Did Roger take the money?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Lethal Weapon 2
gutz1981 — 10 years ago(December 18, 2015 05:33 AM)
It just seems odd how that scene plays out. Roger is tempted when he finds the money. He wants to do good by his family and take the money he finds in the container. Riggs encourages him to do so. Then Roger makes a big scene by slamming the money down and calling it "Drug Money!" implying its tainted and not worth taking. Riggs once again encourages him to do something good with it. Roger actually say "Frig it!" picks the money up again and looks at it just before the container is locked up with them in it. Even when he turns ready to shoot and takes cover, the money is still in his hands. We don't see if he actually drops it or he does as he looks like he was about to do and just give in and take it. What do you think? I think he should have taken it. Given the damages to is house in the first film and this film and the whole car gag throughout I think the dude should have taken compensation, because I doubt the police force would have covered all those damages. Besides, he earned it.
-
venem123 — 10 years ago(January 05, 2016 09:26 PM)
i dont think roger takes the money. in lw4 riggs is talking to lorna and mentions (half jokingly) that hes tried to get roger to take money when lorna brings up rogers expenses. riggs himself didnt know where the money was coming from so i dont think roger took the money.
-
siltom1962 — 10 years ago(January 09, 2016 01:36 AM)
I'm not an advocate for cops making a habit of it (though many do, ha ha), but in this one case I'd say why not. The cops wouldn't know the difference, and you don't care what the South African beep think. I'd sleep fine knowing i was doing something good with it.
-
gutz1981 — 10 years ago(January 09, 2016 01:34 PM)
I'm not an advocate for cops making a habit of it (though many do, ha ha), but in this one case I'd say why not. The cops wouldn't know the difference, and you don't care what the South African beep think. I'd sleep fine knowing i was doing something good with it.
Exactly. If any thing its the right thing to do. Use the money South African racists got from string young black people out on drugs and will use the money to help finance their continuing oppression of your African brothers and use it to give your African American kids a great education to help better themselves and perhaps make a difference within their community. -
SilverGameDog — 9 years ago(July 04, 2016 04:31 PM)
There's NEVER a good reason for cops to help themselves to money used in a crime.
No matter what the money was used for, how much there is, or whether anyone would know if they took it.
The one person that WOULD know about it is the cop that took it. And if he or she can live with themselves and they're okay with it then they're not a good cop. Or a good person.
Taking money that doesn't belong to you is stealing and stealing is illegal. Not to mention a good person and good cop couldn't use drug money to put his kids through college. It would take a special brand of scumbag to be okay with that.
Which is why Roger DIDNT take the money. It all went into the water. -
NicksSciFiCorner — 9 years ago(August 23, 2016 10:51 PM)
Murtaugh
does not
take the money.
He's a good cop.
Blood money is morally wrong to take even if one was to use it for good purposes. That money came from the destroyed lives of the victims of the drug trade, plus all the innocent people those criminals killed along the way.
I don't think many people could live with themselves knowing where that money came from.
Sorry but I'd rather be poor than benefit from someone else's suffering. And I know Murtaugh would too.