>>155268116
The "you'd be the same as him" shit is quite possible the gayest and most juvenile thing I've ever heard, and one of the main reasons I'll never take capeshit seriously. No, a good guy removing a mass murderer from existence does not make him as evil as a mass murderer.

>>155268408
It's also completely unsustainable as any of hte hundreds of dudes Batman has beaten off would have fallen back and broke their skulls on cement or broken a femur and died almost instantly.

>>155268116
>already breaking the law by being a vigilante
>removing a mass murderer is a step too far though
It's fine for Golden Age comics, because those are so tonally different from the capeshit of today, where it doesn't work at all.

That is why he directs his violence towards evil doers.

File: gordon explains the socia(...).png (476 KB, 640x480)

476 KB PNG

>>155268116
.... there is another solution that you could employ instead.

File: 1742446589588.jpg (34 KB, 542x360)

34 KB JPG

>>155268116
The face of a bihhh who needs some dihhh

>>155268408
>I'm mature! YOU NEED TO KILL! LOOK HOW MATURE I AM!

>>155268606
Evildoers.

Just one word.

>>155268408
I mean realistically most of the bad guys would have been put to death forever ago by the courts. Batman shouldn't have to kill anyone. The court system in DC is just broken. Batman should just rape his bad guys so they dont want to do bad stuff anymore out of fear of more rape.

File: x1752300924599959.png (353 KB, 565x744)

353 KB PNG

>>155268471
>the hundreds of dudes Batman has beaten off

>>155272269
But what if they're... zesty.

>>155272464
Then Batman doesn't rape them because he will fuck them if they're good noodles and don't crime. Duh

>>155268408
It is a more juvenile morality system which is why I always hated What’s So Funny About Truth… but it’s more about how a single person deciding if someone gets to live or die is a bad thing, Batman is the fantastical version of a Samaritan tackling a fleeing criminal and holding them until a cop gets there. At that point Zsasz was no longer a threat to anyone so Batman just fucking murdering him would’ve been like if the Samaritan blew the fleeing criminal’s brains out after they’d been subdued. The problem is though DC continuing to bring back villains and having them do worse and worse shit to the point of ridiculousness. Killing Joke should’ve been the apex of Joker’s cruelty instead of something to top

>>155272567
>but it’s more about how a single person deciding if someone gets to live or die is a bad thing
Killing in the immediate defense of oneself or others is justified in nearly all moral systems humans have had through history.

File: no way you said that.png (470 KB, 653x748)

470 KB PNG

>>155268116
>tirelessly defends a city that would absolutely collapse without him, his only "error" being that he hurts the poor criminals a little too much
>AUUUGH YOU SELFISH SAVIOR COMPLEX LOSER YOU NEED THERAPY AUUUGH
Don't tell me the original Bane story was like this

>>155272613
The key words being
>immediate defense
As I said later in my post Zsasz wasn’t posing any sort of immediate threat at that point

File: images (9).jpg (32 KB, 414x386)

32 KB JPG

Not really:
I'm better than him cause if he's a SERIAL killer it means I stopped him from likely killing more than me.

You're welcome..

File: 1719473046408629.gif (438 KB, 280x280)

438 KB GIF

>>155268116
>Bro just murder people and ignore the justice system
Is why I despise cape shit to an unhealthy degree. Fuel for psychopaths.

>>155273148
the law system doesn't always work
sometimes some people just need to be offed, plain and simple

>>155272951
So the issue is not >>155272567
>a single person deciding if someone gets to live or die
as you had said.

>>155273210
Yeah anon it’s almost like that’s just one part of my point I was making in my post that you’re cherry-picking for some reason.

>>155272776
>tirelessly defends a city that would absolutely collapse without him
the problem is he's wearing himself thin it's too much for one man

>>155273252
>that you’re cherry-picking for some reason.
I'm pointing out that that part of your post is wrong. It is in fact not a problem for a single person to decide if someone gets to live or die. That's not why Batman has his no-killing rule.

>>155273148
The punisher is the worst offender of this. Batman , superman, spiderman and the likes are all huge offenders but their stories still try to enact some type of moral teaching about responsibility consequences and justice but punisherslop is porn for murder fags and noting more including the garth ennis shit

In DC it's true though. How many Bad Superman stories do you need to read to know that Superman killing people ends with him being super evil?

Also, outside of America people prefer that law enforcement don't just murder suspects and arrest them instead.

>>155268116
Serial killers are people too :(

>>155268408
marxism, whattayougonnado
>>155268504
not the point. also, golden age batman DID kill people. Silver is the one you're thinking of.
The reason Batman mustn't kill is purely so the police can look at him as a feather in their cap, not as a constant humiliation. Batman wants the system to heal. He's like a pill you take for an illness, the pill's intention is NOT to just be something you have to take forever, but to bide time til your immune system can regain its strength

>>155274706
The punisher kills mafiosi
if you don't understand why you need to go murder mafiosi in the street, you're going to learn it the hard way someday, like Frank did. Or, go talk to an Italian. Ask what he thinks about the Punisher.

I've always hated that sentiment. If you kill a killpin that's murdered and raped thousands you're just like him! You're really not.

File: 1787548697818767.jpg (94 KB, 768x1024)

94 KB JPG

>>155270995
pragmatism and ensuring the safety others is possibly the most mature thing you can do.
would you keep a rabid fox as a pet and expect it not bite you? same way you and I would pop the head off the joker if given the chance.
oh sorry, I forgot...you are a faggot so.

>>155268116
I wonder if the writers who peddle that realize how much of a psycho it means the hero secretly is for that to be true. Like, all it takes is for the hero to kill one evil dude to snap and into a murder happy lunatic and go on a murder spree? Its why I hate continuities like Injustice.
"All it takes is one bad day" shouldn't be the norm. The whole point is that the argument comes from a lunatic villian and isn't true.

>>155274758
>In DC it's true though. How many Bad Superman stories do you need to read to know that Superman killing people ends with him being super evil?
But isn't this just a very heavy-handed and hyperbolic take just to make about a point about killing being bad? You're basically saying that Superman is so emotionally weak that if he kills someone, be it as a mistake or in self defense of someone, HE MUST BECOME EVIL! He's just going to love that feeling of ending the life of someone so much he won't be able to stop, to hell his previous upbringing and moral fortitude.

>>155276472
It is really bad, and give off the idea that the hero was just pretending or deluding themselves beforehand about being, you know, a well-adjusted person. Like some Dexter character who was just waiting, or dreading, the day he got the chance to end someone, because he knew they would get hooked.

>>155272269
a lot of them are put to death, but the penalty takes ages and they escape.

>>155272613
>Killing in the immediate defense of oneself or others is justified in nearly all moral systems humans have had through history.
Rittenhouse

>>155272269
Make them Black or Leftists.

>>155273148
Batman and others heroes are already ignoring the justice system by playing vigilantism so

>>155268408
The idea here is not that the hero is as evil as the mass murderer but rather that superheroes are not above the law. Once a superhero puts someone to death without due process, they become above the law and become a vigilante (this technically applies to any superhero action, but we need some grey area to have the superhero genre at all). Vigilantes are people who enforce whatever laws they see fit in whatever way they see fit. In fact, the whole 'A hero will have perfect moral judgement and we can trust them to personally execute whomever they see fit' is a lot more childish than a no kill rule. Why do you think we have due process in the first place? Why arent cops just allowed to execute people as they see fit? You are operating on a childish moral conception where the shiny guy in the cape will always do whatever is good and we should have perfect trust in their judgement. Is is an exercise in humility for a hero to have a no kill rule.

>>155268116
All DC animated movies are disappointing.

>>155277135
>The idea here is not that the hero is as evil as the mass murderer but rather that superheroes are not above the law
Fuck the law. How many scumfucks get away with shit even with the law?
>Is is an exercise in humility for a hero to have a no kill rule.
Shut the fuck up, man.

>>155273279
gotham should stop hiring ineffectual dei dykes like montoya

>>155277135
Brother, cops been taking out people for ages and that shit ain't stopping anyone, the problem with superhero shows is that they made by big networks and the fucking cop unions always but im whenever cops are portrayed even if for rated M for audiences or whatevee, same thing with the military so they take out the critique on superheros which doesnt make sense half the time because superheroes attempt to change the status quo but all of fucking sudden, real life politics get involved and the "intellectuals" suddenly act like its the superheros fault for shit and suck the authority even though most of these leftist faggots hate cops but suddenly, because some cock suckers that wear red hats, all of a fucking suddenly superheroes are Le Facist or whateevr the fuck

>>155270995
>>155268408

the whole point about "superheroes not killing" was back during the golden age of comic books when superheroes were essentially just ordinary citizens under the law who were subservient to the legal system, military, and police. they didn't kill because it's outside their jurisdiction, not because there's anything particularly wrong with it

your real question is why gotham city keeps putting the psychos in a flimsy mental ward instead of giving the joker the death penalty or putting him in the phantom zone or some shit
>he's insane and gets immunity
he's sane enough to know what he's doing and that it's bad. sociopaths understand morality and laws logically, even if they don't feel anything.

also, many anti-heroes like batman have the no-killing rule as a personal limiter since he's only one kill away from just going completely homicidal on every crook he meets. it's still his own decision though.

>>155268471
also, it's really funny how you have a 6'4" buff dude throwing his weight around and using tasers and stuff but no one ever becomes a vegetable by accident. i like to think that half of batman's training is just learning how to beat the shit out of someone nonlethally

>>155276181
>The punisher kills mafiosi
And a lot of other people. Isn't he a significant cause of death, statistically?

>>155276503
>the idea that the hero was just pretending or deluding themselves beforehand about being, you know, a well-adjusted person
An uncharitable reading is that the message is that well-adjusted people should be incapable of killing to protect themselves or others.

>>155276970
>Rittenhouse
Yeah? The police let him go at the scene, and he was acquitted. The people he shot clearly physically attacked him and pulled a gun on him on video. I don't recall the people behind the political circus that resulted in him going to trial being accused of having good morals.

>>155270995
90% of fiction has heroes who kill you fucking retard. Even the Disney version of the Little Mermaid has Eric killing Ursula. Capeshit is a brain disease.

>>155277135
>Why do you think we have due process in the first place?
Because, while it is useful to have authorities, they are prone to abuse, and so restrictions are placed on their actions. The actual quote from the US Constitution is, "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law." There are legal processes for general citizens to both arrest (generally, people in the process of committing a felony) and straight up kill people (generally someone in the process of or in imminent danger of killing or greatly harming someone). Police have more investigative authority than general citizens, and broader arrest authority. Vigilantism involves stepping into this territory, not responding to supervillains actively being a threat to the community.

>Why arent cops just allowed to execute people as they see fit?
They can, under certain circumstances, same as anyone else.

>>155268408
>>155278375
'killing bad guys makes you bad' was a psyop to ban vigilante justice
You will accept one billion nigger rapists in your country and it will be illegal to fight back. Let the police take it from here, goy.
Similarly, comics turned from being a 'hero' about fighting crime and making your city a better place, and is now superfantasy powerscaling shit of stopping galactic gods. i guess we have Punisher killing zogbots is all.

>>155278875

the punisher's whole schtick is that he's a necessary countermeasure for a broken, corrupt legal system. he doesn't justify his actions as morally correct, or even ideal, only necessary.

what would honestly scare me more than vigilantes running around is glowniggers, soldiers, and cops with superpowers. if superpowers were real, you can bet they'd try to regulate the fuck out of it like they do with our gun rights, only the "good goys" would be allowed full access to their powers. everyone else would be forced to wear mutie inhibitor collars unless they got a permit and agreed to fingerprinting and monitoring.

"x-men" is fantastic because it shows such a scenario. and when the flatscans couldn't use technology or oppression to beat forces of nature, they just went hitler-mode instead.

>>155268408
It's a pretty deep morality check. The ability to kill is easy, but killing for the CORRECT reason is hard. Where is the line drawn between justice and barbarism? It's an issue we are debating to this very day.

>>155276970
>Rittenhouse
Not Guilty :)

>>155279032
The idea behind banning vigilante justice is technically sound, essentially it's the equivalent of not wanting some random inexperienced, untrained moron with no oversight do your computer wiring or plumbing except with vigilantes it's even more dangerous because them being reckless dumbfucks can potentially lead to completely innocent people being harmed. Just look at modern "pedo hunters" or whatever the fuck they call themselves where they are targeting completely harmless goofs which weren't even doing anything illegal or else fucking up actual police investigations. Now imagine if superpowers were real and you had people born with the ability to mind rape others. You'd absolutely want to keep them on a tight leash because the potential fallout from them going around with no oversight would be catastrophic.

>>155278359
>Brother, cops been taking out people for ages and that shit ain't stopping anyone

Yeah and they aren't supposed to do that. And they usually don't, in countries that aren't shithole towns in America at least.

>>155268116
>GCPD can't handle a guy with a knife without just sitting around and waiting for Batman
I assume the comic is better than this shit right?

File: 31265418907.jpg (437 KB, 1122x1200)

437 KB JPG

>>155268116
>>155268408
>He who strikes down a thief caught in the act dead is not guilty of murder.
I'm going to have to go with the bible on this one

>>155268408
Fpbp
Batkeks how do we recover

>>155270995
police force can kill if life's are at stake
death penalty exists
retards like you also exist

>>155270995
Sometimes killing is justified.
Sometimes killing is necessary.
It *is* childish to insist otherwise.

>>155278089
You didn't like Flashpoint?
I thought it was pretty okay.

>>155281412
>He who strikes down a thief caught in the act dead is not guilty of murder.
Where is this stated in the Bible? The only verse even remotely similar to this is the one where it says you can kill a thief in the night specifically because you can't know if they're only there to steal or if they're there to kill you, which implies that you can kill in self defense and CANNOT kill someone just for stealing from you.

It's funny how with age I started being more lenient ondeath penalty.
I used to be completely against it, and to this day I find it a last resort and prison should be more rieducational rather than punishing, but the more I learnt about the brutality of reality, the more I accepted that sometimes killing is justified.
there are some people who just can't be salvaged and removing them is a net positive. I don't even think they should rot in jail because "that's worst than death", because fuck that and fuck paying for his hotel room for 50 years.

>>155281077
I haven't seen the movie, but in the comic he had taken a school full of girls hostage. He killed two cops who were sent in to get him and then took Montoya hostage when she went in as well. She told Batman to stop beating him after he was already down, but didn't give him any lecture about it.

>>155268471
Or hotten a concussion, or closed head injury, or internal bleeding, or ruptured organs, or permanent ligament tears. Honestly a wonder why if ez sleeping gas exists in this universe heroes don't just use it.

>>155272269
How come batman can't just bribe the courts hes the richest man in dc

>>155270995
strawman

>>155272613
Almost every society had legal and socially acceptable revenge though until the enlightenment and european colonialism

File: _91408619_55df76d5-2245-4(...).jpg (58 KB, 976x850)

58 KB JPG

>>155273010
I'm better than him because better is subjective and I just like myself better than a polycidal maniac

>>155281793
>until the enlightenment
the so called age of enlightenment really has been a disaster for humanity

>>155273176
Yea guess what lynching doesn't always work. Sometime when it was looked after the fact, they got the wrong guy. So you can pick your poison but don't act like the problem goes one way.

>>155281697
No it says you kill them if you see them stealing in the moment, property is important, you just cant punish them lethally after the fact when the deed is already done as that's premeditated and thus murder, when their are other options for recompense by that point.

>>155281894
>No it says you kill them if you see them stealing in the moment
Again, direct quotation? Verse?

>>155281942
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2022:2-3&version=NIV

>>155282015
It specifically says "in the night" in most translations, or is implied by "the sun rising upon them". The reasoning being that if someone breaks into your house (especially at night) you cannot know if they intend only to steal from you or to kill you. This has been long established.