Written by Mr. Mouseburger 6th Jun 2005
Nothing fancy, just a simple head shot on an already wounded, unarmed man.
This is completely contrary to the ethos that Dutch hypothesises is the Predator's raison d'etre: to hunt good sport, and not harm unarmed people. But hey, it is Hollywood, who needs consistency?!
[of course the cynic in me would say it is better cinematically for the Predator to kill Poncho, than to have Dutch leave him because he is slowing them down]
[To be fair, Poncho was armed earlier on, and was definitely not an innocent bystander. The Predator is harsh but fair I feel, which is just as well, as otherwise you could shoot at him for the entire film and then throw down your weapon and surrender to save your life (known as "pulling an Ike" - if you've seen Tombstone you'll know what I mean) ~ Old Bluffer]
I think the Predator probably killed Poncho just to get him out of the way. He was after Arnie (Since he had been unscathed by him so far) and probably felt it would be easier if he got everyone else out of the way so that he could have a one-on-one with him. Either that or he was, in essence, finishing the job as you said.
Probably needs an "unsatisfying" tag too seeing most of the other deaths in the film are either imaginative, or graphic, or cool. Poncho feels a bit like - "he's been moaning in pain long enough, let's just get him out the way quick".
If you watch the scene again I think you'll see that Poncho is indeed armed. When Dutch and Poncho turn to the dying screams of Billy you see Poncho raise an MP-5. The Predator takes him out with the Plasmacaster a moment later.
predator owned the entire team poncho was armed so was the rest of the team but poncho should have got to the chopper with anna
i t.hink poncho should have gone to the chopper because i think he shouldn't have ben killed
look at it through a hunters eyes.he is wounded and he will not be a good sport so you put him out of his misery.