The problem of NO KILL code

[Slowpokeking]

But the only reason they keep escaping jail and killing scores of people is because someone keeps writing the stories that way. The problem isn't that some heroes have a no kill code, the problem is hackneyed writing.

And even then it's really only certain characters. It's not like Poison Ivy or Penquin kill 30 people every time they get loose.

Yes, that''s my point. But from the view of the in-story characters, it would be dumb to not kill when you know they are gonna break out.

[ed2962]

Yes, that''s my point. But from the view of the in-story characters, it would be dumb to not kill when you know they are gonna break out.

But the people in story should be like, "Why do they keep sending so-and-so to the same place and not to an institute with higher security?" They should be asking why the legal system can't deal with some of these criminals. They should be like "What am I paying taxes for if the cops or the feds can't make me feel safe from Joker and Spiderman?" Should the general public in a DC/Marvel story really think that a random vigilante that they don't know should be responsible for not killing someone they happen to be afraid of?

[Ghost Rider TheHellfireDemon]

Yes, that''s my point. But from the view of the in-story characters, it would be dumb to not kill when you know they are gonna break out.

Yeah but if a hero is against intentional killing that isnt self defense or in a war then they've become a murderer to defeat a murderer, rapist, etc.
Honestly I dont want to see spider man, green lantern (haljordan), firestorn (ronmieraymond), superman, Gambit become something vastly similar or the same as the Justice Lords of the JLA cartoon.

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

Well, that was Cap's problem. He knew what he was getting into with Frank, and if he expected anything different from a man who doesn't compromise with scum, then he was the fool. Meanwhile, I'm sure plenty of Gothamites wonder if Batman is insane to allow madmen like the Joker to roam free to kill time after time after time instead of putting him six feet under where he belonged.

Regarding the Joker, Miller put the words in Batman's mouth: "I'll count the dead, one by one. I'll add them to the list, Joker. The list of all the people I've murdered by letting you live." It's made Batman look like that dude Sisyphus. Batman forever rolling the Joker boulder up the hill to Arkham, only to have it roll back down--killing scores of innocent people along the way. Listen. Batman needs to eliminate Joker and go through a Bat-existential-crisis until another whack job puts on the clown make-up and starts the whole Batman/Joker song and dance all over again.

[Ghost Rider TheHellfireDemon]

Regarding the Joker, Miller put the words in Batman's mouth: "I'll count the dead, one by one. I'll add them to the list, Joker. The list of all the people I've murdered by letting you live." It's made Batman look like that dude Sisyphus. Batman forever rolling the Joker boulder up the hill to Arkham, only to have it roll back down--killing scores of innocent people along the way. Listen. Batman needs to eliminate Joker and go through a Bat-existential-crisis until another whack job puts on the clown make-up and starts the whole Batman/Joker song and dance all over again.

Joker would just return so its that much of a waste.
Also Batman cant kill Joker without getting his hands dirty which is exactly what Joker wants.
For him to become a murderer to eliminate a remorseless psychopath piece of garbage wretched unfunny utter murdering bastard.

[lancerman]

Joker would just return so its that much of a waste.
Also Batman cant kill Joker without getting his hands dirty which is exactly what Joker wants.
For him to become a murderer to eliminate a remorseless psychopath piece of garbage wretched unfunny utter murdering bastard.

See I have several problems with this.

First, yeah Joker would come back. But only because of zany comic book bs. Not because of some plot point in the story or anything a Batman should expect. So that's not a great excuse.

Second, once Batman became a vigilante and decided to be the guy that stood between the people of Gotham and people like the Joker, he assumes some of the responsibility when he has this guy at his mercy so many times and does the insane thing where he puts him in a place that he has a track record is escaping from and wreaking more havoc. He's playing dad and giving the Joker a time out at that point. He has responsibility with that mantle. He's already getting his hands dirty. Now he's just letting his personal hanguos influence his self appointed job. Yes technically the rest of Gotham's legal system is complicit, but they actually are bound by rules that Batman actively avoids. Otherwise he should just be a cop instead of a vigilante.

Now all this would be fine if we just ignore it and accept that it's comic book cheese, and don't really address it. But the Joker turned into a character where he always goads Batman to kill him. This addressing the issue. Thus pointing out the flaw.

Lastly, what Joket does or doesn't want Batman to do shouldn't be a factor. So hundreds of more people need to die because Joker would be happy if Batman killed him? Big deal.

We know the real reason why these characters don't die. No need for the stories to have an illegitimate argument on the morality of it when it's clearly BS. Just don't address it.

[Michael P]

People who don't want idealism in their superhero comics confuse the heck out of me.

[ed2962]

See I have several problems with this.

First, yeah Joker would come back. But only because of zany comic book bs. Not because of some plot point in the story or anything a Batman should expect. So that's not a great excuse.

Second, once Batman became a vigilante and decided to be the guy that stood between the people of Gotham and people like the Joker, he assumes some of the responsibility when he has this guy at his mercy so many times and does the insane thing where he puts him in a place that he has a track record is escaping from and wreaking more havoc. He's playing dad and giving the Joker a time out at that point. He has responsibility with that mantle. He's already getting his hands dirty. Now he's just letting his personal hanguos influence his self appointed job. Yes technically the rest of Gotham's legal system is complicit, but they actually are bound by rules that Batman actively avoids. Otherwise he should just be a cop instead of a vigilante.

Now all this would be fine if we just ignore it and accept that it's comic book cheese, and don't really address it. But the Joker turned into a character where he always goads Batman to kill him. This addressing the issue. Thus pointing out the flaw.

Lastly, what Joket does or doesn't want Batman to do shouldn't be a factor. So hundreds of more people need to die because Joker would be happy if Batman killed him? Big deal.

We know the real reason why these characters don't die. No need for the stories to have an illegitimate argument on the morality of it when it's clearly BS. Just don't address it.

But a cop would have shot Joker by now. Or a judge would have sentenced him to stay in a higher security jail. Heck, inmates in said jail would have killed Joker.

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

See I have several problems with this.

First, yeah Joker would come back. But only because of zany comic book bs. Not because of some plot point in the story or anything a Batman should expect. So that's not a great excuse.

Second, once Batman became a vigilante and decided to be the guy that stood between the people of Gotham and people like the Joker, he assumes some of the responsibility when he has this guy at his mercy so many times and does the insane thing where he puts him in a place that he has a track record is escaping from and wreaking more havoc. He's playing dad and giving the Joker a time out at that point. He has responsibility with that mantle. He's already getting his hands dirty. Now he's just letting his personal hanguos influence his self appointed job. Yes technically the rest of Gotham's legal system is complicit, but they actually are bound by rules that Batman actively avoids. Otherwise he should just be a cop instead of a vigilante.

Now all this would be fine if we just ignore it and accept that it's comic book cheese, and don't really address it. But the Joker turned into a character where he always goads Batman to kill him. This addressing the issue. Thus pointing out the flaw.

Lastly, what Joket does or doesn't want Batman to do shouldn't be a factor. So hundreds of more people need to die because Joker would be happy if Batman killed him? Big deal.

We know the real reason why these characters don't die. No need for the stories to have an illegitimate argument on the morality of it when it's clearly BS. Just don't address it.

Lancerman, I agree. The problem is the huge desparity between Jokers heinous crimes and Batman's preventive methods. As a result, MY suspension of disbelief can no longer be maintained.

[phantom1592]

See I have several problems with this.

First, yeah Joker would come back. But only because of zany comic book bs. Not because of some plot point in the story or anything a Batman should expect. So that's not a great excuse.

Second, once Batman became a vigilante and decided to be the guy that stood between the people of Gotham and people like the Joker, he assumes some of the responsibility when he has this guy at his mercy so many times and does the insane thing where he puts him in a place that he has a track record is escaping from and wreaking more havoc. He's playing dad and giving the Joker a time out at that point. He has responsibility with that mantle. He's already getting his hands dirty. Now he's just letting his personal hanguos influence his self appointed job. Yes technically the rest of Gotham's legal system is complicit, but they actually are bound by rules that Batman actively avoids. Otherwise he should just be a cop instead of a vigilante.

I've never liked the theory that Batman has any responsibility for keeping the Joker alive. He isnt' anyone special. He's just the guy who tracked him down and beat him up... He has no more responsibility then anyone one else.

But a cop would have shot Joker by now. Or a judge would have sentenced him to stay in a higher security jail. Heck, inmates in said jail would have killed Joker.

This. This is what I find hard to believe. I can totally see Batman not wanting to cross the line. But you know who else has the joker at his mercy and the 'responsibility' to finish him off?? The cops booking him in the station... the Cops moving him from hideout to Arkham... the Doctors who work on him... the nurses... the orderlies... the cooks at Arkham... the random people on the street who usually run from him... the henchmen working for him...

ANY of those could draw a gun and drop him before he had a chance to blink... Or drop some poison in his food... or Leave an airbubble in a needle... Joker is crazy... he's immoral, but he's not an epically powerful super-villain. Once he's in a strait-jacket for the 20th time, realisticly he'd never last a night.

There's always a push to have Batman bear the responsibility for not killing him... but it's really EVERY moral person in Gotham's fault. If Batman should get a free pass for killing a criminal he deems too dangerous for society... then so should everyone else.

[Carabas]

I've never liked the theory that Batman has any responsibility for keeping the Joker alive. He isnt' anyone special. He's just the guy who tracked him down and beat him up... He has no more responsibility then anyone one else.

Think of it like this: Joker is a plague, an infectuous disease that kills a lot of people year in year out, and has been doing this for about ten years.
Batman is apparently the only person in the world with a cure. Batman however feels bad about ending the plague so he gives everybody aspirin instead.

[phantom1592]

Think of it like this: Joker is a plague, an infectuous disease that kills a lot of people year in year out, and has been doing this for about ten years.
Batman is apparently the only person in the world with a cure. Batman however feels bad about ending the plague so he gives everybody aspirin instead.

Batman is not... nor ever has been the only one with the cure. Everyone and anyone has the cure.


A better analogy is the whole world walking past an open gallon of milk without putting it back in the fridge. Batman COULD have done it... but so could everyone else. It's not BATMAN'S fault the milk goes sour.

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

Bats must end the Joker once and for all. After a time, let another psycho become Joker. Give this Joker a different, unique origin and method of madness. Make the new Joker a minority. Ha!

[lancerman]

People who don't want idealism in their superhero comics confuse the heck out of me.

It's not idealism when the comic clearly lays out two options and then says history heavily infers one of them will result in more blood being spilled.

[lancerman]

Batman is not... nor ever has been the only one with the cure. Everyone and anyone has the cure.


A better analogy is the whole world walking past an open gallon of milk without putting it back in the fridge. Batman COULD have done it... but so could everyone else. It's not BATMAN'S fault the milk goes sour.

When Batman's consistently the only one who can get to the Joker, then yeah he's the only one with the cure. Everyone else has to play by rules that Batman explicitly chooses not to play by for reasons...