Should heroes kill in some circumstances?

[Black Narcissus]

Can we stop acting like they are real ppl too tho? lol

Goddamn.

Give me an epic story in which Batman finally kills the joker at the end. Ya'll dont like it? Here are 20 something difference versions and stories in which he does not kill that bastah. There.

Lawd.

 

[BruceWayne2]

Yes

Only if Superman permanently kills off Jared Leto's Joker. I will accept that.

He's beating him senseless while saying "WHARRRRS THE REAL JOKERRR, JASON TODD! SWARE TA MEEE! WHAAARRRS LEX LUTHOR'S FATHURR!"

 

[idiot09]

Heroes can and should find other ways to pursue justice. Murder shouldn't be an allowable option.

So did you like it when WW killed in her film?Or when IM did in his first film?

 

[Predator jp]

Can we stop acting like they are real ppl too tho? lol

Goddamn.

Give me an epic story in which Batman finally kills the joker at the end. Ya'll dont like it? Here are 20 something difference versions and stories in which he does not kill that bastah. There.

Lawd.

i just can't wait to see Batfleck does this to LetoJoker.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Wait, it's been a long time since I read No Man's Land. What does Joker do to Sarah Essen?

I've spoiler-tagged it - although it was 17 years ago and the killing is pretty well-known, some people who haven't read it may not know the exact circumstances;

Spoiler

'Sarah is murdered by the Joker in Detective Comics #741 (February 2000), at the end of the "No Man's Land" story arc. The Joker had kidnapped dozens of infants and was holding them in the basement of the police station. Sarah is the first to reach Joker's position. Although she has him at gunpoint, the Joker tosses an infant at her, and Sarah instinctively drops her weapon to catch the child, saving it from injury. The Joker then shoots Sarah in the head after saying a cold "Merry Christmas." Ironically, the Joker seems to find no humor in her death, as he is shown frowning as he walks away.'

Wikipedia - Sarah Essen Gordon

 

[Polux]

i just can't wait to see Batfleck does this to LetoJoker.

I recently rewatched Raiders of the Lost Arc and it hit me how many people Indy kills in the opening scene alone, I mean...he's a professor, right?? And he just goes around killing people with impunity and without a second thought...

The 80s, man...

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

I recently rewatched Raiders of the Lost Arc and it hit me how many people Indy kills in the opening scene alone, I mean...he's a professor, right?? And he just goes around killing people with impunity and without a second thought...

And we cheered every time!

 

[writer0327]

So did you like it when WW killed in her film?Or when IM did in his first film?

I honestly don't recall IM's kill. For WW, I don't think I had a response to the action. If anything, it didn't feel necessary, but it didn't take me out of the story, ala Man of Steel.

I believe murder should be where heroes draw the line. The question isn't whether I like or dislike a particular kill. In the construct of the story, I feel heroes should find better ways to resolve conflicts. Like I said, it goes back to the question... "Is it moral to murder?"

 

[Primal Slayer]

There is a big difference between murder and killing. Heroes aren't going to murder someone, if the person is dying it is because they dont have a choice.

 

[writer0327]

I recently rewatched Raiders of the Lost Arc and it hit me how many people Indy kills in the opening scene alone, I mean...he's a professor, right?? And he just goes around killing people with impunity and without a second thought...

The 80s, man...

Indy didn't kill a lot of people in Raiders' opening scene. He killed a whole lotta people in the Temple of Doom's opening scene however

 

[writer0327]

There is a big difference between murder and killing. Heroes aren't going to murder someone, if the person is dying it is because they dont have a choice.

Murder is killing with the intent to kill. The question implies the hero intends to kill in order to solve a conflict.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Murder is killing with the intent to kill. The question implies the hero intends to kill in order to solve a conflict.

Maybe definitions are different in the US; in Britain that isn't always the case. Intentionally killing someone can be lawful if it's deemed necessary in the defence of oneself or another. Even by a private citizen. That's not classified as murder here.

 

[Ninjablade]

I don't always see the necessity or creativity or growth in forcing the story to make a character kill. Sometimes there is a good story in it, yes, but I don't find it necessary or transcendental.
If it's conceivable to make a scenario where the only moral, physical and logical solution is for this "no kill rule" character to kill so what? There is no character evolution here, just scripted determinism. I'd find it more interesting if in spite of it all, they manage to maintain their rule.

But I guess at this point is a matter of preference.

This is how I feel about it. If anything I find it lazy that the writer goes for the "hero kills bad guy" solution. It's the easy and cheap way out after you've written yourself into a corner.

Like you said, it's far more interesting if a write manages to come up with a way for the hero to still maintain their moral code. Only issue here is that most writers now adays are incredibly uncreative and think of the most contrived and lucrative ways for it work so it comes off as stupid.

 

[writer0327]

Maybe definitions are different in the US; in Britain that isn't always the case. Intentionally killing someone can be lawful if it's deemed necessary in the defence of oneself or another. Even by a private citizen. That's not classified as murder here.

In my opinion, it still constitutes murder because a hero is endowed with more responsibility due to his abilities. It's no different than a police officer choosing to use deadly force when he doesn't necessarily have to. The hero would certainly be on trial for murder. Maybe he would be acquitted. Maybe the death would be declared "justifiable homicide". My point is the hero should resolve the matter some other way.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

In my opinion, it still constitutes murder because a hero is endowed with more responsibility due to his abilities. It's no different than a police officer choosing to use deadly force when he doesn't necessarily have to. The hero would certainly be on trial for murder. Maybe he would be acquitted. Maybe the death would be declared "justifiable homicide". My point is the hero should resolve the matter some other way.

I'm just explaining what the legal position is over here.

 

[writer0327]

This is how I feel about it. If anything I find it lazy that the writer goes for the "hero kills bad guy" solution. It's the easy and cheap way out after you've written yourself into a corner.

Like you said, it's far more interesting if a write manages to come up with a way for the hero to still maintain their moral code. Only issue here is that most writers now adays are incredibly uncreative and think of the most contrived and lucrative ways for it work so it comes off as stupid.

I feel the EXACT same way. It feels like the writer is either trying to make some sort of halfass commentary on the morality of killing, which always comes off shaky as hell, or he's just lazy and can't write himself out of a corner.

 

[writer0327]

I'm just explaining what the legal position is over here.

Oh certainly, no question, I get what you're saying. I even had asked earlier if this a legal or moral question. Legally, the hero could be in the right or wrong. But I think we're discussing the morality of a hero committing murder to solve a problem.

 

[Polux]

Indy didn't kill a lot of people in Raiders' opening scene. He killed a whole lotta people in the Temple of Doom's opening scene however

Actually, I think I was thinking of Last Crusade.

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Oh certainly, no question, I get what you're saying. I even had asked earlier if this a legal or moral question. Legally, the hero could be in the right or wrong. But I think we're discussing the morality of a hero committing murder to solve a problem.

OP asked should heroes 'kill', not should they 'murder' - the terminology is important. I don't think many would argue with a hero murdering being wrong; however a hero killing may not be (of course whether a writer should put a superhero in that position in the first place is another matter).

 

[writer0327]

OP asked should heroes 'kill', not should they 'murder' - the terminology is important. I don't think many would argue with a hero murdering being wrong; however a hero killing may not be (of course whether a writer should put a superhero in that position in the first place is another matter).

Okay, maybe it's just me then, but I see any intent to kill as murder, whether justified or not. I'm contrasting this to accidental death, manslaughter, where the hero might not have intended for the villain to die.

For the purposes of the discussion and because the OP used "kill", you're right, let's call it that. Killing with intent to kill.

 

[idiot09]

I honestly don't recall IM's kill. For WW, I don't think I had a response to the action. If anything, it didn't feel necessary, but it didn't take me out of the story, ala Man of Steel.

I believe murder should be where heroes draw the line. The question isn't whether I like or dislike a particular kill. In the construct of the story, I feel heroes should find better ways to resolve conflicts. Like I said, it goes back to the question... "Is it moral to murder?"

Well since it was never about murder("killing as the first intent"), but rather about killing(as the last possible option), I dont know why you are bringing that up.

You said straight up, heroes shouldnt kill, at all. No ifs and buts.

So if you consistent with your decision/judgement, it was wrong for WW to kill, or for IM to kill in his movie(he killed loads of terroists).

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

In my opinion, it still constitutes murder because a hero is endowed with more responsibility due to his abilities. It's no different than a police officer choosing to use deadly force when he doesn't necessarily have to. The hero would certainly be on trial for murder.

And what if the person endangering human lives has the same or greater abilities than the hero?

Or what if the abilities are useless in the situation?

 

[writer0327]

Well since it was never about murder("killing as the first intent"), but rather about killing(as the last possible option), I dont know why you are bringing that up.

You said straight up, heroes shouldnt kill, at all. No ifs and buts.

So if you consistent with your decision/judgement, it was wrong for WW to kill, or for IM to kill in his movie(he killed loads of terroists).

Ok now I remember IM. Haven't seen it in a while.

Maybe I misunderstood. You asked me if I "liked" it. By "like", I assumed you meant what was my visceral response to the action, if I "enjoyed" it, not my agreement that it was the right thing to do.

As heroes, it was definitely wrong for them to kill. WW is a sticky one because she was in the middle of a war, but within the story, she actually set out to "kill Ares", not as a last resort, but as a function of her desire. She could have resolved it another way, but she was hellbent on killing Ares. Not quite the same as a hero trying to save a city from an alien attack, but still, she could have done without the murder.

And initially she killed the wrong guy. Even more of a reason not to kill. What if you're wrong?

 

[writer0327]

And what if the person endangering human lives has the same or greater abilities than the hero?

Or what if the abilities are useless in the situation?

The hero would likely already know these circumstances before charging in. Before going up against Darkseid, Batman knows he's going to need a little help or he will have devised a plan to take advantage of his weaknesses.

In the event that the hero is outclassed and/or outnumbered by an opponent, the hero has to find other ways to resolve the problem. Maybe brute force won't work, maybe its time to use cleverness, knowledge of the villain, intelligence or even friendships and connections with other heroes. These are the characteristics that make them heroes, that they have abilities to solve problems that others cannot.

 

[idiot09]

Ok now I remember IM. Haven't seen it in a while.

Maybe I misunderstood. You asked me if I "liked" it. By "like", I assumed you meant what was my visceral response to the action, if I "enjoyed" it, not my agreement that it was the right thing to do.

As heroes, it was definitely wrong for them to kill. WW is a sticky one because she was in the middle of a war, but within the story, she actually set out to "kill Ares", not as a last resort, but as a function of her desire. She could have resolved it another way, but she was hellbent on killing Ares. Not quite the same as a hero trying to save a city from an alien attack, but still, she could have done without the murder.

And initially she killed the wrong guy. Even more of a reason not to kill. What if you're wrong?

Alright. If you are consistent with your moral then then I understand where you're coming from. I respect that

It must frustate you though that most of the heroes kill in these films. But its cool to see atleast you are consistent with your code to ALL heroes.