Batman General Discussion

Oh. How awkward of me.

No worries, and if i may further back you up, the gothic trappings of Batman like calling himself Batman in his head or dressing up as a Bat and still being a heroic individual is part of Batman's appeal. Besides the Dark is not evil motif, it's inspiring to readers that despite Batman's own issues that does not ultimately stop him from being a good person and helping people. Like Spider-Man, Batman has made many MANY mistakes throughout his life and motivated by tragedy, but that doesn't stop him from overall being a hero, and the fact that Batman learns from his mistakes is part of his appeal like Spider-Man.

Edited by RedHunter543 on Feb 23rd 2019 at 1:48:08 AM

Cassandra Cain has one of the most interesting takes on the Thou Shalt Not Kill I've seen in comics. She killed someone, but saw their pain through body language and realized being murdered was so horrible so she doesn't want that pain again.

With Bruce, I think the best reason why he should not kill is because he saw his parents die in front of him and doesn't want that pain to repeat on anyone else, no matter how evil they are. It makes him more empathetic as "I can't kill because I'll lose it and never stop" makes him seem like his sanity is fragile as I imagine most normal people would immediately be filled with guilt and not want to do it again.

So at the very least we can agree his no-kill code is a character flaw?

When uncompromising about it, at least.

Which is nearly always so yes.

For people who think his no kill code is a weakness i'll leave this here.

Captured Serial Killer: Admit it, you live for the hunt as much as I do. Going after the freaks adds excitement to the game, but not as much as you need. Every time you put on that mask the craving comes back, the primal course, the push at the back of your mind. It's only a matter of time before it takes over and you—
Batman: Kill whoever's standing right next to me and calling me a psychopath?
Captured Serial Killer: I'll shut up now.

And if he’s talking to someone who does not mind the prospect of death?

That doesn’t really prove anything.

Edited by slimcoder on Feb 23rd 2019 at 3:57:17 AM

So your defense for his no-kill code is him threatening to kill someone?

I know in the Golden Age they didn't have that no kill policy, which came into being in the Silver Age. But I think the reason why it's an important policy is that the baggage that comes with killing someone. I agree if there was a policy of killing as a last resort, but there would be deadly consequences about superheros killing others. I think one of them is that it could lead to not only killing serious criminals but also petty ones.

Realistically Batman cannot act as judge jury and executioner. Like he says in BTAS, it's not for him to decide to kill, it's for the courts. Batman may work outside the law but he generally has to work with it in order to make progress. He's already skating on thin ice as an illegal vigilante, the ONLY thing that keeps Gordon and the rest of the GCPD from going after him is because he doesn't kill. If you think the no kill rule is morally wrong, then at least you have to admit, Batman has pragmatic reasons for following it.

Plus the only one who isn't afraid of death is The Joker, all the rest usually want to stay alive. And most of his villains are mentally ill if not in the legal definition, so killing any of them is morally wrong than it is for other heroes. What does it say about Batman if he decides to kill Croc, or Two Face, or the ventriloquist?

Edited by RedHunter543 on Feb 23rd 2019 at 4:26:48 AM

Pragmatically the police carry guns when fighting crime because it gets deadly when the opposing side is armed. Not executing apprehended or surrendering criminals, fine, but what about deliberately pulling punches during actual combat? And the stupidity of actually going out of his way to save the Joker? During Under The Red Hood, he berates Jason for breaking a guy's collarbone despite him being the one to bring a child into crime fighting who lacks his martial arts training and would mess him up psychologically.

Edit: I'm also pretty sure that it has been brought multiple times that plenty of Batman's enemies don't fall under legal insanity.

Edited by Ikedatakeshi on Feb 23rd 2019 at 8:33:50 PM

When Jason did that, he already was a teen with enough training, so he clearly knew how much force to apply. Call it stupidity, but Batman saving the Joker does have logic to it, if he lets the Joker deliberately die, there's nothing stopping him from not saving other villains from dying " accidentally " the constant question " Why does't Batman kill Joker " becomes Why doesn't Batman kill Riddler? Two-Face? Poison Ivy? Penguin? Scarecrow?

Edit: yeah they don't fall under legal insanity like i said, but they have mental problems, like Two Face, or Riddler, or Croc. killing them does raise a can of worms.

Edited by RedHunter543 on Feb 23rd 2019 at 4:36:39 AM

Then get a damn psychiatrist to fix his issue with this because plenty of superheroes kill and don't become mass murderers. Also, the can of worms was already blown opened with depicting people with mental issues as mass murderers and them constantly escaping punishment because of it.

Whether Batman should kill is a useless question.

If they'd stop making a big deal outta it, I wouldn't mind his rule.

Edited by slimcoder on Feb 23rd 2019 at 4:54:29 AM

should Batman consult Dr. Crane on his no kill rule?

So is he only psychiatrist in existence?

Well everyone in Arkham sucks.

I just find it weird that the only debate this thread ever has is over whether Batman should murder people or not.

It’s not like he’s too poor to bring in someone actually qualified from another town over.

Nah we talk about other stuff like how Future-Tim sucks donkey ass.

Edited by slimcoder on Feb 23rd 2019 at 5:06:31 AM

Well the spidey forum is where the debates are at.

The writers kind of keep pushing it to the front, they keep making the rogues gallery do more and more heinous stuff to the point "kill on sight" seems like an obvious order and it's asked in the books again and again.

And again why shouldBatman kill? It should be the courts and city government that decide it.

Also because debates are fun.

Edited by RedHunter543 on Feb 23rd 2019 at 5:19:21 AM

Nobody would care if they didn’t bring it up so much.

People watch Batman to see a man in a bat-suit beat up a colorful array of super villains not to see some moral dilemma about whether or not he should kill a bunch of violent serial killers.