I'm a little disturbed by people who say they have no sympathy for the

if someone comes in to my house uninvited and steals my stuff he better be dead before he/she leaves, unlike idiots in this one i work for my money
everyone got what they deserved, except for the last twat who got away, sadly

Also, the blind man was a *beep* rapist psycho BEFORE the thieves broke into his house.

he was at least justified in killing the first guy since being blind he can't reliably hold him at gunpoint or be sure he'd leave until the police get there

I'm little disturbed by people who say they have sympathy with the thieves

they are *beep* thieves!

You take the risk of being hunted down if you break into a home and thats what any burgler should deserve to encounter a man like that. Money had a gun so he would have no problem killing someone if they got in their way. Cause the tables got turned on the idiots, all of the sudden hes the bad guy. They even knew he had a rottwieler which should of eaten all of them too, but dogs are nicer then people.
Thieves are bad people and should be put in jail??? Hes blind how would he even identify them. They would rob everyone and wound up killing someone. The petty criminal move to greater crimes. So stopping them now is what he did right.

I'm more disturbed by the Female who wanted to become a gold digger even after her friend died.
She really deserved to die. Butt hollywood could never afford a girl to die
for the sexist world to go on.
Nice job hollywood.
Once there is another film company that makes a movie with an actual story and no sexist crap, hollywood's sexist
,racist trash sequals and super hero movie spam will be bankrupt in an instant.

No one inside the main cast should have lived. All three thieves should have been killed, and the old man should have died a brutal death. We already know why the old man is terrible, even though I stand by many of the actions he took before the reveal. But the thieves have been robbing multiple houses, many families and people even before this. The fact that they go to rob a blind old man for their own wants is absolutely reprehensible, and I do not give a crap what kind of justification you want to use for that.

The two main thieves had multiple chances to leave, especially the girl. In fact, it could possibly be argued she ended up getting Alex killed (even though he agreed to rob yet another house. Still his fault too). Every single main character was disgusting, and I would rather they all be killed than see even one manage mediocre success. I'm glad the old man was implied to have been near her in the train station/airport. If they both die it would be the perfect ending.

And as I view the discussion, one side is saying that the thieves were justified, and the other is saying that the old man was in the right. Both sides are absolutely moronic and I am sensing a large partisan argument here with Liberals and Conservatives. The old man had every right to defend himself and his property (including the money which they took) from being taken. Moneys death was legally justified. Alex's death was legally justified. Rockys death would be rocky. A blind man who can't tell if the intruder has his money or not? He could easily switch the situation to his side in court (assuming he cleaned up all the evidence), because they brought a handgun into the scene which checks off a self defense tick. They fired off rounds inside the house against him, which checks off that he was fearing for his life. And finally the fact that he was blind, didn't know how many were inside the house, and sustained many injuries from them. I say Rockys death would be rocky because that is becoming a chase situation and not a self defense of person and property on his own land. People keep crying that he locked the doors, but he didn't know there were more than one at the time of locking the doors. When he realized he was missing the money is where he chased them around the house. Again he had no idea of perpetrators, if they were armed, etc. The fact that they discharged weapons in his house and he was blind would be justification enough.

What he was wrong on was kidnapping, rape (yes rape. Insemination is still technically rape, some people are referencing power/pleasure dynamics but it's still technically rape), and chasing after the girl off his property and releasing his dog on her.

And don't think I believe that the thieves were in the right or better than the man. No, they gambled like morons and kept robbing houses over and over, justifying their terrible behavior and even bringing a handgun against a blind man. The fact that the girl could have saved both Alex and her on multiple occasions by just running is leaving me in disbelief. If you rob peoples houses in AMERICA, you will eventually run into trouble.

In conclusion, they all needed to die. I think what many people on the Left are not getting is that many are sympathetic of a Blind man whos story could have gone in a completely different direction had his daughter not died. He was thrown over the edge and became a manic and a despicable person. Just because you have the backstory of the main character(s) does not EXCUSE any of the behavior they have done, as much as many of you are trying to do. This goes for the Old Man and the Thieves. They all deserved to die, or all deserved to get the book thrown at them and ruin their lives for a very long time.

All the thieves shoulda died. Instead the dumb bitch steals his money and injures a man that minded his own business.