Why doesn't Batman just incarcerate super villains himself?

[nepenthes]

Bruce isn't stupid - deep down he's well aware that he needs them to keep escaping. Same reason he never just crippled the Joker.

[Flex Mentallo]

Easier way to get around logistics might be to call his buddy Superman and have them thrown into the Phantom Zone

[sgtmattbaker]

No, this is not a "why doesn't Batman just kill the Joker" type of thread, although it is similar. Also, I know the real answer is "comic book logic" haha.

In most circumstances, Batman is skilled enough that he can effectively stop crime without having to resort to lethal means. However, take for example all the hostage situations in movies, games, comics, etc. In many of those situations he does end up being skilled enough to stop the mayhem, but by choosing to do it in a non-lethal way he sometimes extends the duration of the event, putting more people in danger. Take the Arkham video games for example. Now, a lot of the mayhem is brought on indirectly by goons, but Batman could have saved like dozens of lives just by taking the Joker out earlier in the game. I don't mean just flat-out killing him if he is defenseless/subdued/whatever, but like in Arkham Origins when he had a gun to Gordon's head.. that would be a perfectly acceptable time to shoot him. Also, in Arkham Origins, when Firefly is flying around blowing the bridge up, a well placed shot from a rifle would have saved the lives of quite a few. Let's keep in mind that in a hostage saving scenario, killing a criminal is *not* considered murder in any way. Heck, if you have a permit to carry a firearm and someone comes around shooting at people in a public place you have a perfectly legitimate, pretty much civic duty to take a shot if you think you can do so safely.

If you really want a "real life" explanation for it, it is simply because a) since a gun was what killed his parents he hates them and never wants to use them in any circumstance and b) he is unstable and killing someone, even in a hostage saving scenario would take him off the deep-end.

[sgtmattbaker]

Yeah, when you go out into the rest of the DC universe where there are Phantom Zones, the JLA, etc. then you would think the super villains would really start being put there.

[Mgoldman14]

IMO I love how batman doesn't kill. In Hush, batman was right about to kill joker for the murder of his childhood friend but Gordon puts his gun to batmans head and says "you'll be no different from them". And justice isn't always served by vengeance.

[sgtmattbaker]

Since Batman doesn't take it upon himself to kill, incarcerate or otherwise punish criminals (although in some stories his brutal attacks could count for such) then is he really considered a true vigilante? Isn't a vigilante someone who takes the *law* into their own hands? Doesn't he almost always hand criminals/suspects off to the police?

I forget what the law is, but at least in many areas of the United States normal citizens have the right, although not the obligation, to stop a crime in progress if they are aware it is happening. They must be aware, however, that if they kill or seriously injure someone while doing so in a way that goes outside of the law, or do anything else "questionable" then they don't have the legal protections that sanctioned law enforcement officers do.

Specifically I believe it is talking more about witnessing a crime, knowing one will take place or whatever, so Batman having monitoring systems up, listening in on police chatter, etc. might start to make it questionable, but either way, until he breaks the law by stopping "crimes in progress", starts killing, incarcerating and/or otherwise punishing criminals/suspects then he doesn't seem to be a true vigilante, correct?

[sgtmattbaker]

Well, yes, it defines his character. But, killing when someone has been subdued, or is no longer a threat like in Hush is completely and totally different than taking a life during violent hostage situation or violent crime in progress. Yes, since he is not a sanctioned law officer he won't have the same legal protections, meaning that if he did he would legally have to reveal his identity and ruin everything haha, but it wouldn't make him "just like them" if it occurred during specific circumstances like that.

[sgtmattbaker]

I guess because that would mean that he would have to fill out paperwork and not be able to use fear as a weapon? I mean, he doesn't kill or purposefully maim anyone anyway, so why not give him some legal protection as a special operations law enforcement officer? Gordon pretty much treats him as such anyway..

I guess it comes down to Batman breaking and entering during investigations without getting warrants and things like that.

[Kid A]

He basically already is a "special division cop," due to his relationship with Gordon. It's just unofficial so that he can keep his identity.

[t hedge coke]

Accountability. Deputize Batman, you have to admit he's given full rein and will never be held to official or structured accountability.

Not that they haven't deputized him before, but it seems to work better the less official it is.

[Clark_Kent]

There's a mighty big difference between a citizen's arrest & what Batman does.

[Mgoldman14]

Well you are right sgt but also I think Gordon was also trying to protect his character instead of batman being like hey this killing this killing thing is a lot easier.

[lancerman]

One thing I think the Batman line does right about the whole no killing thing, and other superheroes do wrong, is that they clearly make it a personal thing for the character and not some moral higher ground that is assumed to be true. They aren't afraid to make Batman look like he might be wrong for letting the Joker live.

It's usually portrayed as a hang-up of Bruce Wayne's character. And you have guys like Jason Todd calling him out on it.

[Conch22]

If Batman continually locked up all his victims in a prison complex he designed and oversaw various things( hirings, monthly lie detectors for staff, etc.), He's made such a control freak, perfectionist polymath that a breakout either has to be some larger than life thing, some outside force he couldn't have predicted or Batman looks incompetent. The whole idea behind Hush was that a) it had an outside force he didn't expect in the title character, (b) had a large group of his villains colluding and (c) somebody who knew his identity playing on his emotions. Or like how he had to be weakened through a death trap and 3 different thugs before facing Bane, the guy with super strength born in a prison.

A bat villain take on prison break would be cool, though. As for the cave option, there's something about Batman not be a (complete) fascist so he'd never hold somebody indefinitely without trial.

[Captain Haddock]

Batman could be done for a LOT of crimes if the Police ever got hold of him and decided to prosecute - assault, battery, breaking and entering, just off the top of my head. It varies from writer to writer but a lot of the time the criminals (including henchmen/street toughs) get a beating that would never hold up in court. Batman IS a criminal, a vigilante - it's part of what makes His One Rule especially important.