• CannonFodder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    2 days ago

    This bugs me in so many shows. Like I was just watching Daredevil and there’s this whole theme about him not killing Fisk even though Fisk is killing people all over the place while Daredevil is dropping Fisk’s henchmen like flies. Oh so it’s fine to kill lots of people who got a job to work for Fisk (who is the elected mayor), but not Fisk himself?

  • Astrealix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Imma be real with how many ways Gotham is like actually straight up just cursed by five million supernatural reasons, I don’t think “due process” is really sustainable compared to batman with a gun

    • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      2 days ago

      Interestingly, Batman with a gun did kill the Joker in his very first appearance in the comics.

      • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        well that’s why he doesn’t kill he’s not very good at it. he’s trying his best, okay?

        edit: ganbatte, bat-san. ganbatte

      • Astrealix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        I mean that’s canonically real in the DC universe. There’s like literally a portal to hell there and everything.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah, but the notion that “there’ll always be extreme crime in Gotham because it’s cursed, so therefore Batman must murder people” is just a copout for people trying to justify him squandering his resources on punching people in stead of bettering society.

          I’m capable of suspending disbelief to enjoy superhero movies, but I draw the line at the “if it was real life, he’d still be justified” arguments, is what I mean 😉

          • Zarobi@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            The problem is that it’s a slippery slope. Batman doesn’t want to be the type of person who kills; that’s the line he’s drawn in the sand, for better or worse. If you justify killing just the Joker, what about the next supervillain that shows up? And the next one? Suddenly you’re just killing every one of them, because it’s easier

            Plus there would be a lot more public scrutiny. He gets away with a lot of shit I think partly because he doesn’t actually kill anyone. The police actually mostly work with him not against him; I think that would change if he has a huge body count

          • Astrealix@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Fair. I’d argue Bruce Wayne does use his resources to help people though. Albeit, still a billionaire, so not enough, but yknow.

            also it’s more like “if it was real life and there was actually just straight up a portal to hell and everything, he’d be justified because the law isn’t gonna cut it”

  • Not a newt@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    2 days ago

    So yeah, about Superman suggesting Batman kill the Joker:

    spoiler

    In the Injustice series, the Joker takes it too far and sets things up so that Superman unwittingly kills Lois Lane and his unborn child. In return, Superman punches the Joker’s heart out. And that’s just the first issue!

  • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    2 days ago

    Anyone want to write a thesis on the role of morality and killing in HBO’s Harley Quinn series? So far it’s interesting. She doesn’t mind killing people, as long as they’re the right people, not only super villains, but polluting company’s lawyers. I think the popularity of defending the status quo, usually given to superheroes, is starting to slip away and society is beginning to celebrate villainy out of sheer desperation, as the only hope for change.

  • SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s a real life trolley problem there.

    By not killing the Joker Batman leaves him alive to kill more innocent people each time he escapes or hatches a new scheme.

  • sunsofold@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    One of the things to think about is just how much damage would be done to joker’s body over time as a non-superpowered human. Joker’s getting kicked to pieces repeatedly. He’s not getting Bruce Wayne’s concierge medical care. He’d be a maraca of bone shards after the first few beatdowns. Now, he’s crazy, so maybe he doesn’t even notice the pain, but you have to expect he’d be going around with a garishly colored walker after the twentieth time being thrown through a window onto concrete.

    • FenrirIII@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      That was the premise behind Superior Spider-Man. Doc Ock took such a beating over time that he was dying

  • BillyClark@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    For the most part, Batman doesn’t even punish criminals. He stops and detains them, usually using force, and sometimes what we’d call an excessive amount of force. Batman’s thing with killing is that he goes out of his way to avoid killing criminals while stopping and detaining them.

    The question of killing is not really about punishing them, and so due process doesn’t really figure into it.