How Do You Feel About Batman Killing?

[antoineflemming]

Depends on the situation. If it's a situation where he is being shot at by helicopter guns and other kinds of heavy artillery and it is his survival or the survival of an innocent at stake then I have no problem with it.

I'm ok with some gray area on this but I recognize that some people want it be all absolute, he should never kill under any circumstance type of thing which I don't necessarily buy into.

I'm like this as well. I've always thought his absolute no-kill rule made him dumb and weak and proud. I think if it's for the greater good, he should kill. He should avoid it if it isn't absolutely necessary, but if it is, then he should kill.

 

[Young Superman]

He shouldn't do it, but he's been doing it in movies since '89. So I just give up and go along for the ride.

Agreed, neither Batman or Superman should never kill.

 

[ThePhantasm]

 

[CaptainWagner]

His absolute-no kill rule is not something I endorse, because it makes him look bad. For example, when Wonder Woman killed Maxwell Lord and he threw a hissy fit.

I'm fine with him killing at this point in the universe, but I don't want him to stay in the place he is now. By the end of the first solo, a hope to see him returning to the old code and taking a new Robin under his wing.

So I'm not really sure how to answer the poll.

 

[titansupes]

No option for "occasional, incidental killing"?

 

[hellblazer103]

yes. people want batman to be this compassionate humanist, then they turn around and they want him to be this sadistic psychopath that enjoys beating criminals. you can't always have it both ways. and if you do , you've gotta go all the way with one.

best post ever , lmao

although idk if the " kill everyone but you " joke fully works , since the joker is the first one to be shown dead

 

[regwec]

Memoranda of Marion Cotillard's feeble death scene brighten any day.

 

[Victarion]

Depends who he's killing.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Its completely understandable in this DCEU as to why Batman did kill and it's wholly reasonable as to why and how the events of the film's conclusion of BvS leads to his re-evaluation of his direction & motives.

 

[shauner111]

Its completely understandable in this DCEU as to why Batman did kill and it's wholly reasonable as to why and how the events of the film's conclusion of BvS leads to his re-evaluation of his direction & motives.

Disagree. And the killing didn't seem to be an issue in this film at all. It was the branding and anger he had towards Superman.

 

[BatStormtrooper]

I don't mind Batman killing as long as it's not premeditated.
He should never kill "just because" or in cold blood.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Batman doesn't kill because he doesn't want to be like the monsters he hates. He doesn't want to lead himself down a path of complete darkness he knows he walks every night. He's on a tightrope and it's easy to fall off into oblivion... That's his biggest fear, a fear that keeps him on the straight and narrow.

In BvS, he no longer cared about that, he has no fear of becoming evil to protect and serve, and that's due to Joker killing Robin, realising he's been too soft on the criminal element that threatens and claims lives.

That's not Batman to me though. I understand it in BvS, but I don't agree with it. It didn't make him interesting. It was a change to make him a threat to Superman's life, and the execution of it was an utter mess. He kills out of convenience, he kills out of the sheer brutality of his actions in combat, he kills for no reason when in the Batmobile, and he intended to MURDER Superman... that's the Punisher, not Batman, and I can't understand why people are fine with that.

 

[Tony Gunk]

I'm fine with it in exceptional circumstances where it's absolutely necessary. However I'm not completely comfortable with him blowing thugs away as though it's routine and an afterthought

 

[Rodrigo90]

It wasn't even routine in BvS.

It was for any sloppy reason Terrio could think of.

 

[thorstone]

If you voted no, your 7 year-old self would like you to grow a pair.

 

[Rodrigo90]

It's not about that.

Many of us grew up with a hero, who has for many years, being one of the strongest strengths of his character, vowed to never take a life.

Granted, there have been a few tales of Batman having to go against his code of honour, in rare circumstances.
What you see in the Nolan trilogy is probably the best example of the manner in how Batman should take lives... and that was only Two-Face.

With Nolan, the story of Batman killing had repercussions that came back to haunt him: Talia believed he murdered her father and came close to destroying Gotham. Harvey's death lead to exile and repercussions that released all of Gotham's criminals.

And that should be the case with every killing Batman ever makes in the comic books, in my opinion. Usually that happens.

Snyder may do that for Batman in Justice League, or Affleck may do that himself for the solo film.
Superman's killing of Zod lead to his own death in the long run.

As long as killing isn't treat as causal as The Punisher's perfect weekend, and leads to some major consequences, then fine

 

[godisawesome]

SFDebris had a strong argument about why a masked vigilante has far more ethical strength in a no kill rule than there initially seems to be. It's not his responsibility to kill Joker, or Two-Face, or the other repetitive badguys; it's the responsibility of the populace to decide that in a representative democracy. And point of fact is that it really isn't his fault these guys escape all the time in comics. It's the civilian populace's.

Now in a comic, there is genuine pressure to justify that standpoint; Joker and the rest of the rogues have escaped enough to have near triple digit numbers of Arkham and Blackgate's failure to contain them. But in a movie verse, which will naturally include far fewer adventures, you can actually make the time behind bars for the badguys much longer. If Joker has only escaped two or three times from jail and is just such a slippery SOB that he hasn't been caught (or killed) for his other rampages. And other villains could genuinely have been taken down by Batman one time and locked up for the rest. Suicide Squad gets a lot more meaning if Belle Reve is an escape proof Alcatraz that doesn't fail.

I don't mind having Batman's tactics get a bit more pragmatic, where some death may occur, but on a scale much smaller than in BvS, and especially if we see that Nightwing, as his first Robin, holds to an older code that maximized survival for everyone involved, and we get to see that contrasted with Batman and Red Hood.

 

[Mindreaper21]

Why do people keep saying that Batman turned like that because Joker killed Robin? The movie as well as the books are clear that the arrival of Superman is what made him that way.

 

[Kobra]

Batman doesn't kill because he doesn't want to be like the monsters he hates. He doesn't want to lead himself down a path of complete darkness he knows he walks every night. He's on a tightrope and it's easy to fall off into oblivion... That's his biggest fear, a fear that keeps him on the straight and narrow.

In BvS, he no longer cared about that, he has no fear of becoming evil to protect and serve, and that's due to Joker killing Robin, realising he's been too soft on the criminal element that threatens and claims lives.

That's not Batman to me though. I understand it in BvS, but I don't agree with it. It didn't make him interesting. It was a change to make him a threat to Superman's life, and the execution of it was an utter mess. He kills out of convenience, he kills out of the sheer brutality of his actions in combat, he kills for no reason when in the Batmobile, and he intended to MURDER Superman... that's the Punisher, not Batman, and I can't understand why people are fine with that.

How can such a popular argument be so dumb? So, if Batman kills, he becomes like his enemies? Because that's all that defines his enemies, right? The fact that they kill. Hey, maybe a cop is like a criminal too, since he also can kill, given the chance.

Maybe even if Batman doesn't kill, he is still like his enemies. His enemies hurt people, he hurts people too. His enemies break the law, he breaks the law too. Maybe he should just stay at home watching cartoons, otherwise he is just like his enemies.

 

[Unbreakable Lex]

It's silly to think a man without powers could go up against mercenaries with automatic weapons without killing anyone. I'm all about equal force. Pull out fists, lets box. Pull out knives, lets slash. Pull out guns? Let's die.

 

[hellblazer103]

How can such a popular argument be so dumb? So, if Batman kills, he becomes like his enemies? Because that's all that defines his enemies, right? The fact that they kill. Hey, maybe a cop is like a criminal too, since he also can kill, given the chance.

Maybe even if Batman doesn't kill, he is still like his enemies. His enemies hurt people, he hurts people too. His enemies break the law, he breaks the law too. Maybe he should just stay at home watching cartoons, otherwise he is just like his enemies.

you win this thread , lmao

 

[jonathancrane]

It's silly to think a man without powers could go up against mercenaries with automatic weapons without killing anyone. I'm all about equal force. Pull out fists, lets box. Pull out knives, lets slash. Pull out guns? Let's die.

This.

 

[Rodrigo90]

How can such a popular argument be so dumb? So, if Batman kills, he becomes like his enemies? Because that's all that defines his enemies, right? The fact that they kill. Hey, maybe a cop is like a criminal too, since he also can kill, given the chance.

Maybe even if Batman doesn't kill, he is still like his enemies. His enemies hurt people, he hurts people too. His enemies break the law, he breaks the law too. Maybe he should just stay at home watching cartoons, otherwise he is just like his enemies.

Batman isn't too far off from becoming a psychopath. He's stated over the years, as have others, how narrow the beam over darkness he walks is, and how easy it is to fall from it, plunging himself into a place he can never return from. Taking a human being's life, no matter how evil, where you are in no position to do so, is always going to be perceived as wrong, and rightfully so.
Batman bends the law, sometimes he breaks it, all for the greater good... and this is for the sake of upholding the law. He has to draw a line somewhere, because if ge doesn't, what example is he setting to others out there?

Even after Commissioner Gordon has been tortured, seen pics of his daughter naked and crippled, does he tell Batman to kill the Joker to prevent this from happening again to anyone else? Does he ask Batman to beat the clown to a pulp? No. He instructs him to bring him in by the book, to show him that the lawful side of his character will remain intact, despite everything.
Batman, like cops, works alongside the rules of law and order. Police officers don't go in with a plan to kill a criminals, it's to arrest them. The world would be so much simpler, but where would that leave our society?

Batman, being so close to evil, because let's face it, he's not exactly normal, is he? Should absolutely be the first person to recognise a place to draw a line, so he doesn't run the risk of being like those he fights, who have no regards for law and order, life and death.

 

[Rodrigo90]

It's silly to think a man without powers could go up against mercenaries with automatic weapons without killing anyone. I'm all about equal force. Pull out fists, lets box. Pull out knives, lets slash. Pull out guns? Let's die.

And that's The Punisher.

I prefer the "live forever" fantasy element over compromising his character for the sake of unnecessary realism. Batman's coped pretty well over the years, taking down a lot of powerful enemies without resorting to killing.

 

[Kobra]

Batman isn't too far off from becoming a psychopath. He's stated over the years, as have others, how narrow the beam over darkness he walks is, and how easy it is to fall from it, plunging himself into a place he can never return from. Taking a human being's life, no matter how evil, where you are in no position to do so, is always going to be perceived as wrong, and rightfully so.
Batman bends the law, sometimes he breaks it, all for the greater good... and this is for the sake of upholding the law. He has to draw a line somewhere, because if ge doesn't, what example is he setting to others out there?

Even after Commissioner Gordon has been tortured, seen pics of his daughter naked and crippled, does he tell Batman to kill the Joker to prevent this from happening again to anyone else? Does he ask Batman to beat the clown to a pulp? No. He instructs him to bring him in by the book, to show him that the lawful side of his character will remain intact, despite everything.
Batman, like cops, works alongside the rules of law and order. Police officers don't go in with a plan to kill a criminals, it's to arrest them. The world would be so much simpler, but where would that leave our society?

Batman, being so close to evil, because let's face it, he's not exactly normal, is he? Should absolutely be the first person to recognise a place to draw a line, so he doesn't run the risk of being like those he fights, who have no regards for law and order, life and death.

But Batman has no regards for law and order. He beats people to a pulp and he puts innocents in danger quite often. In Batman Begins, for example, how many cops could he have killed just to save his girl?

Ok, it's ok to break the law, it's ok to set bad examples, it's ok to send people to the hospital and quite possibly cripple them for life, it's ok to put a lot of people in danger, but it's not ok to kill a criminal if the situation really justifies it? What about all the mad men Batman attracts? All the mad men that will take numerous of lives just because Batman refuses to stop them for good? Cops would have killed a lot of Batman's enemies if they had the chance. Batman chooses not to, but is he really saving lives by doing it? The comics and the movies tell us that no, he isn't.

Batman's no kill rule is actually quite dumb and reveals a twisted understanding of morality. "I can do all these bad things, but there's one bad thing i can't do, even though i'm still doing things that indirectly end up being even worse".