There is a lot of controversy over whether Ned was believed to be a hero, a villain or a victim. Some people would label him a villain- someone who terrorized the lives of the people. Others would agree that he was a hero- someone who stood up for what he believed in and gave to the poor. But he was neither; he was only ever a victim.
As a young boy, Ned had no direction. His father had recently died and his only role models were his 'larrikin uncles' and relatives with a history of crime. Despite young Ned getting off at a bad start, he was also a fearless horse rider and a boy who not only wanted to help his family survive but was also known as a local hero when he saved a boy from drowning. At the start of the book "Black Snake-The Daring of Ned Kelly' – it states that Ned had a habit of stealing horses before bringing them back to their original owners and demanding for a reward. He cared about his family so much to the point where he was willing to steal. He was willing to turn to crime. Many people would argue that turning to crime is not the right solution, but in Ned's defence- his family was living in such horrible and unpleasant conditions that Ned had absolutely no choice! Ned knew his family didn't have enough, he decided he would have to…show more content… Ned was no different- He robbed banks and even went far and killed many people. While many can agree, what makes some people boil with hatred at the very mention of his name is the incident at Stringybark Creek. The attackers of Ned Kelly only look at his horrific actions without looking at the 'why' behind those actions. The incident at Stringybark Creek left three troopers dead. In a split second, Ned had to shift into the position of the hunter, or the hunted. He had no intention of killing anybody that day, but with the three troopers armed and the lives of his brother and friends at stake, he raised his own gun and pulled the trigger. Three
