Justified Death In John Steinbeck's Of Mice And Men

Ince Candy’s dog was Candy’s best friend, George knew how much pain Candy went through when he had to witness his own dog getting killed by somebody other than himself. George knew that he had to kill Lennie himself. The facts that Curley would have killed Lennie if George didn’t, Lennie’s disability was only a burden, and George had to look out for himself all prove that George was not wrong in euthanizing Lennie. These three reasons justify the actions that George had to take. George was not wrong in killing Lennie in the way that George had only good motives and was only looking out for

If a person saw someone do something, they might act differently than if that person didn't do anything. One example of this is on page 97 where it says, "When you see 'um, don't give 'im no chance. Shoot for his guts. That'll double 'im over." When George heard this, he decided that if Lennie was going to die, he wanted him to die peacefully and painlessly; therefore causing George to shoot Lennie.

Curley used this as an excuse to kill Lennie. He really wanted to kill Lennie because he destroyed his hand though. Curley said he was going to blow Lennie's guts out and make him suffer and be in pain. George prevented this by shooting Lennie in the back of the head and ending him quickly. George killed lennie because if he didn’t, Curley would have made him suffer.

George was protecting Lennie from an agonizing death by killing Lennie himself instead of having Curly murder him. He even had difficulty raising the gun behind Lennie’s head. This substantiates George’s adherence to Lennie due to the fact that he struggled to do what was best for his chum because he did not want to lose him. Therefore, George made the correct decision to assassinate Lennie, guarding him against an apprehensive

However, several times in the novel Lennie uses violence to solve his problems because he does not know what else to do. Unfortunately, his actions have consequences, the most crucial being when he accidentally kills Curley’s wife, which culminates in Lennie's own death. George also solves his problems with violence; his solution to the death of Curley’s wife is to kill Lennie himself. He believes that if he just kills Lennie his problem will be solved. However, he would have to spend the rest of his life thinking that he has killed his best friend, and that he can never atone for it.

As the book progresses, more and more incidents occur. Although Lennie knows his role, To stay quiet and not get into trouble, He is no longer capable of doing that basic task. So his caretaker and life long friend, George, is asked to do an unspeakable deed, to euthanize Lennie. Euthanasia is killing someone who is ill to prevent any further suffering. George has very good intentions when killing Lennie which, is why he was allowed to kill him.

While awaiting trial Frank 's father Matt Fowler decides to give Mr.Strout a punishment he felt was necessary. Mr.Fowler went out and ended up murdering the man who murdered his son. While reading the story the audience dominantly takes Frank 's father 's side on the situation rather than feeling the same way about the two murders. People seem to sway towards Mr.Fowlers side of the story because they say it was out of love, Richard Strout deserved it, and Frank was innocent unlike Mr. Strout. Love is the key to all relationships throughout the world.

“George raised the gun and steadied it,and he brought the muzzle of it close to the back of Lennie’s head. He pulled the trigger,”(Steinbeck 106).Despite the fact that there was option for Lennie to go to jail, George killed him. Knowing that there was a second option that he could have went to jail it should have been the route taken because why end a person's life for no exact intention he didn’t do anything to George. All in all Lennie saw his fate looking beyond the waters and died,but he could have just went to jail because he would have been taken care of and off George's back, but no George took the path that should have never been taken in the first

George made an excellent decision by killing Lennie. If he hadn’t killed Lennie, the future consequences could have been greater. Killing Lennie was a way to hide his disability, while preventing torture for both of

Lennie’s pure strength and actions led his best friend George to kill him, so that he doesn’t get in any more trouble. George killing Lennie was a justified murder because Lennie was too dangerous, Lennie would have been killed anyways, and he only would slow George down and drag him into trouble. Lennie was way too dangerous to be kept alive, because he has no comprehension of his true strength. He was just too mentally challenged to even understand his sheer power. For example, Lennie explains to Curley’s Wife how he unintentionally killed the puppy, “I made it like I was gonna smack him… an I done it.

The author makes it seems as if Fortunato is a bad guy especially because he’s trying to kill him to find out later Montressor was crazy. 5. A theme statement for “The Cask of Amontillado” is to encourage readers that revenge doesn’t get you anywhere because after it done you’ll have a strong feeling of regret. In the short story Montressor kills his friend and it wasn’t worth it at the end of the day because he started feeling

If he believes Richmond should have died for doing something to him, then he deserves his death because he did something to someone else as well. I could go on for pages about who did and did not deserve to die and who I could not decide on. I think if the character deserved death, Justice Wargrave’s idea of having a murder-mystery gimmick is pretty smart. I think it is smart because making them feel that they were going to die soon and making them experience death makes them go through what they made others go