we are.

Eastman's actions are a conundrum.  He watched a man die for 47(?) days, and somehow lost the will to kill after the deed was done.  He could have easily dispatched him at any time, which would have at least demonstrated some compassion on his part. No, if you have it in you to watch someone die at your own hands for that long, you are not likely to have an epiphany to the contrary.  Everything he did after that were acts of contrition, fueled by guilt, not a higher sense of purpose.  In other words, the shrink needed a shrink.

Some things are more important than survival... like living a proper life.

Living a proper life is what one strives to do.  Survival is what makes it possible.  What Eastman did was not survival at the most basic level, so the parallels are poor.  Even the act of converting Morgan was not pure.  He needed him, and stated so.  In a different context, the outcome may have been quite different.  This was demonstrated in the final scene with one of the "wolves", where Morgan did lock the cage before leaving.

It was still good TV, poor concepts aside.  Oh, and Glenn can't not be dead

[harveybirdman]

Everything he did after that were acts of contrition, fueled by guilt, not a higher sense of purpose.

Couldn't agree more.

I hope Morgan regains some sense of balance, especially if they intend to keep him around longer than his comic counterpart.

[Howard_Casto]

I don't disagree with the fact that the philosophy of non-violence doesn't work in tribal society, but I think that's kind of the point... if you ever want to elevate your community out of a tribal society then you need to institute such philosophies, regardless of the consequences.

I think my brain just exploded.  The way tribal societies, and humanity in general, became "elevated" was to cast out those with violent tendencies, who acted on them in ways which were not beneficial to the tribe.  This was a death sentence in times where solitude made survival virtually impossible.  Of course, if the case warranted it, they just cut to the chase and eliminated the threat...violently.  Violence is an unsavory component of human nature, and to be completely rid of it, you'd pretty much need to "breed it out" of us.  Or continuously cull the herd, which is violent in itself.  I think both methods have been tried in the past, and are still in practice to a lesser extent (at least in this country.)

And what happens when one tribe achieves "non-violence", and twenty others have not?  TWD poses a lot of these questions, which is part of what makes it so interesting. Even with the constant and formidable shared threat posed by the walkers, we don't cease being who, and what, we are.

Eastman's actions are a conundrum.  He watched a man die for 47(?) days, and somehow lost the will to kill after the deed was done.  He could have easily dispatched him at any time, which would have at least demonstrated some compassion on his part. No, if you have it in you to watch someone die at your own hands for that long, you are not likely to have an epiphany to the contrary.  Everything he did after that were acts of contrition, fueled by guilt, not a higher sense of purpose.  In other words, the shrink needed a shrink.

Some things are more important than survival... like living a proper life.

Living a proper life is what one strives to do.  Survival is what makes it possible.  What Eastman did was not survival at the most basic level, so the parallels are poor.  Even the act of converting Morgan was not pure.  He needed him, and stated so.  In a different context, the outcome may have been quite different.  This was demonstrated in the final scene with one of the "wolves", where Morgan did lock the cage before leaving.

It was still good TV, poor concepts aside.  Oh, and Glenn can't not be dead

Nope.  We elevated ourselves out of tribal society by creating civilized society... were you have rules and laws, and just punishments for anyone who breaks those laws.  "He's a bad guy so let's kill him!" is NEVER justified even though it continues to this day. 

Survival is in no way necessary to live a proper life for the record.  You pick a moral code and you try to live by it.  If you die quicker because of said code that is ok because you lived without regret.  Living is all about quality, not quantity. 

Also you are confusing different societies with some sort of global society.  What happens when one tribe is non-violent and 20 others aren't?  Well That one tribe is only non-violent towards members of it's own tribe.  The other groups aren't part of their society.  You still try to resolve things between outsiders peacefully though.  Note that Morgan still whipped the tar out of many of those wolves.... he just didn't kill them... because he's civilized. 

[harveybirdman]

While I hate to steer away from the can of worms I opened with the tribal comment.

Steven Yeun's name was missing from the credits.  If he's not dead, the producers are trolling at best and if Daryl is the replacement for Glen's comic fate by proxy, I'm done.

[Howard_Casto]

That's a nice catch.  I honestly don't know.  The night of that episode they were all buy saying he was dead but this last talking dead they were talking about "seeing what happened to glen" as if it wasn't all said and done.  Honestly it's just ticking me off....if it was further along in the season I think I might be ok with it as the Negan stuff is going to happen soon anyway, but this was just a cheap ploy for ratings if you ask me. 

[RandyT]

What you say, and what I say, about what elevated society are not different.  Capturing someone is a violent act, as they won't give up willingly without the fear of said violence.  Tribal laws are also laws, and punishments ranged from severe to not so much (i.e giving a family an animal in payment for misdeeds against it, etc.)  A society incapable of directing violence against violence, simply breeds more violence, as there is little to deter it.

Note that Morgan still whipped the tar out of many of those wolves.... he just didn't kill them... because he's civilized.

That's what makes Morgan dangerous to every person in that community.  They ran away to regroup, and they will return to kill more of the community, or others they happen upon outside it.  Letting them go with a "butt-kicking", after they slaughtered so many from the community, was a selfish act, not a civil one.

[dkersten]

"He's a bad guy so let's kill him!" is NEVER justified even though it continues to this day. 

Can I ask why?  Is it because of your morality?  And what defines that?

In other words, finish the following sentence:
Killing a person who committed crimes that are unforgivable is wrong because _________.

The reason I ask is because it is really the central core of my next book and I had to really dive into what is "moral" and what isn't. 

In the simplest form of what I came up with, morality is a cultural ideal, not an instinct.  I also believe it has religious roots.  Take those two things away: the instilling of morality from your parents (ie "don't do that, it's wrong") and the religious repercussions for doing so (ie "you will suffer for all eternity, not just until you die"), and what is left to prevent it?  Without those things holding you back, when someone is a threat that will never go away until you kill them, why would it not be a clear choice?

Keep in mind, this is a Post Apocalyptic world.  If you were religious (at least Christian based religion) you were left behind because this was, by definition, the Apocalypse.  The ending of humans on earth.  If you are left, you are Forsaken.  Sorry, but regardless of what you do now, you no longer have a place in Heaven. 
And even if you never believed in an eternity, the culture that restricted you from committing murder no longer exists.  In fact, nobody would blame you for killing someone because chances are every stranger is a threat.  There could even be a good argument that it is necessary.  You let him go and he will find more people and tell them you have food, shelter, weapons, etc. and they will return to try to kill you again.

I think the episode does a good job of diving into this issue.  Morgan's moral base was gone, completely.  He had devolved into an animal that had one purpose: kill everything that gets close.  There was nothing he cared about enough, including himself or his soul, to tell him there is something better, and nothing he did made him feel better.  Then he meets a man who shows him a way that he can feel better about himself.  With no other stimulus and no consequences, would you live your life in a way that felt better, that allowed you to sleep better at night and have positive emotions, or would you choose to keep living a life that was empty?

When you start to look at the bigger picture, you have to ask what makes these people tick now that that moral base from culture and religion is stripped away.  The culture that arises from the chaos will not be influenced by what society used to be, it will be born first of necessity and then from tradition.  "Why do we kill people who commit crimes, dad?" "Because that's what we do, son."   

[harveybirdman]

Based on Negen's comic book fate, I believe that we will see the survivors eventually trend towards Morgan's point of view.

I expect this to remain a central theme throughout the series.  I just want to make sure that whatever we see on screen has a believable motivation behind it.  I'm eager to discover what it may be for the Wolves, I will reserve judgement until that is revealed.

[Howard_Casto]

"He's a bad guy so let's kill him!" is NEVER justified even though it continues to this day. 

Can I ask why?  Is it because of your morality?  And what defines that?

It happens to align with my morality if that's what you mean, but there is a far more practical reason.  Everyone has friends or family or followers/admirers of some kind, even if they are a really sick puppy.  When you kill a person you might have gotten "revenge" or "justice" but you've potentially made an enemy of anyone associated with the person and now they want revenge on you.  Violence begets more violence until the violence is so horrific that neither side can tolerate anymore... this isn't an opinion but rather a proven fact.  Just ask the Japanese if you don't believe me.   I'm not saying that a person or a community will never be forced to violence, but understand that when they do they have lost... because they couldn't resolve their differences peacefully and the likely outcome will be even more violence in the near or distant future. 

I think people take a bad reaction to that stance because they think I'm some kind of loopy hippie tree hugger when in reality I feel that way mainly because of cold logic and common sense. 

And yeah, unless the show really goes in a different direction, you better enjoy Eastman's teachings, because they are going to be implemented on a massive scale pretty soon.  The current books are trying to answer the question of how a truly civilized society can exist when surrounded by savages so it's a very worthwhile topic if you are into TWD.

[DaOld Man]

Keep in mind, this is a Post Apocalyptic world.  If you were religious (at least Christian based religion) you were left behind because this was, by definition, the Apocalypse.  The ending of humans on earth.  Sorry, but regardless of what you do now, you no longer have a place in Heaven.

That is not correct, but I am not getting into it because I really dont want this thread sent to P&R.
If you want, you can PM for my explanation.

[RandyT]

Everyone has friends or family or followers/admirers of some kind, even if they are a really sick puppy.  When you kill a person you might have gotten "revenge" or "justice" but you've potentially made an enemy of anyone associated with the person and now they want revenge on you.  Violence begets more violence until the violence is so horrific that neither side can tolerate anymore... this isn't an opinion but rather a proven fact. 

I also don't want this to end up in P'N'R, so I'll refrain from too many examples.  But unfortunately, when "the violence is so horrific that neither side can tolerate anymore", it has reached the point where wars can be ended, and the two sides can agree on the terms of peaceful co-existence.  Only when the losses are so severe, and further losses inevitable, does one side succumb.  That is history.  People aren't bits and bytes which can be manipulated by pure logic.  They (we) just don't work that way.

Individuals prone to unchecked violence, and/or extremely violent societies, cannot be reasoned with.  If they could, they probably wouldn't be as they are.  They are a cancer on civilization and humanity in general.  When dealing with cancer, you tear it out at it's root, by any means possible.  At the center of the cancer, it is the most severe.  You start there and work your way outward, removing what you must, and treating what you can.  If it's not completely eradicated, you haven't finished the job.

If Eastman's philosophy becomes entrenched in the story line (which is already becoming a bit disconnected from the show's "reality"), I'll likely give up on it.  The visceral challenges posed by the human condition are what makes it interesting. When they start watching people die around them because they want to be "civilized", I'll start rooting for the zombies.

[dkersten]

I like the opposite viewpoints on this.  I do think morality comes into play extensively, but any situation where your personal morality comes into question (whether it be religion based or not), other factors will influence your decisions, and the direction of the new culture, extensively.

I think in a world where people are desperate to do anything and in particular have seen first hand how trusting people they don't already know usually ends up killing them, there is no concern for the repercussions.  Someone comes close and you kill them or they will kill you.  You can introduce compassion but in a world where compassion is already rare if not extinct, it would just be met with even more distrust.  Look at Eastman:  He shows compassion and nearly ends up dead.  The only thing that saved him was his own skill and propensity for violence.  If Morgan had been accompanied by friends there is no way Eastman would have survived his own compassion. 

Frankly the message I am starting to see is:  You can be compassionate if you are the most dangerous person in the room.

That doesn't bode well for most people though.  Just ask the people of Alexandria who fell victim to the Wolves attack.  They had the tools to fight back but chose not to learn how because they wanted things to return to how they were before.  That isn't going to happen.  The only way you can have that philosophy is when you can back it up with the ability to do violence.  Alexandria could grow as long as it has people like Rick in place to make sure that anyone threatening it in any way will be dealt with swiftly and decisively.  Examples would need to be clearly displayed to any newcomers to show, without a shred of doubt, that not following the rules would have severe consequences.

There is a lot of irony in a situation like this because the only ones able to make the choice not to kill are the ones who are best at killing. 

This show is about the "human condition."  I always saw the "Post Apocalyptic" genre as the perfect platform for exploring this.  Humankind will never live in perpetual peace.  Sooner or later the power that keeps the peace will grow complacent and someone will realize they can take what they want.  It will always lead to violence and war.  Is there really any way the human species will not end up committing violence against itself?  Randy makes a very strong point: eventually the losses of war and violence will cause one side to cave in and surrender.  But what happens when the next generation comes to power and does not have the insight of the ones who found out how much war can really hurt?  Once the memory of the cost of war fades, there is nothing to stop a human from waging war again.  Perhaps you could say Humankind's biggest weakness is shortsightedness.

Food for thought.

[Howard_Casto]

Without giving too much away in the books, planet earth on a grander scale is kind of where they are in the books.  You've got this massive nation (the first world) which has, for the most part, learned the lesson that war is pointless and lives in a truly civilized society, under constant bombardment by these pockets of savagery (the meanest and most fanatical members of third world nations). 

If you are paying any attention to the news at all, it should be apparent that violence DOES NOT WORK against these nuts.  It's like trying to squash out an entire anthill one ant at a time.  So the solution?  You do the bare minimum in offensive moves and build a stronger defense.  Eventually they will die off on their own because that level of fanaticism/lunacy isn't sustainable. 

Randy you pose the argument that "people" aren't logical.  I think you mean "some people" aren't logical.  You know what your momma said about following others what with the bridge jumping and all.  You have to be a better person than the people around you, or else you aren't worthy of survival.  By your own logic the only way to get rid of evil is to kill evil off, the only problem is if you go to the same extremes as the evil, then you are evil.  So if we go with your logic then it is impossible for good to win.  Sorry but I'm more of an optimist than that.

There is a lot of truth to the concept that the more powerful you are, the more you have to restrain yourself and keep the moral high ground.  When violent solutions are the easiest solutions is when it's time to stop using violence.  If you don't then you will have a very lonely, very fascist planet real quick.

[dkersten]

you pose the argument that "people" aren't logical.  I think you mean "some people" aren't logical.

I can't speak for Randy, but I would counter this by saying that while individual people might very well be logical, a culture is not.

There is a demotivational poster (one of the originals) that says "Meetings: None of us is as dumb as All of us."  This is insanely true.  As a nation, we are a bunch of idiots and we aren't learning from our mistakes.  As a race, we are not peaceful.  We never will be peaceful.  Sooner or later someone who is stronger will realize he can have what he wants and he will not have the "decency" or "morality" to see that it is wrong to just take it, and violence will happen.  In some cases this will lead to more violence and it will only end when there is war and one side is finally hurt so bad that it surrenders or will face complete annihilation. 

You say there are nuts out there who you cannot stop with violence, and that is true:  they WANT violence, so the only thing you can do to stop them is eliminate them.  History has shown that when you just shut yourself off and leave them to destroy themselves they don't, they just sit there waiting until you drop your guard and then come at you again.  History also shows that eventually we also always drop our guard.  Complacency.  The next generation doesn't grow up fighting them so they start to think they can love them, so they open the doors to them and BAM, they are being hurt again.  The only way to end it is to eliminate them completely, which of course is not possible if you are trying to be moral.  You can't fight a war (and have it end) against a culture who believes the best thing that could happen to them is they could die fighting you. 

[harveybirdman]

I'll add this, Homer had this figured out ages ago... He wrote


"In All things, balance is better"  or as I like to translate "In all things, balance is best"


I also agree with DK, when he says only the baddest mother ---smurfs--- can be compassionate.  It makes me think of Jules from Pulp Fiction.  Morgan's trying REAL hard to be the Shepard.

[RandyT]

If you are paying any attention to the news at all, it should be apparent that violence DOES NOT WORK against these nuts.  It's like trying to squash out an entire anthill one ant at a time.  So the solution?  You do the bare minimum in offensive moves and build a stronger defense.  Eventually they will die off on their own because that level of fanaticism/lunacy isn't sustainable.

As dkersten stated, that doesn't work.  People aren't static.  They reproduce, and when ideology is entrenched in a society, and that ideology include heinous acts of violence, it is passed on to the offspring.  It is sustainable because we, as part of nature, always find a way.  And the anthill analogy is a bit odd.  I'm not sure how you deal with an anthill, but it sounds like you would advocate constant patrol of the perimeter with a magnifying glass on sunny days .  No, you deal with an anthill by soaking it in a flammable substance, burning it out, digging up what's left and doing it again.  You go after the queen, and deal with the stragglers as necessary.  Otherwise, it just comes back.

By your own logic the only way to get rid of evil is to kill evil off, the only problem is if you go to the same extremes as the evil, then you are evil.  So if we go with your logic then it is impossible for good to win.  Sorry but I'm more of an optimist than that.

Reality always trumps optimism.  The effects of reality are a constant.  Optimism can help to change the nature of reality, but on it's own it has little, if any, weight in a situation.  It's neither possible, nor impossible for good to win.  What is "good" is merely a concept.  As humans, we assign specific criteria to both good and evil, and they usually end up being related to personal or societal, needs, desires and beliefs.  When these opposing desires meet in conflict, it can be said that both good and evil always win.  They also always lose. 

Your statement also paints police and military organizations as "evil", or at least on par with those who perpetrate your version of it.  Without these organizations as part of "peaceful" society, chaos would reign supreme.  It's no accident that Rick, the primary focus of the show, was in law enforcement.  He represents what is necessary for a civil society to exist, and that doesn't mean he must remain "civil" at all times in supporting the endeavor.  It simply means that he must operate within accepted boundaries.

[DaOld Man]

So, is tomorrow nights show going to be about Rick getting out of the RV? Or is it going to be another walk about episode?

[harveybirdman]

Horrible episode with nothing but commercials and soap opera ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow---.

Glenn's character deserved a better end then this ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow---. And he better be dead, if you took his name out of the credits only to have him miraculously survive you are the biggest ---punks--- in television that have resorted to trolling the audience instead of writing compelling material.

I seriously am at the point of abandoning this ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- show.

[Howard_Casto]

I can't really get that upset because I saw this coming but....

I thought initially that Glenn's ambiguous fate might have been an accident on the part of the production staff but after seeing tonights show.... nope it was engineered.  That whole little speech with Maggie about how they don't get to know what happened to Glenn... that was directed towards the audience.  It was kind of a dickish thing to say at that.  The last minute line about a pregnancy was b.s. as well... it just gave them a cop-out to keep the show somewhat inline with the comics if they kill Glenn off. 

I'm pretty sure he's dead now, but we can tally him up with Otis, Dale, Hershel and nearly all of the rest as implausible and totally illogical death #369.  Intestines don't come out of your chest and one guy shooting himself next to you doesn't make you trip and fall in after him.  Also notice the fence, and the fire escape and how they don't even attempt to make it to either.   

[DaOld Man]

Did I miss how Rick got out of that RV, ran a good distance with thousands of walkers behind him, and even some trying to intercept him?
So is Rick going to hook up with the blonde and even win over her son who hated him?
Is the girl who Carl had a crush on gone?
Is Glenn gone?
And what about Michone?
Tune in tomorrow for the next episode of As The Walkers Turn.
Yep, soap opera.
This show needs to change its direction. Or it may be time to end it as the whole group turning into walkers.

[JMB]

I think the show was only about 32 minutes long after commercials.

[Howard_Casto]

Did I miss how Rick got out of that RV, ran a good distance with thousands of walkers behind him, and even some trying to intercept him?

No you didn't.  There are only three episodes left, so I'm sure one of them will be a flashback episode detailing the incredibly boring and irrelevant tale of how Rick got out and how that cut on his hand was magically better.  It looks like next week is an episode about how survivalist Daryl is a survivalist.  Seriously how many times have they done that episode over the course of the show?  I'm placing my bet right now... we won't see Glenn's ultimate fate until the end year finale, possibly not resolving itself fully until next year. 

As for your other complaints.... you've read the comics right? 

[Vigo]

I figured the lackluster "character development" episode was coming soon.  Still been a high octane season.

I guess I was more scratching my head why they kept mentioning Carol and she didn't even show up for a brief second. Alos, you think there would be somebody mentioning how their quiet little Betty Crocker went full solid snake on a dozen barbarians. The pantry scene would have been much cooler with Carol, too. Give them a baking tip to stretch their rations out, then while keeping a full smile, threaten to slit their throats in their sleep if they touch one more can of food than they are allowed.

[Howard_Casto]

I'm beginning to wonder if maybe they blow all the show's budget on sfx and that's why characters are often absent.  It's an old trick.  Every few shows you only feature one or two characters and if you are paying your actors per appearance you only have to pay those two. 

[CCM]

I figured the lackluster "character development" episode was coming soon.  Still been a high octane season.

I guess I was more scratching my head why they kept mentioning Carol and she didn't even show up for a brief second. Alos, you think there would be somebody mentioning how their quiet little Betty Crocker went full solid snake on a dozen barbarians. The pantry scene would have been much cooler with Carol, too. Give them a baking tip to stretch their rations out, then while keeping a full smile, threaten to slit their throats in their sleep if they touch one more can of food than they are allowed.

Wasn't Carol in disguise for most of the Wolves attack?   How many Alexandrians actually saw her killing anyone?   

[Vigo]

Well, the townsfolk can't be stupid enough to think that the wolves got killed by a ghost, there was nobody around in the beginning but Carol to fight them. The chubbier gal for sure saw carol off one of the wolves, and she taught her how to shoot a gun quick. Rick mentioned it in a matter-of fact matter way to Deanna after she was attacked that one of the bodies of a wolf carol downed was missing, so there were no secrets that she was going around wolf hunting.

I guess, maybe they could be that ignorant, but I sounds like the townsfolk are pretty gossipy if the blond chick stabbing a walker in the head is "big news"

[DaOld Man]

As for your other complaints.... you've read the comics right?

I have not.

[Howard_Casto]

You probably should at this point, at least up until the Alexandrian massacre.  10+ years of books after all.    The thing is, they are getting dangerously close to catching up with the books, so I don't know what they are going to do after next season unless they do something stupid and try to stretch it out. 

[CCM]

Jeffrey Dean Morgan cast as Negan...

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/walking-dead-negan-jeffrey-dean-836243

[thomas_surles]

was I the only one that assumed it was Rick on the walkie at the end there? Talking dead didn't seem to think so. I was Just assuming it was him stuck in the RV. They really just skipped past how the hell be got out.

[Rick]

was I the only one that assumed it was Rick on the walkie at the end there? Talking dead didn't seem to think so. I was Just assuming it was him stuck in the RV. They really just skipped past how the hell be got out.

They're giving this season the Tarantino treatment - jump the timeline around, to keep everybody guessing. Effective, really.

[dkersten]

was I the only one that assumed it was Rick on the walkie at the end there? Talking dead didn't seem to think so. I was Just assuming it was him stuck in the RV. They really just skipped past how the hell be got out.

I thought it was obvious.. he stepped out of the RV and ran.. or why would he show up only a few dozen feet ahead of the horde, covered in sweat and about to collapse from running?

[Howard_Casto]

Well it doesn't make sense timeline wise, but they've made such errors before. 

I think it was those guys that stole Daryl's bike. 

[JMB]

was I the only one that assumed it was Rick on the walkie at the end there? Talking dead didn't seem to think so. I was Just assuming it was him stuck in the RV. They really just skipped past how the hell be got out.

My first thought was that it was going to end up being Glenn on the walkie talkie.

[BadMouth]

I assumed it was the new bad guys.  If it were Glenn, that would be a cool twist although I'll be pissed that they went too far in making it look like he really died.
If he did survive, I'll be rolling my eyes and complaining about the soap opera style of bringing back dead characters.

[Blackfoot]

I bet it's Jesus.

[harveybirdman]

I bet it's Jesus.

I really like this theory and wouldn't hate it if it were true, but I read some junk interview with Norman Reedus and supposedly he claims that it's someone from Alexandria but NOT Glenn.  Enid perhaps?

[Howard_Casto]

Not unless Enid became a dude.  It's not Rick because a ridiculous fake southern accent wasn't heard.  That is, again, if they try adhere to any sense of show continuity... but at this point they might be willing to pull any dirty trick in the book. 

The only two from Alexandria (Glenn aside) that could potentially be outside the wall are Carl and that blonde ladies kid looking for Enid.  Remember all unaccounted for had an on screen death and there is a horde of zombies around the town.  So only stupid people (read the kids) would try to leave right now.

[harveybirdman]

it sounds like a really wimpy @$$ voice if it's a dude.... It's definitely not Glen.  We haven't seen Aaron's boyfriend for a while, but I hardly see any reason he'd leave Alexandria.

Eugene would most definitely not venture out, and he's pretty deep voiced regardless.

[harveybirdman]

Trolled us so hard...

Looks like my Enid theory could still be true.