>>1292345
>the gunfight between the factions of his father and uncle wouldn't have been able to take place during the party where there were bystanders present, due to his uncle not being able to plan a clean hit on him where Hugo once could have
No, you're inventing those events as well. There was nothing like that in the story.
The innocents were killed by his father.
Hugo is blaming theirs deaths on himself because he has
failed the assassination attempt, prompting his father to act.
>first was Hugo not fully committing to the kill
This part, the "hesitation" you also keep embellishing with details that never were present in the actual story.
You keep selling it like there was a scene of Hugo with his gun down his dad's throat and then Hugo just goes
>I just can't do it, man!
and starts crying.
Meanwhile, literally all we know that:
<1) There were two assassination attempts by Hugo, effectively back to back;
<2) The first was botched because his father more prepared than he expected;
<3) The second was successful in terms of carrying out the process, but has ultimately failed to deliver the result - the dad survived it;
<4) At some point Hugo has hesitated.
Now, I'm choosing to interpret the "hesitation" part as more of a
>he should've been dead long ago but as a young lad I didn't have balls to do it when I had the chance
because there's a consistent theme in his reasoning that the longer cunts are allowed to live the more people will suffer from them.
With that said, I consider the interpretation of
>he has botched the first assassination because he hesitated
to be completely fair and reasonable.
But it's the implied details that seem to appear out of nowhere that I find silly.
There are countless tropes of people hesitating yet committing to an act, and failing the act because they hesitated.
We literally do not know any of the specifics, but you chose to go with the most silly and highly specific interpretation, instead of something like
>he had a clean shot, but he hesitated a missed it because of that, alerting everyone to his presence
Because what I'm gathering so far is that Hugo apparently waltzed next to his daddy, T-posed at him, asserting his dominance, then walked away due to "hesitation", then people die because hid dad couldn't stand be mogged this brutally, then Hugo goes back again, and decides
>you know what, no, I'm gonna kill that dude after all, ten minutes ago was a mistake
And
sure. Let's say that's exactly what has happened.
Let's say Hugo is a terminally online brainrotted zoomer who acts and behaves exactly like this.
He
still went back to try and 360 no-scope his pops.
He
did resort to murder.
He fucked up, sure, but what can you expect from a social failure like that.
It all loops back to my original point is that
>committing to a murder
is an important character trait
>committing a murder
is a recollection of events that has literally nothing to do with the actual character building.
Not being able to recognize the former without the latter is being underage.